Comments bertignac has made

in the city

Your neighbors must wonder.
On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

What do you know?

I guess you live out there somewhere in a beautiful solar paneled house, raising chickens, and shooting the occasional game. Fine, sounds nice. But look around you. Most of the world does not, and cannot live like that. It is easy to say that an infrastructure is not coherent. But infrastructures come together bit by bit, over time. The internet infrastructure could be much better, but we need to use what we have because to tear it up and start from scratch is impossible.

In France, only one thing allowed this country to industrialize in the 1970s and that is nuclear power. Without it, France is back to dams, and gas, and coat heating in the cities. Back to an agrarian economy.

Policy making involves realistic choices, not pie in the sky. And leaders need to lead by example. Gore and Leonardo de Caprio (et al) do not do that.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

Green Engineer

Hey, what do you know anyway? Quite little I am sure about climate science, or about economics, or policy-making. I guess you are an expert idiot-detector.

PS: Buzz words like "cherry picked" are tired. They don't make you sound smart anymore, just hackneyed.

PSS: Making up words like "hacktastic" (what is that supposed to mean anyway?) is poor style. Using it more than once is a serious faux pas.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

something useful

I am not so interested in the science of global warming. In all honesty, I can't even follow the scientific debate in much depth. Can you? I am interested in the politics and policy choices for the future that are involved.

The issues, as I understand them today, is how to allocate resources. If the underlying scientific question is whether contemporary global warming is due to humans, then the policy questions are, what can we do about it, if anything? This debate is really beginning, though some people want to pretend that it is closed.

I listen to arguments about the IPCC findings, some critical and some supportive. I am not sure. I find that science and politics have become so intertwined in some quarters that it is difficult to see where one ends and the other begins.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

Green Engineer

Oh, I see, you are attracted to a Gulag-type idea. Pathetic.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

Is GreenEngineer a secret fascist ... ?

" ... it would be mighty handy to have a feature on the blog like a Usenet killfile (user specified permanent supression of specific individuals)."

Then later, you could be applying the same tactics in the real world. You and your friends could form groups and wear brown or black shirts, develop a salute. You could develop a political program to get rid of all the asses with stale talking points, even permanently suppress specific individuals.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

To Green engineer. Familiarly breeds contempt.

First of all, I am not "Berti". Tossing around insulting epithets I could do, but they wouldn't be in Inhofe's direction, they would be in Gore's. So there. If you want to criticize the views that Inhofe uses to support his arguments, be substantive. Claiming that views opposed to yours are fossilized, or that the person expressing those views is an ass, is disrespectful, to everybody concerned. And that is the tone of this blog.

Be precise. I didn't imply anything of the sort. The arguments against Gore are not that global warming is a hoax. (Anyway, the substance of the debate today is not about whether global warming is taking place, but why it is.) They are that the politicization of this issue is  disproportionate and dishonest, and that there is much room left for debate and research on the scientific level, which has unfortunately been cooped by too many non-scientists. We are not even talking about science anymore most of the time, but about politics and policy.

To say that views you disagree with are stale talking points is to say that you know better. Or that you would like everybody accept the "party line" and stop dissenting from the majority opinion. Well, that type of attitude breeds groupthink or worse.

Don't cry. The world is not coming down around our ears. Or, if you prefer, it has always been coming down around our ears.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

Steven T

One thing I am not, and that is "child's play". If there had been substantive arguments to comment on in the original post, maybe I would have, to the best of my ability. But the only "arguments" made were such as these:

"He (Inhofe) could not have made Gore look better if he'd tried."

"As gimmicks go, this one would embarrass a high school student ..."

"What a small, sad man."

"By the end, Gore seemed measurably energized. Like, "I was worried about this dimwit?" He glided through the rest of the hearing."

Now, be honest Steven T. Are these "substantive" arguments that one can respond to? Or are they childish, insulting remarks?

The "liberal in Redville" speaks of verbal "flatulence". I know my strong and weak points, and verbally flatulent I am not. So I will make one last point and bid you all adieu. Someone, maybe not myself, needs to come in here and give you all a sound intellectual thrashing to wake you up to yourselves. Or maybe a simple verbal bitch slapping would do.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

unbelievable !!!

You people are unbelievable. Substantive arguements? About what? I was commenting on David Roberts' orginal post. Have you even read it? What is it about? A attack on Inhofe. Nothing more. Nothing substantial.

I quote:

"What Inhofe did is flounce around and bitch and moan like a petulant adolescent."

"First, he spent the beginning of the hearing whining about the rules ..."

"When Boxer tried to intervene to give Gore a little time to answer, he snapped and her and whined about not getting his full time."

"As gimmicks go, this one would embarrass a high school student, but Inhofe's band of knuckle-draggers seems quite pleased with themselves. I'm sure there were frat boy back slaps all around."

"Boxer had to treat him the way I treat my three year old."

"By the end, Gore seemed measurably energized. Like, "I was worried about this dimwit?" "

So, liberal in redville, and Steven T, did you even read the original post? I won't hang around here because you are obvious a block of mutual backscratchers and circle jerkers, without a clue.
The original post demands not discussion and debate around substantive issues, but mutual mooing likes cows of the same "opinions", I guess everyone feeling a warm glow afterwards about how
bright they are. Oh, excuse me, I've got to run to the toilet, that nausea is coming back.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

David Roberts and his comments

David Roberts,

After all your puerile and perjorative personal characterizations of Inhofe I feel that equal time and treatment permits me to say that you sound really like the kind of person who would like Gore, i.e. a basically unintelligent type who likes to congratulate himself for banal observations, and poor writing style, yet feels free to sneer at anyone who offends his puny world view.On Even by his standards, this was pathetic posted 2 years, 8 months ago 38 Responses

ps to David Roberts

David Roberts,

Truly tolerant people never characterize themselves as tolerant, any more than truly good people call themselves good. Live and learn.

PSS: Calling me silly is silly, thilly.On Liveblogging is the new black posted 2 years, 8 months ago 27 Responses

A head of state who doesn't see it that way

Anti-greenhouse religion' scorched by Czech prez
Klaus says environmental extremism modern equivalent of communism.

As Al Gore takes testifies before two congressional committees today on "global warming," Czech President Vaclav Klaus is warning "the anti-greenhouse religion" espoused by the former vice president is the modern equivalent of communism.

Gore spoke this morning to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and will appear before the Senate Environmental and Public Works panel this afternoon.

In a letter issued Monday to the energy panel, Klaus wrote, "It becomes evident that while discussing climate we are not witnessing a clash of views about the environment, but a clash of views about human freedom."

(Story continues below)

Responding to questions by U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and former House Speaker Denny Hastert, R-Ill., the Czech leader said: "As someone who lived under communism for most of my life I feel obliged to say that the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st century is not communism or its various softer variants. Communism was replaced by the threat of ambitious environmentalism."

(Story continues below)

He added, "The so-called climate change and especially man-made climate change has become one of the most dangerous arguments aimed at distorting human efforts and public policies in the whole world."

In a letter to Klaus, Barton, the committee's ranking Republican, and Hastert, ranking Republican on the Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee, asked the Czech president to comment on global warming, based on his background as an economist and political leader, especially since he is familiar with European responses to global warming.

"We believe your perspective on the political, economic and moral aspects of the climate change debate can be useful as we seek to assess the potential impacts of proposed U.S. climate-related regulations on the economic well-being of its citizens and their ability to contribute to future economic vitality and innovation here and abroad," Barton and Hastert said.

Klaus urges policymakers to rely on free-market principles, not government coercion, in formulating public policy. In his written response to the House committee members, the Czech leader said:

"I warn against adopting regulations based on the so-called precautionary principle which the environmentalists use to justify their recommendations, the clear benefit of which they are not able to prove." Klaus added, "Responsible politics should take into account the opportunity costs of such proposals and be aware of the fact that the wasteful environmentalist policies are adopted to the detriment of other policies, thus neglecting many other important needs of millions of people all over the world. Each policy measure must be based on a cost-benefit analysis."

Last month, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., ranking member of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, congratulated Klaus for speaking out against the fears of man-made global warming. Klaus had told a Czech newspaper on Feb. 8 that fears of catastrophic man-made global warming were a "myth" and critiqued the U.N.'s report, calling it "political." Klaus also said other government leaders would speak out, but "political correctness strangles their voice."

"President Klaus is to be commended for his courage in speaking not only the truth about the science behind global warming fears, but the reality of the politicization of the U.N.," Inhofe said. "President Klaus's reported comments questioning the fears of catastrophic man-made global warming are in line with a growing chorus of scientists, peer-reviewed literature and government leaders who are finally realizing the true motivations behind climate scares. The scientific and political momentum is clearly shifting away from climate alarmists to climate realists," Inhofe said.On Liveblogging is the new black posted 2 years, 8 months ago 27 Responses

by the way

By the way, Inhofe was correct in cutting off
Gore's constant pontificating ... what a bloated
bag of hot air that guy is. And the fawning senators
were more than annoying, they were, well, stupid.On Liveblogging is the new black posted 2 years, 8 months ago 27 Responses