In response to:

So Fake It’s Real: Global Warming is Reality TV for the Media Elite

None1257 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 11:24 AM
How many people believe that if the theory is correct, that anyone has a plan that will guarantee the event will not happen? If the theory is correct, why isn't every country on earth, willing to ask their people to make the necessary sacrifices to prevent the event from happening? Is there only one way to address the potential problem, or are there more than one way to address the potential problem? What are the advantages and disadvantages of trying to prevent the event from happening, or mitigating the effects of the event should it happen? Which approach has more advantages than disadvantages? Why aren't we having a discussion of alternatives to solving the perceived problem?
Polly1 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 12:41 PM
If you don't believe increased taxes and increased energy prices will solve the problem, then you must be a logical, thinking person, i.e. a Republican.
traitorbill Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 11:38 AM
Global warming is a socialist Trojan Horse.
Simplecaveman Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 12:37 PM
Colonialgirl Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 1:45 PM
3204 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 3:17 PM
Flagged for intense stupidity by agitator.
johnm h Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 11:32 AM
We are, but most of the rest of the world isn't so gullible.

Here’s my challenge to all the global warming apologists:

Explain to me why the “settled science” of global warming has to manipulate headlines to make information appear scarier and more threatening than the actual data shows.

If global warming is so settled, why do you and your friends take the opportunity to exaggerate, obfuscate and slant every piece of news that comes out to make it seem relevant to today?       

You can see an example of this in the headlines below:

Climate Change Main Contributor to Corn Volatility, Study Says” writes Bloomberg-BusinessWeek.