I think I said previously that you can't get converts by beating them over the head. So in a way the rabid environmental movement has feathered its own nest. Sorry to say that ... but the debate has become less practical and more akin to some strange new religion that people fear.

The Big Lie analogy was preposterous in the sense that you miss the point that more people now think that man-made global warming is a Big Lie.  

They were motivated not by the right-wing talk shows as much as the rabid barking of the left, who seemed to propose Communist solutions. Taken that way, perhaps a new strategy is in order to get more people on board.  -sam

Onward through the fog

Sam, in behalf of the King Of Saudi Arabia and the Chairman of ExxonMobil et al, may I say please keep up the good work.  With enough people like you, short-term profits will continue to be assured.  Sucker.

What "Communist" solutions?  I apologize if my posts have been "Communist", but they are clearly way out of the mainstream of environmentalism.  Cap-and-trade? Ads on TV?  Telling people to change their lightbulbs?  Please educate me.

OK, the comedy isn't working.  I just read a great article in the LA Times about how we need to get below 350 ppm real fast and keep reducing or we're literally cooked in our own juices. The article was well written and cited our friend Hansen. I liked it. I agree with it. I'm a liberal nut and I want to do something about it.  

What I was referring to was Chicken Little "the sky is falling" problem. Or, "the boy who cried wolf." So I intended to mean that perhaps there was some "burn out" of public opinion.

I didn't just fall off the turnip wagon and could see this coming. First Al Gore (who in my opinion deserves some great credit), then the latest IPCC round, then the climate change conference. A lot of people started saying that the sky was falling, and nobody had a simple solution or a fast one.

Americans are a fickle people, for all you geniuses on Grist. Being a split-personality Gemini and having a poor, almost redneck side to my personality, I have noticed many rednecks changing their views on global warming from neutral to opposition. It happened fast, within the last 16 months. Many rednecks seem to vote Republican, but I think the problem is Redneck Thinking.

So sorry for the misunderstanding.
-sammie

Onward through the fog

Is doomed to a marginal role in the coming energy revolution.  That will put them on the political margin too.

4,5,6 dollar gas makes them responsible for economic disaster.  They calimed that their oil bidness experts bush/cheney would solve our problems by invading the ME.

Instead it made oil prices soar.  Oil empire is not good for america, it's only good for multinational corporations and OPEC.  Great friends and financial supporters of the GOP and bush/cheney.  McCain is bush-lite.

Oil, war, fear, terror, bush, cheney, GOP, McCain all bad for we the people and the good old USA.  GOP friendly corporations sold US down the oily river for huge swiss and dubai bank accounts.  Basically it's a matter of treason.  Lying and treason for power and wealth.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

My prediction is that most of us Merkins are tired of the old system and want a Democratic President, along with some serious discussion of (1) windfall profits taxes and (2) a carbon tax or some kind of cap & trade system.

This will blow the oil speculation bubble away but not the underlying economics of supply and demand, which are becoming all too evident. -sam

Onward through the fog

I thought maybe you were being partly sarcastic, but it didn't seem like it, so therefore, my plaintive tones.

But to address the issue, this is why I push for simple things that people can understand, like actually building the solar/wind/geothermal that we need, with government funds if necessary, high speed rail, etc., I figure that most people can grasp a pretty picture as opposed to a vague set of numbers.

By the way, when energy was a big issue in Nixon's reign, out he went.  When energy was a big issue when Carter was President, out he went.  Probably will destroy McCain this time time too.  But it's not clear whether the messenger will be killed, no matter who is the President.

what's most dangerous is that the deniers like to plant the idea that it wouldn't neccesarily be a bad thing.

What I find most disturbing is the number of people who believe in global warming but think it's not going to be a big deal, and they'll save money on their heating bills in winter.

I don't think it's fair to blame the mainstream media for the fact that most Americans don't understand global warming very well. If that were the case, wouldn't the misunderstanding be equally distributed across party lines?

But it's true we've got a long ways to go. Bill Maher had a bit about this poll that I liked (and he reported it accurately).

"I saw a poll that explained a lot. Like why global warming and the environment isn't a big issue in the campaign. 47% of Democrats said that global warming should be a top priority. Which is pathetic. 12% of Republicans said that global warming should be a top priority. So we have two parties, the lame, and the super-lame..."

...are also less likely to have graduated college, even less likely to have graduated with a degree in an arts, sciences, or humanities field, less likely to keep up with current or foreign events, less likely to give to charity, and are also less likely to believe in evolution or the Big Bang or that the Earth is several billion years old.

So it's natural that their intellectual horizons are bit more hazy in general than Democrats or Independents are.

You may be amazed to know the doubters feel the same way about those who claim the science is so solid on man made global warming.  As one of the doubters I challenge anyone to show me laboratory, or other conclusive proof, that co2 either forces the amount of increased heat observed in the northern hemisphere or generates enough increased moisture in the atmosphere to otherwise explain the increased heat.  No theory please, only a trail of evidence at least comparable to that supporting the theory of evolution will do. Also skip the computer models with so many variables based on theory that is amounts again to nothing but conjecture.

You may be amazed to know the doubters feel the same way about those who claim the science is so solid on man made global warming.  As one of the doubters I challenge anyone to show me laboratory, or other conclusive proof, that co2 either forces the amount of increased heat observed in the northern hemisphere or generates enough increased moisture in the atmosphere to otherwise explain the increased heat.  No theory please, only a trail of evidence at least comparable to that supporting the theory of evolution will do. Also skip the computer models with so many variables based on theory that is amounts again to nothing but conjecture.