Any measure that we look at shows Al Gore's losing at the moment. The public is just not that concerned.
So said Gallup Poll editor Frank Newport about the Nobel Laureate's campaign to convince Americans that man's carbon dioxide emissions are destroying the planet.
As reported by U.S. News & World Report's Paul Bedard at his Washington Whispers blog Tuesday:
He admits that it's counterintuitive, but Gallup Poll Editor Frank Newport says he sees no evidence that Al Gore's campaign against global warming is winning. "It's just not caught on," says Newport. "They have failed." Or, more bluntly: "Any measure that we look at shows Al Gore's losing at the moment. The public is just not that concerned." What the public is worried about: the economy. Newport says the economy trumps the environment right now, a strong indicator that President Obama's bid to put a cap-and-trade pollution regime into operation isn't likely to be politically popular.
Let's hope he's right:
"It's Al Gore's greatest frustration," says Newport. "We seem less concerned than more about global warming over the years. . . . Despite the movies and publicity and all that, we're just not seeing it take off with the American public. And that was occurring even before the latest economic recession."
He adds: "As Al Gore I think would say, the greatest challenge facing humanity . . . has failed to show up in our data."
Of course, this isn't really surprising, for if you look at the data, carbon dioxide doesn't show up as a cause of global warming -- but don't tell the Nobel Laureate who got a D in his natural sciences course at Harvard that.
Of course, this isn't really surprising, for if you look at the data, carbon dioxide doesn't show up as a cause of global warming
So by repeating this lie and a host of related lies often enough, you and your ilk have managed to confuse the issue enough to accomplish this polling result.
Any measure that we look at shows Al Gore's losing at the moment. The public is just not that concerned.
I agree with this assessment. It seems to me that human nature dictates we will be more concerned about things that we can see as having an immediate affect on us and our neighbors. Things like our soldiers in harms way and the economy in the toilet. Unlike the author of this piece, I don't believe our concerns are an indictment against Al Gore or Global warming it's just that human life issues take precedence.
Its just the persistent attempt by white bread rightwing brain dead Americans to duck taking responsibility for polluting their environment. If not stopped everyone of them would still be shitting downstream and taking their drinking water from upstream.
Filthy moronic pigs
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan
I believe that every right implies a responsibility, every opportunity an obligation; every possession, a duty. - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
So by repeating this lie and a host of related lies often enough, you and your ilk have managed to confuse the issue enough to accomplish this polling result.
Oops, that nasty old "Idiocracy" again. Aren't they a frustration? J2 needs to get those firing squads in gear!
Yesterday, President Obama and Vice President Biden "urged a group of House Democrats at a White House meeting...to move forward with climate-change legislation
," asking for "quick action" on the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
. After Blue Dog Democrats, representing oil and coal interests, stalled subcommittee negotiations
on the bill last week, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) announced yesterday that he could potentially "bypass regular order on a major climate change
and energy bill and mark up the legislation before the entire 59-member panel," E&E News reported. However, Waxman said that "[n]o final decisions
on process have been made." Beyond negotiating with fellow Democrats, Waxman and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), the authors of the bill, are facing steep opposition from conservatives, whose "solutions" amount to drilling for more oil and completely denying the climate catastrophe
. Obama is hoping Congress can take a visionary approach. "He told us, sometimes we do things of real impact," Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) said after the White House meeting yesterday. "And none of us would want to look back in twenty to thirty years and think we had punted on something of a historic nature
."
CORRALLING DEMOCRATS: With Obama making energy one of his four main domestic policy priorities
, Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have been hard at work seeking consensus on the issue. Yet after the White House meeting with Obama yesterday, Democrats "remained far apart on the critical elements
, including goals for emissions reductions, mandates for renewable electricity like wind and solar power, and the issue of whether the government would give away any pollution permits rather than auctioning all of them." E&E News reported that Obama told the group "that he is open to giving away some of the emission credits
for free to industry" rather than auctioning all of them, something Democrats from energy-industry states like Reps. Gene Green
(D-TX), Rick Boucher
(D-VA), and Mike Doyle
(D-PA) have pushed for. "We're talking to each other. And we're working out these issues because we want to be together
and we want to succeed in getting this legislation through," said Waxman.
REPUBLICAN IDEAS M.I.A.: Throughout the discussion on America's energy future, Republicans have been notably absent. In March, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) announced the creation of the House GOP American Energy Solutions Group, an effort to "work on crafting Republican solutions
to lower energy prices for American families and small businesses." The man chosen to head the committee -- which includes notorious climate change deniers Reps. Michele Bachmann
(R-MN) and John Shimkus
(R-IL) -- is none other than House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), who, just last night, refused to even admit that climate change is real. "Well, let me tell you," he told MSNBC's Chris Matthews, "I think the science is very mixed
on the subject of global warming." "Then why should your party believe you're going to get serious about it, if you say the science is mixed?" Matthews asked. Pence replied, "Yeah, it's a fair question." Under the guise of their rebranding attempt, the National Council for a New America, the Republicans' entire energy plan
boils down to increased domestic supply (i.e., offshore drilling), "streamlining the permitting" for renewable energy sources, and improving energy efficiency. No wonder Chris Matthews wondered how Americans could believe Republicans are "going to get serious" about the climate crisis and transforming America's energy economy.
BUSINESSES LINES UP FOR ENERGY REFORM: From the start, the right-wing Chamber of Commerce has been the GOP's strongest ally in stalling meaningful climate legislation. Indeed, as the Wonk Room's Brad Johnson noted, the Chamber's climate policy "looks stunningly like that of the Bush administration: 'Don't just sit there, do nothing
.'" Recently, the Chamber warned that federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions "will be devastating to the economy
." But the Chamber's head-in-the-sand approach is angering some of its corporate partners. Johnson & Johnson wrote to the Chamber to ask them to stop making comments on climate change unless they "reflect the full range of views, especially those of Chamber members advocating for congressional action." Nike says it has been "vocal" with the Chamber "about wanting them to take a more progressive stance
on the issue of climate change." An analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council(NRDC) found that just four of the 122 board members
at the Chamber share the group's questioning of science and stark opposition to federal regulations to reduce global warming pollution. Indeed, though the vast majority of board members have stayed silent on the issue, 19 have publicly supported the need for federal regulations
. "The U.S. Chamber is representing the views of a small minority
of its board members," said Peter Altman, NRDC's climate campaign director. By contrast, other business coalitions, like the Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy
and the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, aim to push "the federal government to quickly enact strong national legislation
to require significant reductions of greenhouse gas em
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan
I believe that every right implies a responsibility, every opportunity an obligation; every possession, a duty. - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Oh that's right ... I forgot. You don't give a damn what I really think or say. You've got some imaginary guy named "Jan" living in your head and he espouses all kinds of stuff that you find easier to argue with. It's all very disorienting for anyone who can't read your mind to know exactly what it was the imaginary Jan said.
Oh that's right ... I forgot. You don't give a damn what I really think or say. You've got some imaginary guy named "Jan" living in your head and he espouses all kinds of stuff that you find easier to argue with. It's all very disorienting for anyone who can't read your mind to know exactly what it was the imaginary Jan said.
Exactly how else is one supposed to interpret "...you and your ilk have managed to confuse the issue enough to accomplish this polling result."? Where the hell do polling results come from, and how else would they be "confused"? God knows I can understand how the attitude becomes such second nature to you people that you don't even know when you are espousing it. It's not unlike that "We're in the center now" perspective. I imagined that one too!
Exactly how else is one supposed to interpret "...you and your ilk have managed to confuse the issue enough to accomplish this polling result."? Where the hell do polling results come from, and how else would they be "confused"? God knows I can understand how the attitude becomes such second nature to you people that you don't even know when you are espousing it. It's not unlike that "We're in the center now" perspective. I imagined that one too!
***********************************************
uh, one other question that could be asked Gus... is: "Do polling results negate real science?"
in other words, is the fact that people are skeptical, for whatever reason, enough reason to dismiss the science?
Exactly how else is one supposed to interpret "...you and your ilk have managed to confuse the issue enough to accomplish this polling result."? Where the hell do polling results come from, and how else would they be "confused"?
Very simple, Gus. Absolutely nobody has the time and inclination to become thoroughly educated on every possible topic. If I were presented with some dispute about, I don't know ... say the unification of the electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear forces, or maybe superstring theory or whatever, I wouldn't have much basis to distinguish who has the solid science behind them and who is full of shit, since my physics education pretty much ended at relativity and basic quantum dynamics. That doesn't make me an idiot, or part of some "idiocracy." It just means I don't have enough information about that particular field. And if I were presented with a flood of lies about the unification of forces, I might just believe those lies or decide that we just don't know without more research. Again, that doesn't make me part of some "idiocracy" with regard to advanced physics.
But again, you already know what I think and the fact that I don't really think most of what your imaginary version of me thinks according to you won't ever shake your belifs I'm sure. So don't even bother thinking up some new fantasy about what I supposedly really think based on some crazy-ass misreading of something I typed. We both know that's what you're going to do and it's one hell of a fucking waste for both of us. I'm writing this for anyone else who might read this and might wrongly assume you imaginary Jan is the real one - not for you.
This message has been edited by jrooth on May 6, 2009 10:29 PM
uh, one other question that could be asked Gus... is: "Do polling results negate real science?"
in other words, is the fact that people are skeptical, for whatever reason, enough reason to dismiss the science?
It really doesn't matter so much in a representative democracy does it? Human nature is to focus on the alligator that is the farthest up one's leg. Consequently, the submersion of Muldavia pales in comparison to next month's house payment. And while that may drive you and me crazy for what could be totally different reasons, I ascribe it to human nature, while the Paul Reveres on the Left get all full of their arrogant selves and want to send them all to j2's firing squads for it. Messianic zeal is a bitch for all parties. I don't recommend it.
but gus, who chortles that liberals are voting themselves bread when hard economic numbers suggest that the fat cats won't even let them eat cake, has no trouble with the notion that wingnuts, told that up is down and day is night can change the laws of the universe simply by closing their eyes real tight and chanting I do believe in faeries. I suggested to gus before that Bishop Berkely had long been refuted, but lacking philosophy (a subject I studied at the graduate level gus) he will take the rock to the back of the head. Sir Issac in similar circumstances outlined the calculus and classical physics.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson
We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan
I believe that every right implies a responsibility, every opportunity an obligation; every possession, a duty. - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
J2 the Euro Pukes are 10 years ahead of the USA in applying Gw Taxes to their people and as each election comes up the Radical GW LIb parties are now losing elections
Way to Go Idiots !!!
AB
Current Topic - Al Gore Is Losing Global Warming Debate
![[linked image]](http://www.network54.com/Realm/JansRealm/wfelix.gif)
