Comments on: Climate speech, part 3: John McCain loves big government

By: Ken Brosky

Ken Brosky — Wed, 14 May 2008 03:07:33 +0000

What’s your take on the Libertarian argument out there right now that the IPCC is more of beuraucracy that operates more like a … I don’t know exactly how to phrase it. I guess the argument is that the IPCC is not really a “scientific consensus” and is more of a “Politician’s consensus.” I don’t know … I’ve heard it before and it sounds like a pretty weak argument, but is there merit to it? I’d like to know more on this.

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 14 May 2008 00:18:46 +0000

Sometimes I think that This is exactly the reason our government is doing nothing about this crisis. How better to control a population than to have it depend on you completely for the basic necessities of life?
The scenario you lay out here is a step backwards, about 400 years. We would all become serfs, toiling to support those who lord over us.

Furthermore, who CARES whether all this is “man-made” or not? Even if it is natural, it will, for all intents and purposes, eradicate us from this planet.

It’s natural for a tiger to want to eat me. It’s also natural that I kill the tiger first.

By: Harold Pierce Jr

Harold Pierce Jr — Wed, 14 May 2008 00:08:39 +0000

“Where is Arizona going to get water for the coming decades?”

The answer is a no brainer: Stop sending Colorado water to Southern California! Let them drink frog water!

Ya know, growing cotton in the desert is just plain dumb as is growing the water hog rice up there in the Central Valley.

Large cities should not be allowed to develop in deserts unless there is a natural supply of abundant water, cf Baghdad or Khartum.