Kerry: If We're Wrong on Climate Change, 'What's the Worst That Can Happen?'

[kiwiman127]

What's wrong with energy conservation, clean air, clean water?

Conservatives of the past were all about "energy conservation, clean air, clean water". Then something happened. Now conservatives, well the more so far right conservatives, battle anything that does conserve our natural resources. They hate renewable energy, like it would kill them to conserve for future generations.
The GOP is the party of God, (or so they claim around Christmas time), there are many, many verses in the Bible that tell us to take care of the Earth. God even promises to destroy those who destroy the Earth. You can't get much clearer than that!
Probably for the first time in a long time, I agree with John Kerry, "What's the Worst That Can Happen?"

 

[Stephanie]

What's wrong with energy conservation, clean air, clean water?

Conservatives of the past were all about "energy conservation, clean air, clean water". Then something happened. Now conservatives, well the more so far right conservatives, battle anything that does conserve our natural resources. They hate renewable energy, like it would kill them to conserve for future generations.
The GOP is the party of God, (or so they claim around Christmas time), there are many, many verses in the Bible that tell us to take care of the Earth. God even promises to destroy those who destroy the Earth. You can't get much clearer than that!

that was so uncalled for
just because we aren't falling for this voodoo science of (globull man made warming) and see this as another way for this government to get more money and more control over us

what's so hard to understand about that?

 

[ScienceRocks]

I support clean air and water...Pro-renewable energy.

 

[kiwiman127]

What's wrong with energy conservation, clean air, clean water?

Conservatives of the past were all about "energy conservation, clean air, clean water". Then something happened. Now conservatives, well the more so far right conservatives, battle anything that does conserve our natural resources. They hate renewable energy, like it would kill them to conserve for future generations.
The GOP is the party of God, (or so they claim around Christmas time), there are many, many verses in the Bible that tell us to take care of the Earth. God even promises to destroy those who destroy the Earth. You can't get much clearer than that!

that was so uncalled for
just because we aren't falling for this voodoo science of (globull man made warming) and see this as another way for this government to get more money and more control over us

what's so hard to understand about that?

How many threads have there been that have been negative about solar and wind energy in particular? Go back in the archives and tell me I have no foundation to base my post on.
I'll wait.

 

[westwall]

What's wrong with energy conservation, clean air, clean water?

Conservatives of the past were all about "energy conservation, clean air, clean water". Then something happened. Now conservatives, well the more so far right conservatives, battle anything that does conserve our natural resources. They hate renewable energy, like it would kill them to conserve for future generations.
The GOP is the party of God, (or so they claim around Christmas time), there are many, many verses in the Bible that tell us to take care of the Earth. God even promises to destroy those who destroy the Earth. You can't get much clearer than that!
Probably for the first time in a long time, I agree with John Kerry, "What's the Worst That Can Happen?"

We would LOVE for there to be some real environmental clean up and pollution control! We really would! However, all you are offering for the 76 trillion dollar expenditure is carbon credits.

So that means you can still pollute, you just have to pay more for it. And us wealthy banker types get to screw you out of that money and looky here...we don't actually have to produce, or do anything! Yeeeeaaah! We get to fuck over stupid people and it is PURE PROFIT!

"How cool is that" is what they're saying to themselves as they slap each other on the backs!

 

[Howey]

Phil Jones (Remember him) says you're wrong

No wonder you don't post links.

?Climategate?

Scientists at CRU use tree-ring data and other "proxy" measurements to estimate temperatures from times before instrumental temperature data began to be collected. However, since about 1960, tree-ring data have diverged from actual measured temperatures. Far from covering it up, CRU scientists and others have published reports of this divergence many times. The "trick" that Jones was writing about in his 1999 e-mail was simply adding the actual, measured instrumental data into a graph of historic temperatures. Jones says it’s a “trick” in the colloquial sense of an adroit feat — "a clever thing to do," as he put it — not a deception. What’s hidden is the fact that tree-ring data in recent decades doesn’t track with thermometer measurements. East Anglia Research Professor Andrew Watson explained in an article in The Times of London:
Watson: Jones is talking about a line on a graph for the cover of a World Meteorological Organisation report, published in 2000, which shows the results of different attempts to reconstruct temperature over the past 1,000 years. The line represents one particular attempt, using tree-ring data for temperature. The method agrees with actual measurements before about 1960, but diverges from them after that — for reasons only partly understood, discussed in the literature.

 

[Meister]

His point is valid. Why shouldn't we respect our environment, regardless of climate change?

We should. But on the other hand, we shouldn't be using it as a means to commit fraud. That's because AGW is a scam.

97% of scientists say it's not a scam. But you'd rather believe the 3% who are paid by the right to believe differently. After all, it's worth the exposure, right?

It's better to have name recognition for being a kook rather than nothing at all.

The 97% of scientists is a TOTAL SCAM.

 

[Mustang]

dear gawd, we need to be saved from these people in this government

SNIP:

What if '97 percent' of scientists are wrong?

11:38 AM, May 20, 2014 • By JERYL BIER


Secretary of State John Kerry did not shy away from pejorative language when addressing "climate change" in his commencement speech at Boston College on Monday. Kerry referred to those skeptical of the Obama administration's climate claims as "members of the Flat Earth Society" who are "risking nothing less than the future of the entire planet" by resisting implementation of the administration's policies. At the very least, Kerry argued, what have we got to lose by taking the steps he and the president are advocating? [emphasis added]:


If we make the necessary efforts to address this challenge – and supposing I’m wrong or scientists are wrong, 97 percent of them all wrong – supposing they are, what’s the worst that can happen? We put millions of people to work transitioning our energy, creating new and renewable and alternative; we make life healthier because we have less particulates in the air and cleaner air and more health; we give ourselves greater security through greater energy independence – that’s the downside. This is not a matter of politics or partisanship; it’s a matter of science and stewardship. And it’s not a matter of capacity; it’s a matter of willpower.

Kerry also suggested there's not much time to act, because "things will change in a hurry," and indeed some things have already changed:


ALL of it here
Kerry: If We're Wrong on Climate Change, 'What's the Worst That Can Happen?' | The Weekly Standard

The danger of ignoring climate change is not a danger to the present day population in much the same way that warning teenagers about the dangers of smoking is not a warning about what might happen in two or three years. The longer term dangers effects of smoking might easily not manifest themselves for several decades, at which point quitting might not make any difference at all if you already have an advanced case of heart disease or lung cancer.

We can continue to send CO2 into the atmosphere for several decades while pretending increasing signs of climate change is just some natural cycle. But there will almost certainly come a point where even the most skeptical among us (or more likely their children and/or grandchildren) will begin to realize that perhaps they were unduly overconfident in their denial of a problem. Alas, by then, it will probably be far too late to bend the curve in our favor after mostly ignoring the problem for so long. When crops start dying in the fields from too much heat, or too little rain, or too much rain, and nations are warring over natural resources like potable drinking water, humans are going to look exactly like we've been far too when it comes to other economic and social issues: shortsighted. In other words, when we had a choice to make, certain elements within our society decided to put on the blinders in order to chose the short term gain of continuing to burn fossil fuels at the expense of our long term sustainability simply because they didn't want to acknowledge a problem. That's how humans have often gotten into a jam in the modern era. But while it was relatively easy to clean up a lake or a river, the planet won't be so simple to scrub of increased amounts of CO2 and CH4, and it will be impossible to reverse the effects of years of increased (and still increasing) temperatures. But who from today will be left to blame 50 or 75 years from now? The industrialists of today as well as all the economists and all the owners of coal mines and oil fields who touted growth with no worries will all be dead by then as will we all. It's our descendants who will be cursing our stupidity at dumping this on them because we wanted to burn through our resources like an heir who burns through his inheritance of $10 million dollars like it will last forever without regard for what he'll do in ten or twenty years if the money doesn't last as long as he does.

 

[Katzndogz]

The worst that can happen is that we become a third world country begging for care packages from China.

America does not control planetary climate.

 

[Mustang]

The worst that can happen is that we become a third world country begging for care packages from China.

America does not control planetary climate.

That's not the worst thing that could happen.

 

[kiwiman127]

The worst that can happen is that we become a third world country begging for care packages from China.

America does not control planetary climate.

Speaking of China,,,,,,,,,.

Green China? It Leads the World in Adding Renewable Electricity
Green China? It Leads the World in Adding Renewable Electricity - Businessweek

 

[Rozman]

You want to put complete faith in government...
Go ahead.

 

[Katzndogz]

China is buying our coal mines.

 

[Rozman]

The worst that can happen is that we become a third world country begging for care packages from China.

America does not control planetary climate.

Kerry and the rest of the left wing wackos seem to push the idea that America
is the reason for the issues of climate.

Where is their outrage against...

China
India
Russia....

What's their plan to get those countries to get their shit together.

Seems to me that this country has done a lot to lower emmisions.

But again Liberals hate this country.
We are the cause of all that is wrong.

 

[guno]

dear gawd, we need to be saved from these people in this government

SNIP:

What if '97 percent' of scientists are wrong?

11:38 AM, May 20, 2014 • By JERYL BIER


Secretary of State John Kerry did not shy away from pejorative language when addressing "climate change" in his commencement speech at Boston College on Monday. Kerry referred to those skeptical of the Obama administration's climate claims as "members of the Flat Earth Society" who are "risking nothing less than the future of the entire planet" by resisting implementation of the administration's policies. At the very least, Kerry argued, what have we got to lose by taking the steps he and the president are advocating? [emphasis added]:


If we make the necessary efforts to address this challenge – and supposing I’m wrong or scientists are wrong, 97 percent of them all wrong – supposing they are, what’s the worst that can happen? We put millions of people to work transitioning our energy, creating new and renewable and alternative; we make life healthier because we have less particulates in the air and cleaner air and more health; we give ourselves greater security through greater energy independence – that’s the downside. This is not a matter of politics or partisanship; it’s a matter of science and stewardship. And it’s not a matter of capacity; it’s a matter of willpower.

Kerry also suggested there's not much time to act, because "things will change in a hurry," and indeed some things have already changed:


ALL of it here
Kerry: If We're Wrong on Climate Change, 'What's the Worst That Can Happen?' | The Weekly Standard

I'm sure American spring would have taken care of that science nonsense stuff, Lets roll!!

 

[OKTexas]

Just heard a interesting tidbit on this subject on TV, the said the world will emmit 35 gigatons of CO2 this year. The US will be responsible for only 6 gigatons. So any reductions on our part will be virtually worthless in the big scheme of things.

 

[LeftofLeft]

If Climate change is a Global Issue, what are the UN and other International Organizations doing to curtail oil and fossil fuel consumption by China, Russia, India, Latin America? All of the effort is pointed at US. If this were truly a global concern, efforts would be underway to keep other countries from contributing to the so-called fossil fuel crisis. In fact, China, Russia, India, Latin America, it's Drill and more Drill.

This is clearly an effort to keep the US from growing.

 

[Clementine]

What they are wrong about is the solution. That will do irreparable damage to the middle class because of cap and trade and other stupid redistribution plans.

 

[Howey]

dear gawd, we need to be saved from these people in this government

SNIP:

What if '97 percent' of scientists are wrong?

11:38 AM, May 20, 2014 • By JERYL BIER


Secretary of State John Kerry did not shy away from pejorative language when addressing "climate change" in his commencement speech at Boston College on Monday. Kerry referred to those skeptical of the Obama administration's climate claims as "members of the Flat Earth Society" who are "risking nothing less than the future of the entire planet" by resisting implementation of the administration's policies. At the very least, Kerry argued, what have we got to lose by taking the steps he and the president are advocating? [emphasis added]:


If we make the necessary efforts to address this challenge – and supposing I’m wrong or scientists are wrong, 97 percent of them all wrong – supposing they are, what’s the worst that can happen? We put millions of people to work transitioning our energy, creating new and renewable and alternative; we make life healthier because we have less particulates in the air and cleaner air and more health; we give ourselves greater security through greater energy independence – that’s the downside. This is not a matter of politics or partisanship; it’s a matter of science and stewardship. And it’s not a matter of capacity; it’s a matter of willpower.

Kerry also suggested there's not much time to act, because "things will change in a hurry," and indeed some things have already changed:


ALL of it here
Kerry: If We're Wrong on Climate Change, 'What's the Worst That Can Happen?' | The Weekly Standard

I'm sure American spring would have taken care of that science nonsense stuff, Lets roll!!

All ten of them?

 

[whitehall]

My guess is that Kerry's statement is a slick effort to switch the focus from his profound failures in foreign policy and Hillary's criminal negligence at Benghazi for the safe left wing argument about global warming.