Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Ben Shapiro :: Townhall.com Columnist
What I'm Doing To Stop Global Warming
by Ben Shapiro
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



According to the global left, the evidence is in: The earth is warming, and it's all your fault. Don't blame the sun. The giant ball of fiery gas responsible for all climate change over the past few million years isn't the problem. It's you. In particular, it's you Americans, you big-spending, high-on-the-hog, corporation-supporting, First World gluttons with your shiny gas-guzzling sports cars and central heating.

Well, global left, your words have finally hit home. I finally realized that correlation does equal causation after all. As one of the pig-Americans you so despise, I pledge to do my utmost to mitigate the threat of global warming.

And so, without further ado, I henceforth dedicate myself to achieving the following goals to aid Mother Earth:

-- EAT COWS. Turns out, cows are the climate's worst enemy. Cows, it seems, are culpable for 18 percent of greenhouse gases. Their cud-chewing, flatulence and burping create giant clouds of methane. All this time, we thought the cattle were our mammalian friends. But, fools that we are, the cows outsmarted us. While we milked them, they pursued their long-term strategy of world domination.

So the question becomes: What can we do to fight the global onslaught of the bovine herds? Some have suggested changing their diet to prevent indigestion -- the so-called "Pepto Bismol Strategy." Others have proposed recycling cow manure, with sloganeers already hard at work: "Cow Poop -- The Crappier Hemp." Still others have recommended eating less meat, thereby decreasing the production of baby cows -- "Abortion: It's Not Just For People Anymore."

I say this looming threat must be handled -- and handled immediately. I believe Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when she says, "Now is time to act; the future of our country, indeed our entire planet, is at stake." I stand with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid when he explains, "We cannot afford to defer action."

It's the cows or us, people. If we eat them faster than they can reproduce, we can sleep easy at night. Hamburgers are the answer. Steaks. Barbecue ribs. Vegetarians, dissent here isn't patriotism -- it's global suicide.

So let's roll. Or rather, let's put them on a roll. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Ben Shapiro is a regular guest on dozens of radio shows around the United States and Canada and author of Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ben Shapiro's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Zeocarbon eliminates greenhouse gas
According to the AIA houses, not cars, produce more than 50% of all greenhouse gases. Zeocarbon plumbing filters capture these homemade greenhouse gases and truns them into a nitrogen rich fertilizer. See more at

http://www.airconditioner-portable.com/reduce_greenhouse_ga s.wmv

Help Stop Global Warming
After burning of fossil fuels and deforestation leading to higher carbon dioxide concentrations the next biggest Greenhouse culprits are covered landfill emissions, and the newer style fully vented septic systems. Sweetfilter Residential Units Reduce Your Fully Vented Septic System Greenhouse Emissions and Odors Overnight. Only Zeocarbon Sweetfilters (registered with the USPTO) remove Odor, CO2, and other Greenhouse Gases by as much as 18% on a lb. per lb. basis. Typically, after 5 years of work, the Zeocarbon is returned to the soil as a nitrogen rich ornamental plant fertilizer.

http://www.aircondition-portable.com/reduce_greenhouse_gas. wmv

Controllable Global Warming?
"Just believe, shut up, drink the koolaid so I can restrict your freedoms a little bit more.

But wait, don't forget to open the coffers so I can take for me and mine. Then I can go find something else to scare you into living a little more fearful and cower under my fat belly"--Big Brother.

Here's are some thoughts to ponder on Global Warming:

1) The Sun--ever notice the temperature drops and rises a bit more than 1 degree every 24 hours?--I like Dennis Miller's jab flicker--"1.8 degrees? I can futs with my thermostat at home for hours and could not detect the difference"

2) High tech industrial temperature measurement devices usually have an uncertainty of about +/- 1 degree. How much data do you think in the last 200 years has been collected with better uncertainty? Better yet, what do you think the uncertainties are in temperature extrapolations from ice core samples to obtain historical temperatures?

What uncertainties has a single one of the alarmist's notes been repeated to the public by the MSM?

3) The Earth has been much colder and much hotter than we've experienced in the last 200 years--Greenland--look it up.

4) CO2 is heavier than air--150% heavier. How exactly is it hanging around the upper atmosphere to hold in the heat? Its not--it flows into the oceans like a river and feeds the f&fauna on the way down to the sea then feeds the ocean's f&fauna.

5) Every bit of ICE CORE data shows CO2 FOLLOWS global climate change--it drops AFTER the temperature gets cold and rises AFTER the temperature gets HOT. Kind of funks up the whole cause and effect thing.

6) There is not a MINORITY in disagreement over what is causing the temperature rise. I understand 1000's of scientists world wide have signed a petition stating that the climate change cannot be attributed to human behaviors.

However, there has been a lot of duplicity from the International Community and the Left over who authored parts of various reports and major lies from Gore showing a 20' increase vs. the actually predicted 1' increase in sea level.

Sort of funks up the merit of their arguments when people start multiplying effects by 20 and saying "People are dying." as they did today for MSNBC report on Bush's Global warming moves.

Yeah, people are dying--of malaria--by the millions--DDT anyone? Where's the equal time?

7) There is no debate--for example in a report just today covering Bush's weak knees on Global Warming MSNBC simply says stuff like, "Scientist say by 2050 we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emisions by X and so."

I thinks it's called fait tu compli (sp?) meaning "already sold"--there is no debate--no other side. Just as Al Gore told us. They actually think they can predict how much we must reduce to get the temperature down. They can't even tell us what the weather will be like tomorrow based on CO2.

8) Net carbon emissions to date every year equate to something around a thousandth of a percent of the total atmosphere. That's increased our temperature by how much again?

Where is the experiment with a jar, a heat lamp and a 1/1000th increase of CO2 to show the increased temperature in the jar?

Bueler? Bueler? Anyone? Bueler?

9) Why is the ice sheet in Ant-artica getting more abundant?

It's just sad--so sad people don't take science seriously in high school.

When the alarmist climatologists can get their model to predict accurately say 1 year from now--then I'll believe anything they say has merit.

Today, I think the whole lot of them are whores for federal and international funds and use scare tactics to get you and I to foot the bill for their holiday jobs.

New Scientist.com
abc123cba

I spent as much time as I could stomach reading your link refuting right wing GW myths. My favorite is the myth refuting the predictability of computer models claiming they can correctly predict past weather patterns, so you can assume they can predict future...

Then on the article refuting the myth that we used to be much warmer the same author claims we can't possibly know for sure what the temperatures where past 150 years ago b/c we don't have the data. I thought the models could successfully predict the past (whatever that means).

Absolutely spot on liberal argument style. Use contradictory statements to argue separate points of the same issue. Absolute genius.

Thanks for linking to the site. I needed the laugh.

Feeble attempt at humorous satire..
However, I dont see why "conservatives" have a difficulty "conserving". Regardless of the global warming arguments:

1. Anything which reduces our dependence on imported oil has to be a GOOD thing. In a choice between a wasteful SUV (many of which are never used off road and most of which are clumsy to drive) or an fuel efficient car which handles sharply and actually accelerates when you press the gas, I will choose the car EVERY time.

2. The wasteful use of private jets makes Gore and company hypocrites, but we shouldnt fall into the trap of being deliberately wasteful just because THEY say we shouldnt be.

Global Conspiracy
Global Warming is a code word for Globalization....along with all the other Global issues being put forward by the Global Leftists


It cant be a serious issue unless it is 'GLOBAL'

Seriously though....Global Warming is an attempt by the Global Power Brokers to discredit real science which is experiment based and skeptic based...and replace it WITH pseudo-science which is faith based and can be used to incite the World masses to do the bidding of the shadow governments of the World..

I know this seems incredibly far-fetched much as the idea of a conspiracy to assasinate Kennedy is far-fetched...but it all falls into place when you see whats been happening, such as North American Union, government sanctioned mass illegal immigration, UN trying to globalize international law, etc

I dont think these are merely coincidencies....brave new world is coming...if right thinking people dont wake up soon

Hey Ben,
I generally like your work but Loyal Democrat is better at satire.

DA
Tim P. Barnett, David W. Pierce, Krishna M. AchutaRao, Peter J. Gleckler, Benjamin D. Santer, Jonathan M. Gregory, Warren M. Washington, Thomas L. Delworth Thomas R. Knutson, T. P. Hughes, A. H. Baird, D. R. Bellwood, M. Card, S. R. Connolly, C. Folke, R. Grosberg, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, J. B. C. Jackson, J. Kleypas, J. M. Lough, P. Marshall, M. Nyström, S. R. Palumbi, J. M. Pandolfi, B. Rosen, J. Roughgarden, Sydney Levitus, John I. Antonov, Julian Wang, Thomas L. Delworth, Keith W. Dixon, Anthony J. Broccoli, P. Falkowski, R. J. Scholes, E. Boyle, J. Canadell, D. Canfield, J. Elser, N. Gruber, K. Hibbard, P. Högberg, S. Linder, F. T. Mackenzie, B. Moore, III, T. Pedersen, Y. Rosenthal, S. Seitzinger, V. Smetacek, W. Steffen, and Thomas J. Crowley:

All "bike buddies" of yours?

fatchance
But most of the Greenhouse methane comes from termites!
You need to rethink the size of those plugs!

Corks! That's It!
I got the GW Gorelution! Corks. Big ones for the cow's butte and even bigger ones for the blowhard librats mouths. No more methane, super heated air or copious Carbon Dioxide emissions! That'll fix it! There! I made Mom Proud.


Lynne
--There is aboslutely NO evidence

that concludes that "global warming" is a result of human activity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--

And why should we take your assertion of the work of climatologists who study the data and computer models?


Penetration of Human-Induced Warming into the World's Oceans
Tim P. Barnett, David W. Pierce, Krishna M. AchutaRao, Peter J. Gleckler, Benjamin D. Santer, Jonathan M. Gregory, and Warren M. Washington
Science 8 July 2005 309: 284-287

Simulation of Early 20th Century Global Warming
Thomas L. Delworth and Thomas R. Knutson
Science 24 March 2000 287: 2246-2250

Climate Change, Human Impacts, and the Resilience of Coral Reefs
T. P. Hughes, A. H. Baird, D. R. Bellwood, M. Card, S. R. Connolly, C. Folke, R. Grosberg, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, J. B. C. Jackson, J. Kleypas, J. M. Lough, P. Marshall, M. Nyström, S. R. Palumbi, J. M. Pandolfi, B. Rosen, and J. Roughgarden
Science 15 August 2003 301: 929-933

Anthropogenic Warming of Earth's Climate System
Sydney Levitus, John I. Antonov, Julian Wang, Thomas L. Delworth, Keith W. Dixon, and Anthony J. Broccoli
Science 13 April 2001 292: 267-270

The Global Carbon Cycle: A Test of Our Knowledge of Earth as a System
P. Falkowski, R. J. Scholes, E. Boyle, J. Canadell, D. Canfield, J. Elser, N. Gruber, K. Hibbard, P. Högberg, S. Linder, F. T. Mackenzie, B. Moore, III, T. Pedersen, Y. Rosenthal, S. Seitzinger, V. Smetacek, and W. Steffen
Science 13 October 2000 290: 291-296

Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years
Thomas J. Crowley
Science 14 July 2000 289: 270-277



Lynne
John Kerry says AGW is a fact.
If that were not true, then how would John Kerry know to tell us?
John Kerry wouldn't lie to us, would he?
If he were to tell a lie it would damage his reputation with Veterans of the Vietnam War.
He is going on a book tour to promote AGW.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPrint.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200703/CUL20070313a.html

Lynne
Good points, Lynne.

The leftists (socialists) are trying to convince everyone that anthropgenic GW exists, but they do not use empirical evidence. Instead, they use coincidence and claim it's causality.

It's an old trick, and it will fool SOME people. That's why the left needs ignorant people to enter this country and become voters.

You're right about the leftists not wanting to debate the issue. That's because the left knows the truth will come out if there's an open debate.

The socialists have always tried to fly under the radar, using the chaff of demagoguery to hide their real motives.


Patiently waiting
I'm waiting for the day when the Goreacle's mindless disciples stop flapping their gums about the "threat" and actually start to live what they (purportedly) believe. Imagine the joy when they all take to bicycles and the sensible ones among us have plenty of cheap gas to get around.

Driving down I-89 to work the other day (here in hippie heaven) a very old Chevy suburban, occupied by only the driver, flew past me in a cloud of blue dust. On one side of the rear bumper was a "Bernie for Senate" sticker, and on the other side, "End Global Warming Now".

Guess we'll have to wait awhile. Meantime, anyone that starts preaching to me about the need to "save the planet" will be answered with "And how do YOU travel these days?"

comment
--Cows, it seems, are culpable for 18 percent of greenhouse gases.--

Just to point out the obvious, cattle are so ubiquitous because of human influence so the global warming buck still stops with us.

Cal
You are not doing your fair share to save the Planet!
This is your only hope for salvation!
http://www.liberalwhiners.com/print.php?a=1218

Critical Bill
CB wrote to Audi10:

"Well, being a hardy island race in a temperate zone, maybe we aren't quite so demanding of our creature comforts as our American cousins"

Hey Bill,
Why don't you come on over here in the Plains States during the month of January, where the average high can be as low as -28 Deg C (wind chill of -56 deg C). I remember one Winter(1983-84) when I was living in Nebraska, we went 40 straight days with the temperature below -30 deg C.

While you are at it, try visiting Midland Texas in July. Down there, the high can easily top 35 deg C in the shade. You ever try hauling hay in that weather with the sun beating down on your back from 5:00AM to 9:00PM?

If I remember correctly, 3 summers ago, Europe had a summer that would be considered cool in Texas and Oklahoma, and over 35,000 Europeans died from heat related illnesses. I bet a few of those people would have loved to have even a window air conditioning unit.

As far as the English being hardy folk, how do you explain the sailor who broke down in tears when his Iranian captors took away his iPod?

Looks like all the liberal weenies have
gone home for the day.


There is some movement to change the
There is some movement to change the term global warming to Climate change, that way, if the temperature goes either way they will be be able to say, see, we were right.

And if that don't make you want to jump right in and join the cause, nothing will.


I guess there is no comment from the
I guess that there is no comment from the Global Warming Peanut Gallery on my previous post, Re: Global Cooling.

Back in 1975, the same left wing wackos were claiming that by 1985 Global Cooling would be so bad the earth would be undergong massive food shortages and the attendent massive starvation caused by failed crops.

How'ed that turn out?

We are now fatter, world wide than at any time during our history.


Run!! We are all going to die!!

You can laugh all you want about this global warming situation, but Leonardo DiCaprio flew in and out of Chicago on his private jet to tell Oprah and her audience (including me) that we are all going to die soon if common people like me don't start bicycling to work.

I trust him because he thought global warming was so important that he flew in on his private jet.

Oh, and that kind fat man, the one with the movie, I trust him. I heard that everynight, he makes sure that the lights are off in every single room of his 43 room mansion because he's worried that Florida will disappear.

Now if the fat man will take the trouble to turn off the lights in his 43 room mansion, then I know that global warming is real, not something just to frighten me so I vote for liberals so they can wreck the economy and make all of little people servants.

It's the conservatives (like the ones here on TH) that try to scare people with this Islamic Jihad stuff. So a few Muslims yell in the street and shoot guns in the air. That's nothing to lose one's head over.

Liberal politicians and Hollywood stars, on the other hand, are trustworthy. They care, they REALLY care!!

How about a serious answer on this
For any of you "True Believers", Please read the excerpt below, and please explain why India and China, which generate far more greenhouse gasses than the U.S. does, is not required to reduce their emmissions?

--------

As of December 2006, a total of 169 countries and other governmental entities have ratified the agreement (representing over 61.6% of emissions from Annex I countries).[2][3] Notable exceptions include the United States and Australia.

Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement.


Um no joke
these things are listed as fake "liberal" threats
Global Cooling - read this
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11643
>
AIDS - Millions dead (more than the holocaust)-thats no fake problem
>
SARs - Serious disease that was contained
>
Mad Cow Desease - Caused huge damage to agriculture in some places and cost millions of dollars to deal with.
>
Global Warming - The overwhelming majority of experts believe it is real (including the US government) and most of them say that action is needed to save the lives and lievlihoods of millions of people.
>
I dont think its fair to claim aids is a "scare" when millions of people (more than the holocaust) have died. In 2005 570,000 children died of aids. Imagine if they were american children! You wouldn't claim it was an overblown threat if OBL killed 570,000 children would you......

Hey Ski Man
I remember global cooling.

I think that a guy named Paul Ehrlich was the point man for that bit of lunacy.

-

The Cooling World (Blast From The Past Archived Newsweek Article Warning About "Global Cooling")
Newsweek ^ | April 28, 1975


Posted on 10/02/2003 10:21:17 AM PDT by presidio9


There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.
--------------

This bit of leftist lunacy called for serious population controls, lest we all starve to death due to reduced harvests from global cooling and shorter growing seasons.

Most of the same cast of characters that supported old Paul Ehrlich on this one are now crying "global warming" wolf.

It is interesting that both of these movements called for implementing serious governmental controls over many aspects of our lives.


1 gallon of ethenol
It Currently takes more than one gallon of fossil fuels to make one gallon of ethanol.

What that means to you Lib folks is that running your cars on ethanol ultimately pollutes the envrionment more than a gallon of the real deal.

Kyoto.

Can one of you Global Warming Alarmists please inform why Brazil, India, and China, currently some of the biggest contrbuters to green house gasses get a pass from Kyoto?????

??

Remember Global Cooling ?
The hysteria over so called global warming is similar to the hysteria over global cooling back in the late 70's. I guess people (or more accurately politicans) need something to scare us. Some recent examples -

Global Cooling
AIDS
SARs
Mad Cow Desease
Global Warming


MikeR
That 12:47 PM posting is Tongue-in-Cheek Satire aimed at Libs who are at odds and are TOOOOO Dim to know it!

The joke is far more serious
We have been mocking the liberal's agenda for so long that they are about to turn their agenda into policy.

Left Wing Egotism at it's Finest
The whole Global Warming crusade is egotism at it's finest. These are the same people who believe that the Earth is billions of years old and that everything now living got this way from evolution. If you believe the archeologists, geologists and anthropologists who say that the fossil and geological record show the earth has experienced changes in climate for millions of years before humans even managed to light fires, how can you believe that we are now the cause? Even more ego-centric is to suggest that we can do anything about climate change. I don't care what high tech gizmo or hair-brained policy we come up with to reduce "greenhouse gas" emissions, that's not going to stop what is really causing climate change. The culprit for climate change is the same as it has always been: the sun. All heat that the earth has comes from the sun. If the sun experiences more severe and/or more frequent solar flares and storms, then more solar energy is going to come our way. Solar energy does more than just make things warmer. It also drives the flow of air currents and water currents since what gets warmed tends to flow towards what gets cooled. Have we forgotten what we learned (or at least used to learn) in grade school science? The weather is a cycle of ocean and air current movement influenced mostly by the heating of air and water by the sun. Increased solar activity means more severe weather as these fronts of hot and cold air and water collide more fiercely and more frequently. That's what is causing the increased hurricanes and "freak" snow storms, tornadoes etc. That we hear about in the news. The whole idea of it being caused by ammounts of CO2 and other gasses is silly. It's way over simplified not to mention innacurate to say that green plants give off oxygen and animals (including people) and burning stuff gives off carbon dioxide. You see, even living trees, grass etc. give off carbon dioxide too. The cells of their roots take in oxygen and give off CO2 just like you and I do. Ever wondered why a house plant that is over-watered dies? Because its roots are suffocated by the saturated water. It's not as simple as "lets grow more plants and stop burning them" if you want to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Even if we did have more plants than animals like some enviro-whackos seem to want, those plants only live so long. When a plant dies, the decomposition process releases CO2 as well. So all those who are composting to avoid using chemical fertilizers are guilty of releasing "greenhouse gasses" too. Not that composting is bad, it's not. Just don't give me that self-righeous nonsense that you are doing it to "save the planet". Say you are doing it to save money by not buying commercial fertilizer (which is true) and leave it at that.

My Contributions
I pledge to drive my '56 T-bird and my '06 GTO as inefficiently as possible whenever possible. I also pledge to run only 93 octane premium gas. I will demonstrate my commitment to the cause to our liberal friends by blowing past any Prius I see as fast as possible. So help me God.......

abc...
Mild and selective critisism? You don't do much reading or writing at the technical level do you. My area isn't science but engineering and had that mild critisism been written about my work I would have felt it a bit more than selective or mild.

"...the committe finds it plausible.."
Means, sure this could possibly happen. Maybe.

" the substantial uncertainties currently present in the quantitative assesment..."
Translates into, there are a lot of holes in this theory.

"... lower our confidence in this conclusion..."
We are having some serious doubts here.

"Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions..."
We ain't buying that bridge either.

"...because the uncertainties inherent in temperature reconstruction..."
This is saying there's no such thing as an accurate guess.

"...and because not all of the available proxies record temperature information on such short timescales."
A proxy is a stand in, meaning they didn't have hard information to put into place so they used proxy, stand in, data which suited the results they were seeking. There evidently were other proxies, stand ins, available that were not used which would have sent the results in another direction.

In short any number of theories can be proven simply by manipulating the proper data. There are untold millions of government monies, and not just US dollars, up for grabs in this global warming sham. With that in mind do you think any research group is going to come out and say, "Hey it's getting warmer, it's a natural cycle and there's nothing we can do about it so don't bother sending more money".

A Mustang GT?
Is that the best you can do? That thing gets 26 miles per gallon! No, no, no. You need a 1971 Cadillac Eldorado with a 472 inch monster motor! With a Holley intake and dual Dominator carb! Your MPG will become GPM!

And drive it like Dennis Leary! Going 90 mph in the fast lane, eating dead cow burgers and tossing the wrappers at Priuses!

At least swap the gears for 4.11:1's so you can drop your gas mileage to 15 MPG to give you some cred.

toro
LOL!

That's right, cyborgs don't leave a big carbon footprint until their batteries need to be swapped out.

Green pledge
For those interested parties, please consider the following Green pledge:

http://www.junkscience.com/GREENer_pledge.pdf

abc123cba
Evidently, you think that their economies are doing well?

Here's how heavily these socialist havens are taxed per GDP.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/tax_tot_tax_as_of_gdp-taxation-total-as-of-gdp

Our GDP compared.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gro_nat_inc-economy-gross-national-income

OUR economy is NINE TIMES most of the others in the top ten and we're only a few points above them.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/env_pol_car_dio_per_cap-pollution-carbon-dioxide-per-capita


Waste generation per capita.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/env_was_gen-environment-waste-generation

BrianR is dead-on about Kyoto. Just a way to cripple our economy. Nothing more.

lightening things up a bit...
"The report on climate change said that humans are very likely making the planet warmer. To which Hillary Clinton said, 'Hey, can't blame me for that one.'"

chuck
Every time a libsquirt mewls about gloBULL warming, I make it a point to BBQ dinner that night. And in the spring/summer months, that is every night and twice on Sunday!


abc123cba: Really?
abc123cba writes: Wednesday, May, 30, 2007 12:06 PM
In fact...............
I suggest you all have a look at this new scinetist article (the global left!). It disproves every myth you people are peddling from consensus to solar flux to the "little ice age". Have a read and open your eyes, go on I seriously challenge you all to do so.
>
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

Really? I can also find a website that counters your article in an especially erudite fashion:

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/Greenhouse_not_a_problem.htm

Which proves that the whole issue of "anthropogenic global warming" is not established fact and is still open for debate.

not ashamed to be right
yeah and he claims to have been a successful stock broker before stopping that writing for the independent. He used to rip on the amount of readers on my blog before I used the site meter to shut him up.

BTW, ANY TIME a libsquirt uses a personal attack on you, glorify in it, as you're hitting them where it hurts.

VRWC Rule #1


HERE IT COMES
I can see it now, a billboard with some chickens on it saying eat more beef,(reduce co2) its good for you. Where i reside we dont have enough water to do our lawns but they want to build and ethenol plant. I understand that it takes 2 Gallons of water to make 1 Gal of ethenal. Have a good time trying to get the residents in my state to approve an ethenal -plant HA,HA REMEMBER EAT MORE BEEF


mongo
well said, and amen brother.

BrianR of 12:35
LOLOL, my first of the day. Thanks. Its worth scrolling past the left wing hysteria to find a laugh. Talking of hysteria, have you noticed most of the same folks shouting the sky is falling over GW, sneer at the righties for being concerned about the jihadis?

Lynne, notice how CB has not
penned one of his ugly comments towards you since you said to 'gently99', "CB often has no point!" You know CB better than he pretends to know himself.

AudiR10, Gunny (not fake!)and BrianR: Can you clear up something for me? I am 98% sure that Critical Bill claimed (in TH posts)to be moving to the United States 1-2 months ago in order to "make his wife happy" (meaning she stays in Britain?) His posts still sound like he has not gone anywhere or he was lying. I vote for lying.
It is interesting to see his posts dissolve when the taunts and insults do not have the affect he so desires.

abc
Why do you suppose the Euro's keep moving the 1990 baseline upon which Kyoto relies? If they succeed, it's due to an accounting gimick.

http://www.cei.org/pdf/5693.pdf




Really
New scientist? Its just a science magazine. I'd love to see a source that the NAS "debunked" the hockey stick graph.
All I got was this
>
"The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1,000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes ...
Based on the analyses presented in the original papers by Mann et al. and this newer supporting evidence, the committee finds it plausible that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period over the preceding millennium. The substantial uncertainties currently present in the quantitative assessment of large-scale surface temperature changes prior to about A.D. 1600 lower our confidence in this conclusion compared to the high level of confidence we place in the Little Ice Age cooling and 20th century warming. Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that "the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium" because the uncertainties inherent in temperature reconstructions for individual years and decades are larger than those for longer time periods, and because not all of the available proxies record temperature information on such short timescales."
>
I don't believe thats a debunking, mild and selective criticism at best.

RE: abc123cba
That your site feebly tries to resurrect the "hockey stick" graph even though none other than the National Academy of Sciences thoroughly debunked it is tantimount to the fact that your site is nothing but a rehash of the same old lies being vomited by the likes of AlGore®.

RE: CB
Seriously, kid, are you illiterate, or do you just pretend to be illiterate?

Ethanol, on the whole, produces FAR more polution than gas. That is a FACT. Taking into account not only what is produced from burning (which is about the same as gas, when comparing apples to apples), and also the production and transportation polution, there is no constest whatsoever. Never has there ever been a scientific study that has said anything different. Again, the ONLY case for ethanol (unless you are a rich corn farmer looking to get richer) is that we can produce ethanol in the US, and need not buy it from Osama bin Laden.

The only wool-pulling here is by you "we're going to fall into the sun unless we return to the 5th century AD!!!!!!!!" freaks.

Georgetwin
You have a strong tendency to bring things down to their lowest level. Do you realize how similar you are to the liberals you detest?

Um
Well come stay at my house next time, or every single person whose house I have been to in Britain?

AudiR10
Well, being a hardy island race in a temperate zone, maybe we aren't quite so demanding of our creature comforts as our American cousins. Your definition of central heating is different to mine. To be honest I don't know anyone who has what you decribe, so maybe it does only exist in five star hotels that cater for molly coddled yanks. I'll let you know when the snow storm hits, ok?

abc: Not the point
Kyoto's a scam.

THAT'S the point.

Sorry, Critical Bull
I'll have to defer tp your ownership of the crown on an ongoing basis.

Critical Bill
I don't have time to spend here all day long, but I will mention that I have been to Britain regularly since the early 1970s and have yet to stay anywhere except a five star hotel that had central heating. I don't mean radiators or those little mingy electric heaters either. I meant thermostat controlled forced air electric or gas furnace type heating.

We at Free Dominion saw the story on the snowstorm heading for Britain this week. We had a good laugh about it.

Monty Python the show, not the individual Pythons who are humorless Ack-tors these days; I ahve seen Michael Palin's stuff and love it.

Really a socialist hellhole?
China is second world and only just hitting the industrial revoloution. Find me three first world countries with economies closer to the USA's than Britain.
>
Besides have you ever been to britain? I don't know by what you judge that....

Warming Cows
Great article. If more journalists would mix funny with facts, it might get the point across that there's a whole lot of hypocrsisy going on. And I'll buy that credit if you can get Gore to quit exhaling garbage!

BrianR
Congratulations.Prize for most moronic post of the day so far. Tough contest too.

abc: More cut and paste
The only greenhouse gases involved in global warming come from the mouths of liberals and the butts of cows.

There's some symbolism there, I think.

Kyoto is a scam to steal America's wealth.

Britain's a lousy example, as it's a socialist hellhole.

Try China, a booming indutrial economy which sneers at Kyoto.

There, saved some time from the other column.

GunnyG
"Albedo!?

Is that related to libido?"

Are you serious? or was tht just a joke? You're having a debate about climate and you don't know what Albedo is? Its the amount to which something absorbs infa-red radiation (heat from the sun). Typically the darker something is the more it absorbs heat.

GunnyG, BrianR, go with me on this!
Let's send this column to PETA! Then let's send a letter to The Sierra Club under someone else's name (Fake Gunny or Moronical Shill). Those 2 groups of Moonbats will get in a slapfight or hit each other with their purses (John Edwards Breck Girl Line) & possibly injure a few moonbats!

Fool brianr
You clearly haven't read through that page. It is a series of articles. I would note how rapidly your position has shifted when faced with practically unassailable evidence.
>
We don't need to go back to the stone age to stop or massively reduce GW. We just need to use different power sources (including nuke and renewable). Insulate homes better (tht would save a vast amount of carbon). Drive cars with much higher MPG, and do lots of research into "Green" technology.
>
Furthermore Britain Sweden and some other countries are going to easily meet Kyoto and thier economies are doing pretty well. (i dispute the figures at the top of the page but they are doing better than the US economy).
>
Kyoto is only a first step but people often forget it includes stopping growing emissions.

My prediction
For the Northern Hemisphere, a continued warming trend for the next four months, followed by a cooling trend. This phenomenon is called "Summer" followed by "Fall" and "Winter".


Climate change
No one can doubt that the climate change is happening. It has never stopped changing. Here is my take on the whole thing: When meteorologists can predict the weather with 100% accuracy, I'll start taking what everyone says about climate change to heart.

gently99
Way to go. Top contribution. You are sooooo right.

Let's see, abc123
The Earth is warming due to human activity.

I'll go along with it for now (though not in real life).

Meanwhile, we have longer lives, live a comfortable lifestyle in climate-controlled houses and business establishments, drive roomy powerful cars that get us where we're going quickly and comfortably, can cure most diseases, enjoy thriving artistic accomplishments and cultural advancements, have the ability to adapt our environment to meet changing conditions, are advancing the frontiers of knowledge and have the ability to address future changes in the natural environment.

Yep, you're right, we should give all that up and return to the Stone Age because it maybe might disrupt an already dynamic cycle, and maybe it won't.


BrianR
You're right. Trying to post the drivel that they do would either come out as humor or satire. Only the moonbats can follow that twisted logic.

English Bob
I'd bet a week's salary that you're very familiar with leather chaps ain't ya? HAHA, and guys IN leather chaps no doubt.

abc123cba
Albedo!?

Is that related to libido?

I guess me and the VRWC are gonna have to do a lot more BBQ'ing on Mars to make it human's fault. Oh, and Bush's as well.

Keep up the faith with Gaia.

Real Gunny: LOL
Something to be said for it, but ole LD is THE qualified Expert in the field.

Anyway, the question then is: How can you simulate wild-eyed lib ramblings and NOT have it sound like satire?

Even when they do it sincerely, it sounds like satire.


Critical Bill
You're on the way to getting it. My point is that your post adds exactly zero point zero value to the thread. Keep applying your criticisms to yourself and eventually you may reach some practical point where you expend your energies in your own backyard.

Gunny
I dread to think what kind of mission you were on when you felt that the Freddie moustache was appropriate. I presume the outfit was completed with leather cap and chaps? But please, don't enlighten us.

In fact...............
I suggest you all have a look at this new scinetist article (the global left!). It disproves every myth you people are peddling from consensus to solar flux to the "little ice age". Have a read and open your eyes, go on I seriously challenge you all to do so.
>
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

BrianR
Maybe we should create one, Critical Bull, and share it. Posting wild and crazy libsquirt ideas along the lines of Loyal Democrat only not satirical?

Whattya think?

GunnyG
Mars is warming due to changes in Albedo not solar activity. Neptune hasn't been studied by a space probe since the 80's, so you've got your planets mixed up I'm afraid. (you mean pluto but have a look at the source below).
source....;http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11642

Stop the Cows
Forget world domination, the cows have apparently already taken over mars and neptune. For my part, I pledge to shoot any cow who attempts to drive my SUV!!

Gunsmr8
Don't forget that one bloviation by Chappaquiddick Teddy equals one Mt St Helens while one bloviation by The Goreacle equals a Krakatoa!

English Bob
I do my essay/lecturing on my blog. Here I focus on sending you libgirls home to your life partners crying and sobbing.

Gunsmr8
Nope human carbon emissions are way bigger than volcanic ones. Ask the US geological society. Stop spreading a disproved myth.

GunnyG )the real one)
Yeah, typical leftist/liberal courage. When the going gets tough, the libs get running.

Critical Bill
You're just jealous that I have more readers than you do!

BTW, that facial hair changes often according to the mission.

Also, using your logic, my facts should change with the times? I mean, Carter sucked a** in the 70's, how could it change over time. We kicked you lobsterbacks out in 1776, and THAT fact hasn't changed over time.

Are you a revisionist as far as history goes? I'm betting the 5 or 6 people reading the Independent on a daily basis won't like that.

I did like your newspaper's motto:

"Over 50,000 bought daily. Great for fishwrap or birdcage liner!"

Critical Bull
That's what I think of your post, and your name.

Ok, I take it back
Gunny doesn't ramble. In fact I think he is incapable of delivering more than a couple of sentences at a time. I think it's because he is so angry and shouts so much.

Brian
Notice how the varmint ran for cover when the REAL DEAL showed up!? haha. I let Josue know about it.

Hopefully Josue will yank the chain and flush the turd.

BrianR
Come off it, Gunny's name can hardly be besmirched further. His own rambling posts do a far better job than anyone else could. I mean, the man wears a Freddie Mercury moustache - how can anyone so clearly living in the '80's have any credibility? Besides, there are far worse things to get upset about and Gunny is a grown man - he can fight his own battles...

Fake GunnyG
I've already given the real deal, the true patriot GunnyG, about your despicable use of his handle, and I'm also alerting the TH techies to get your handle taken away.

You're a disgusting POS who evidently doesn't have one fiber of integrity to take the handle of someone else -- particularly one well-known here -- and besmirch his name with your lunatic ramblings.

DavidMac
I didn't take this column too seriously - if you'd read all of my comments I have stated more than once that Shapiro is trying to be funny and failing miserably. But it should be a serious topic. If I want a laugh I'll go to the Onion. I don't think anyone purely blames man for global warming or denies that the earth's temperature changes of its own volition over time. Most people on the left have heard of the ice ages too you know.

Leroy's
post is the real question:

What DID end the last ice age?

When we find out, it will go a long way to discrediting the loony left's assertion that global warming is anthropogenic.

Ben Shapiro's
tongue-in-cheek essay is funny, but (as Pointguard indicated) he'll be taken seriously by the loons on the left, like critical bill does.

The debate is about mankind's effect on the global temperature. The leftists believe it's all mankind's fault while the right believes it's probably the sun's fault.

Yet the left still demagogues the issue by claiming the right is denying any global climate change at all. The right, of course, being much smarter than the left, knows that the earth's climate changes over the centuries for purely natural reasons.

The left has a political agenda in all this. The left says, "Because the earth is in danger and we might all die, turn over control of the USA to us; we'll save you."

Looking out for the little guy, lefties? Not hardly.

What about the Ice Ages
Science tells us that up until about ten thousand years ago ice sheets a mile thick covered large parts of Europe and North America. Sea levels were considerably lower at that time because of the amount of water locked up in the ice. Ten thousand years is pretty darn fast in geologic time, where did all that ice go and why?

nmr- Ash
Gunny you beat me to the punch, Ash And No More repubs seem very turned on by what they see. Maybe they could go somewhere more quiet and discuss this together.

Mongo
Well made points. I've also read (don't have where I got it from, so this will probably be discounted) that as glaciers retrest in Switzerland, I believe, that silver mines are being uncovered. The tools are still where they were left when winter came, ready to take up when the following spring arrived. Lo and behold, the little ice age was beginning which kept work from continuing.
Perhaps we are returning to a more normal temperature level, where vineyards and growing crops in northern Great Britain and Greenland are the rule.

Tap - AGW Sceptic

what I don't get
... is that most anti-GW posters and writers seem to have no desire to reduce America's requirement for oil. They all seem to be utterly determined to remain as dependent on oil as ever. Dependence on oil has nothing to do with global warming really, but you would have thought that reducing it would be something in everyone's benefit, regardless of your position on the political spectrum. The West, in aprticular the US, is practically held to ransom by the Middle East because of its thirst for oil. I just don't understand the hostility I see on Townhall to anything that might reduce demand. Fine, you go out and buy your hummers. But oil will run out one day, and until then you are all beholden to imported oil. It's downright weird if you ask me...

Ash
"Ben - how are the manboobs coming on?"

Why do you ask? Do they turn you on?


gunrsm8
Amigo, you're wasting your time. GloBULL warming is a religion to the leftists. No matter than scientists with REAL PhD's are coming out against it, and things like snowstorms in May, cold snaps in April, Mars is warming, Neptune is warming, etc, are going on, THEY'LL line up behind an idiot who:

1. Failed divinity school not once but TWICE!

2. Failed law school.

3. Got a "C" in science in Harvard.

The Goreacle has some impressive creds...to a stupid drooling moonbat.

audiR10
Are you aware of the fact that ONE volcanic eruption of the size, say, of Penutubo(sp?) in the Philippines released more toxic gases and pollution into the atmosphere than all of the gases released by mankind since the beginning of the industrial revolution? Mother nature sort of makes man's efforts look puny. And that one eruption was relatively small compared to such events as Krakatoa or the previous eruptions of the Yellowstone Caldera. I hardly think that the emissions created by our inventions come even close in comparison.

Hah! How typical!
Only a know-nothing left winged liberal Democrat nutjob (but I repeat myself...repeatedly) like Ash would actually seriously think hurling juvenile insults constitutes rational debate!

beowulfe
As I orignally said, I was looking for an explanation. And yours falls well short - again, the point of examining pollution of both forms of fuel must include what it produces on burning. Shapiro is only telling part of the story and in that sense, yes, he is attempting to pull the wool over his readers' eyes.

beowulfe
As far as I'm aware, Al Gore didn't write this column, Ben Shapiro did. To be fair on Gore, he has done perhaps more to raise the debate and generate awareness on global warming than anyone else on the planet. So regardless of his transport or living conditions, yes I think he has done plenty. But again, it's not his contribution I was commenting on - it was this pithy, daft column by Ben Shapiro I was talking about. And I'm not sure how you can make that assumption about a Hummer - kinda depends on how far you drive it, doesn't it?

RE: CB
"Shapiro is pulling the wool over your eyes..."

Uh, no, that you can't comprehend what he says doesn't mean he's trying to fool you.

As EVERY study on the subject has ever concluded:

(Amount of energy it takes to produce and trasport ethanol) > (Amount of energy burning ethalon produces)

This is not even CLOSE to the case for gas. Gas produces FAR more energy than it takes to produce and transport it.

Thus, this mean burning ethanol is WORSE for the environment than burning just pure gas.

The ONLY advantage of burning ethanol is that every drop of ethanol we burn is one drop of oil we don't need to go to the Islamo-nutjobs for. But don't fool yourself into thinking that you're doing the environment a favor by burning ethanol because you are not.

RE: CB
"Well, for your benefit, my point is that Shaprio's column adds zero point zero of value to an important debate. Was it not clear enough for you?"

But, on the other hand, AlGore® consuming more gas in a single cross-country flight in his private jet than a Hummer H1 consumes in a year, and running his house on more energy in one month than any of us use in an entire year certainly adds a lot to the debate, huh?

Focus
The debate isn't about whether the world's temperature has risen. It has. However, it has fallen also. This is called climate change and it has always been so. Greenland has been farmed when the climate was warmer. Most of Europe has been covered in ice when the climate was colder. The reason climate changes is most certainly not man. To argue that point is to prove oneself truly, well, lets just say "uninformed".

The reason climate changes is because of the sun. I am ashamed for you if you don't see this obvious and proven point. The sun's energy output varies. Earth's orbit varies (changing the amount of energy reaching us). Our climate closely follows sunspot activity, which is an indicator of sun energy output. Carbon dioxide levels increase or decrease as a result of, not because of, increases or decreases in sun energy output. The lag is several hundred years.

Is CO2 a greenhouse gas? Yes. Is it a major greenhouse gas? Not hardly. Water vapor (clouds) is far and away the biggest greenhouse gas. Of the minor greenhouse gases, such as methane and CO2, CO2 is a minor contributor. Man's contribution to atmospheric CO2 is negligable, even with industrialization. Thus, man's contribution to CO2 rise and GW is basically nothing, well less than a tenth of a percent.

This is what makes Shapiro's satire funny (and sad): We humans are so full of ourselves that we think we can change the climate! What hubris! And what a foolhearty way to spend our limited financial resources. Money should be spent on adaptation rather than squandered (not the word this former Navy man would prefer to use) on trying to alter the climate.

Critical Bill
Perhaps Audie had it right. I remember a story of a father,mother, daughter, He was assigned duty to the "colonies". The family was to follow, but there was resistance. Daughter was still in school, so mom went to see what she could make of wilderness, or perhaps talk hubby into making a career change and coming home. Call to daughter had her coming immediatly after school. Mom what happened? Two words. "Heated bathrooms"

KennyG
Very amusing! I mean it! Is that an old post? Think I may have seen them before. Much funnier than Shapiro...

NMR
See, here's the thing. I don't doubt that you believe Global Warming is a cause for concern. That's legitimate from your standpoint. But, in this country we are all allowed to have opinions whether they be differing or not. Now, my opinion is, we could all clean up our act in various ways, but I also believe that the major movers and shakers on this subject are scam artists right from the old county carnival days, only worse.

But NMR, what I really wanted to express was my dismay at your tendency to always go personal in some negative way that contributes nothing positive to the discussion. Frankly, that's just immature. There's a lot of that going on nowadays.

I realize that this missive sounds kinda pussyish, but not many would say that to my face.

Keep pluggin'. John

no more republicans
"An entire column mocking the science you all choose to ignore or misinterpret."

Just curious, have you ever heard of Thomas Kuhn? How about postmodernism?

cooling or warming?
Is it cooling or warming?
the answer is: YES.
It cools and warms, up and down.
Recorded temp. history is to short to make any logical conclusion.
NOW - maybe the earth is too cold and the optimal temp. is 8 degrees above today's one?
Can't be, because there are no grants for that :)

Chopper John
No doubt he's doing good things there. I went there jul-sep and NOT a nice place to be. Went back in 92 for a visit, STILL not a nice place to be!

Kudos to him and you for raising him right.

English Bob
Never happen. I have too high an IQ to be a libstain.

BTW, did you catch the pics of our last VRWC BBQ?

http://noliberalspin.townhall.com/Default.aspx?mode=post&g=dcfd97fa-59db-4a4a-a9a0-687123b246fb

This one on the 4th is gonna be a doozy! Jerubaal and I have fifteen libstains trapped in preparation for the big hunt.

GunnyG (without the period)
You are one of my heroes. What you Gathering of Eagles folks did made my heart sing. I'm proud of you and wish I could have been there with you. I'm proud of my Senior Drill Instructor son too.

no more republicans
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try it on the liberals I have trapped and penned for our 4th of July VRWC BBQ! They're getting a mite tired of what we feed em, raw meat and green beer.

"The Global left"
Thanks for clarifying who the "global left are" mr shapiro. They include
> The US national research council. (part of the national science academy.
> The national science academies of the UK, France, Germany, India, China and others.
> The federal climate change program commissioned by the Bush administration.
> The American Chemical society
> The american meteorological society
> President George W Bush (yep he's an "AGW kook" he just advocates "Adaption" over stopping the problem.
>
Now I know who the "global left" are. Thank you mr Shapiro

KennyG
I had no idea we got fined for having barbeques. that makes about as much sense as AduiR10's comment about central heating... have to say that "other" gunny nearly caught me out. I thought you had had a road to Damascus moment, seen the light and become something approaching a liberal... too good to be true though!

Critical Bill
In honor of The Goreacle, I'm BBQ'ing every day throughout the summer. See, here in America, we don't get fined for it like you Euros do! haha.

Just doing my part to make it warmer since Denver got 4 inches of hail and a couple of feet of snow...in MAY!

Also, I see y'all got a little.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=458562&in_page_id=1811

So much for globull warming huh?

Chopper John
Be advised that GunnyG with a period afterwards is a fake. You'll note that MY handle is underlined which denotes a blog. You'll also note that I am known personally by a few folks here, especially Nee, who attended the Gathering fo Eagles with me, which I blogged by the way. My bona fides are out there but you'll note that GunnyG. is a fake.


And
if that's the standard of his debating skills I hope Harvard sees the light of day and chucks him out sharpish. Woe betide anyone hiring dunce of the week Shapiro to represent them in court. He'd get eaten for breakfast. Perhaps instead of pursuing a career in law, for which he is poorly suited, he can maybe fulfill his bloodlust by signing up for a wee tour of Iraq...

Any explanations?
I'm not an expert on any of this but this paragraph in Shaprio's column needs some more explanation:

"Second, my new GT won't use ethanol. That's a benefit in and of itself. Manufacturing ethanol requires more pollution than manufacturing gasoline. As John Stossel reports, "The standard mixture of 90 percent ethanol and 10 percent gasoline pollutes worse than gasoline."

Surely the point of fuels and their environmental impact is not just their production - it's their use as well. So what if ethanol creates (surely not "requires"?) more pollution in its manufacture? What about when it burns? Is it not more reasonable to look at both sides of the process? Or wold that truth hurt shaprio's argument? I don't actually kow what the answer is but I would assume the point behind ethanol is that the combined pollution from its production and its use is less than that created by petroleum-based fuels? And the final sentence of that paragraph is also unclear - what does he mean by that? That the total poulltion caused by the manufacture and use of a 90/10 ethanol/petroleum fuel is worse than pure petroleum? Or that the manufactruring pollution, as in the first half of the paragraph, is worse?

Shapiro is pulling the wool over your eyes...

GunnyG
My son is a Gunny. I just visited him in Parris Island. He's a good guy. I'm proud of him and the work he and his cohorts do. Hopefully, he doesn't waste his time doing what you and I are doing right now.

NMR: Benny Boy
Now there's a really, really impressive comment. Holy cow (oops).

and AudiR10
What's this stuff about us having no central heating over here? Where did you get that from? I've never lived in a house without central heating, and I lived in a handful of houses that were barely fit for human habitation when I was a student... for your information, it snowed once in London this winter. Pretty much as it has done since I was a kid when we used to get at least a fortnight off school every winter because of snow...

AudiR10
Well, only Graham Chapman has kicked the bucket and as far as I know the rest of the Pythons are still working - and not a peep out of them. In fact, Michael Palin has made a name as a travel writer and documentary maker - I wonder which side of the fence he'd be on? Regardless, there is an overwhelming body of evidence to suggest that the world is getting warmer. Yes there are those who have come up with figures to disute this but they remain firmly in the academic minority. I accept that the temperature of the earth fluctuates naturally. Always has done. But I also find it hard to believe that the gases we have pumped into the atmosphere over the last 200 years or so haven't affected the situation and made it worse. Go and suck in your exhaust funes for a few minutes if you want an illustration of how harmful they are. This shoudn't be a political issue but it has been hijacked by both sides of the political spectrum. However, the White House is trying to go greener and even News International is attempting to go carboon neutral. If Geroge Bush and Rupert Murdoch can accept it, I don't see why others can't.

Critical Bill
Monty Python would be all over this if they were stlil in business. You know they would.

As for me, my contribution to stopping non-existent global warming is to pray that y'all in Britain get that big snowstorm currently threatening your no-central-heating country and that you spend the summer shoveling global warming off your sidewalks and shivering in your uninsulated, unheated homes. I challenge you to keep the heat off in your cars and in fact to walk to work and save the planet, and if you really care about Mother Earth, you would walk to work naked.

With snow threatening Africa and Britain (oh it's threatening Canada too but we're used to that) I don't know how we're going to stand the hilarity of watching people slide into another ice age bleating about global warming. But I will try to contain myself.

gently
Well, for your benefit, my point is that Shaprio's column adds zero point zero of value to an important debate. Was it not clear enough for you?

Critical Bill
And just what is your point?

Pointless, unfunny, you name it...
I sure hope Townhall doesn't pay Shapiro for this nonsense. I know it is an attempt at humour, and a risible one at that, but does it add anything at all the debate over what is a very serious matter? Nothing at all I reckon. Eat more cows... yeah Ben, you really are a genius.

funny, and great send up
...of the pseudoscience and weird logic used by many liberals that defends whatever the speaker wants to do (or, in too many cases, wants YOU to do while he or she buys carbon credits and keeps up those jet flights and electricity-hogging mansions).

Best line: "..with leather interior, to make sure I pick off a couple of cows." lol!

Millions of Years!?!?!?
Silly Mr. Shapiro! The earth is only 6,000 years-old!

To shut the libs up,
tell them We are trying to abort the planet.

My new bumper sticker:
Help stop global warming!
Gag a gasbag lib!

They never stop and we never learn
Liberals should be mocked at every turn, but I fear it's never going to be enough. They repeat their loon-left-lies so often that bad legislation soon follows no matter how ridiculous the original claims. We're always losing ground to these idiots and for all our brains as conservatives we still have no idea how to effectively thwart them. Ridicule and satire isn't enough. It just isn't.

What's funnier??

What's funnier??? Your satire (kill the cows!!!) or knowing that many liberals will read your article, and actually consider the validity of your idea.

I can see some nut-job now popping down a couple dozen Krystals..."Got to save d'em Polar Bears!! Let me get a six more!"

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.