Posted on 01/22/2015 6:32:53 AM PST by bestintxas
As he considers a third presidential campaign, Mitt Romney said Wednesday night that one of the country's biggest challenges is climate change and that global solutions are needed to combat it.
"I'm one of those Republicans who thinks we are getting warmer and that we contribute to that," he said.
The 2012 Republican presidential nominee spoke to a sold-out crowd of about 3,000 at an investment management conference. It was his second public address since privately telling potential donors two weeks ago that he's considering seeking the presidency in 2016.
Romney didn't address a possible campaign at the event, but he used his 30-minute speech and a Q&A session afterward to lay out what appeared to be a populist platform. While hitting familiar Republican points criticizing the size of the federal debt, Romney at times sounded like a Democrat, calling for President Barack Obama and other leaders in Washington to act on climate change, poverty and education.
His evolving platform comes as he works to reshape his image after consecutive presidential defeats. He spent little time talking about poverty, the middle class or climate change in a 2012 campaign in which opponents cast him as an out-of-touch millionaire. But in public and private conversations in recent weeks he has focused on poverty, perhaps above all, a dramatic shift for the former private-equity executive.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Please, Please, Please let this lying idiot run for POTUS 16’
He will single-handedly hand the nomination to Ted Cruz!
CRUZ or LOSE!
Mitt the earth heats up the earth cools down. Nobody’s fault.
Oh STFU and go away, Mitt.
BS! Man has Zip! Zilch! Nada! impact on the climate.
This whole scam is a power grab to control everything we do.
I have followed issues regarding pollution etc. since I was a small child, and became interested in climate decades ago - including reading about ‘the coming ice age’ back when that was all over the lay press:
http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html
I was very concerned about deforestation, acid rain, habitat loss, overpopulation etc. since the 1980s, and eventually became very alarmed about AGW, back in the early 1990s - well before it became politicized. Back then I voted for democrats - specifically because I bought into idea that the GOP was anti-environmental. I also strongly felt back then that since AGW was ‘going to happen’ that it could be a game changing political winner for the democrats if they got out ahead of it and claimed it as their own.
I read everything I could get my hands on back then, and was convinced that we were headed for disaster if the world didn't make marked changes. The predictions and modeling were always dire.
A variety of things happened in the world and in my life along the way that shifted my political views - not overnight - but cumulatively. It's too much bandwidth and time to explain all of that here, but suffice it to say that I am very pro-science, and in that context feel strongly that the data are manipulated and that we absolutely do not have the definitive capacity (with current computer modeling and our current understanding of all the factors involved in determining climate) to accurately predict future climate. I also think the data sets we are using (e.g. the global temperature records) are flawed, and manipulable, and that even when evaluating the data with a pre-analysis bias (which so many of the current crop of federally-funded climate scientists have), the results of that analysis show no warming or small amounts of warming within the margins of error.
In most other scientific fields, if you submitted a paper to a journal and made definitive high-impact interpretations in that paper - extrapolating your conclusions from small numerical differences that were within the margin of error - there's little chance you would even get a full review, let alone a publication.
Having said all of that, I think the most ‘conservative’ approach is probably along the lines that you suggest. Do all we can to modernize our own production methods - making them as efficient and non-polluting as possible (makes economic sense too in the long run), look for alternative energy sources and try to lead the world in the discovery of new energy technologies, and politically hold other nations - such as China - accountable for doing the same. Instead, we've let ourselves be characterized as the criminals.
Climate Change? Perhaps Mitt can go study climate change on Planet Kolob ...
I wonder...if this disgrace of a human being ends up being the nominee, how many folks will cave and vote for him?
Now I know I’m not voting for him. If Hillary wins, so be it. But I am not voting for the lessor of two evils.
I’m a Kentuckian. I believe in climate change. The climate changes here every few minutes it seems. Yesterday was partly cloudy, windy, with temps in the 50s. Today its calm, overcast, temps in the 30s. The climate’s been ever-changing since I’ve been born. Last winter was long, very cold, lots of snow and ice. This winter’s been fairly mild, so far no snow. Even the forecasters, with all their sophisticated equipment, can’t accurately predict the weather a few days ahead. All the hoopla concerning climate change (formerly known as global warming) is hogwash.
No, at least not in this case. The winemaker told me they were all there naturally. Minerality is a nice component to wines and many vineyards have sea bed deposits in their soil. Sand, shale, Galestro (a sort of sea bed gravel hybrid) it’s interesting even if you’re not a wine geek.
One vineyard in Montalcino excavated an ancient whale fossil on their vineyard several years ago. That vineyard was about 400 meters ASL.
Mitt walks like an old man, short steps. That really bothered me 2012 though I did vote for him. I also seem to remember in 2008 he was anti illegal immigration and anti global warming hoax which is why I supported him again.
Look at video of him walking. He is old.
_____________________________________________________
They could have been deposited there by a long-ago tsunami caused by a massive undersea earthquake or volcanic event in pre-historic times.
Or . . . applying Occam's Razor . . . some earlier viniculturist spread a few truckloads of clamshells to lighten the soil.
My dad was in the wine racket for many years.
And no one bothers to point out that the world has gone through uncounted warming and cooling cycles with no ill effects.
Unfortunately, all it "proves" is what we already know - that coastal regions undergo upheaval over geological time. That took place long before humans were on the scene - millions of years ago. Lots of seashells on top of mountains all over the world - from Everest to the Appalachians.
The Mount St. Helens Eruption put more NOX, SOX, and CO2 into the atmosphere than all of the ICEs ever used in the history of ICEs - times 3.
It is simply, completely, and without any qualification - horse hockey (AGW, that is).
Now, when REAL damage was being done to the ozone, a simply experiment showed what was doing it and how it was being done. We banned CFCs, and the problem has generally solved itself (ozone ‘grows’ back if you let it).
AGW is without scientific basis. No part of it has any foundation in either evidence or is supported by any small or large scale experimentation which would settle the question on a peer reviewed basis.
Is his ‘carbon credits’ card up to date?
This alone nullifies him -
We agree for the most part. But no reasonable person has ever denied that climate changes. Whenever someone states that "climate change is real," they are invariably referring to the anthropogenic climate change theory - for which there is no data.
Carrying a sign that states "climate change is real," while a scientifically valid statement, is, in our current political climate, really giving credence to the unproven global warming hypothesis, whether that is your intention or not.
The more Mitt talks, the less convinced I am that there is a lesser of two evils in a Hillary-Romney race.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.