<p>
To expand on this, every president since Eisenhower has run a deficit, except for Clinton. Reagan gave us the highest deficit as a percentage of GDP since World War II (but Obama is really trying hard to break this record).</p>
<p>Minnesota Twins: Yes, I’m sure the billions of pounds of carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere every day by man-made cars and factories which coincides with the systematic deforestation of huge swaths of land, to be replaced with black tar (black + heat…think about it) has NOTHING to do with global climate change. That study cites 650 scientists from all over the world. Impressive, but not when you weigh it against the literally tens of thousands who disagree. Most of these scientists say they are “skeptical,” which all scientists should be. The rest claim that CO2 has no effect on the environment, which, while possible, is highly unlikely given the amount of correlatives.</p>
<p>Exactly. Everyone should be skeptical. That means not posting BECAUSE MAN DOES NOT CAUSE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.</p>
<p>Climate change is real, but the thought that it is man made is just asinine.</p>
<p>And your evidence to back this up is???</p>
<p>What is this “evidence” you speak of. Republican need no evidence. Republican smash.</p>
<p>
I realize that the scientific method requires that we examine everything and not accept things at face value. If you think that human actions don’t cause climate change, I encourage you to look to evidence to help you evaluate this hypothesis.</p>
<p>It is a fact that some gasses treat light differently than others. It is also a fact that man’s actions have increased the rate of production of some gasses above the natural rate and reduced the environment’s consumption of these gasses at the same time. You can argue that this change in atmospheric composition won’t cause a raise in temperature. But it really intuitive makes sense that it would, and the vast majority of scientists agree and think that the evidence proves it. Maybe they’re wrong. I love to root for the underdog. But when you call a logical theory “asinine” or yell that “MAN DOES NOT CAUSE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE” you’re just being obtuse.</p>
<p>This topic is getting way off base. its about the fact that professors shouldnt ridicule you for your beliefs and that they cant teach propaganda. not about republican vs democrat</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>See, if you’re going to disagree with a generally held belief, you need to provide some sort of proof.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Japan’s</a> boffins: Global warming isn’t man-made ? The Register](<a href=“http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/jstor_climate_report_translation/]Japan’s”>Japan's boffins: Global warming isn't man-made • The Register)</p>
<p>reiterating my earlier point:
MAN DOES NOT CAUSE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE</p>
<p>But that is based on the opinion of 3/5 researchers. The IPCC report was based on that of 2,500.</p>
<p>It’s been known that manufacturing produces CO2 and that CO2 causes the Earth to heat up for over a hundred years. The real debate is over how much the Earth will heat up, not whether it will or what’s causing it.</p>
<p>The point is that no one knows. Stop pretending you do.</p>
<p>Your right. No one knows. Therefore it is insanely stupid to completely capsize our already floundering economy with a giant cap and trade boondoogle in order to prevent a problem that man probably has no control what so ever over.</p>
<p>Can we agree on that?</p>
<p>And LogicWarrior, since CO2 causes the earth’s temp to rise, why has the temp stopped rising since 1998? Whe haven’t stopped producing CO2, have we?</p>
<p>I once saw a documentary about a warming period in the Mesozoic Age where so many of the animals were carnivores that plants grew wildly, and their O2 emissions collected in the atmosphere and bam, desertification, everything dies. It was interesting. That is all.</p>
<p>And Minnesota, cap and trade is designed to painlessly move corporations from fossil fuels and coal power to sustainable resources. This is a long-term investment which creates thousands of new jobs in burgeoning feilds, which has been proven to be quite beneficial in past recessions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How did you go from “no one knows” to “probably this” in 2 sentences? Usually when attempting to be dishonest, it helps to throw in a few more empty sentences in there to distract a bit.</p>
<p>I don’t even understand how it’s probably aren’t affecting climate change, when most studies predict we most likely are.</p>
<p>Do you know what I hate? People who say they HATE Republicans or HATE Democrats. Hate is such a strong word and I do not believe for a second that people who say this mean it and if you do I want to know what bubble you live in where you ONLY like people in your party. I think that as long as a person can back up what they are saying and don’t push their opinions on you that they could believe that unicorns are real and going to take over America and that would be fine. I lean to the right, but I respect everyone on the left and right that are worth respect. I think that there are crazies on both side of the spectrum. For example, this a$$ hole at my school is so sexist and racist and homophobic and everything else horrible and he thinks he is the ultimate Republican and likes to say things like we’ve trained our women so well that they paint their faces for us. What a jerk. However, this is obviously not how sane Republicans think. And I think that people should be able to respect people in both parties without questioning their intelligence. Oh and all Republicans are certainly not stupid the top three at my school are Republicans, myself included, and we are certainly the minority at our very liberal school near Detroit….</p>
<p>It’s a figure of speech.</p>
<p>Hey this is a very informative article for all you global warming nuts out there:</p>
<p>[Anthropogenic</a> Global Warming - Fact or Hoax? An editorial by James A. Peden](<a href=“http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html]Anthropogenic”>http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html)</p>
<p>It is written by some Middlebury student and generally sums up my argument. It’s quite long though, but it makes the argument well.</p>