I'll bet Chicken Little is pissed.

I'll be on the lookout for ManBearPig.

Once again public ignorance clouds a serious and important issue. If we don't stop Ryan Seacrest now, who knows what he will do?

That's priceless: I'm keeping that one for the next global warming thread...

Looks like illegal immigration also took a bit hit this year.

Sybarite: Looks like illegal immigration also took a bit hit this year.

Just wait until there are millions of climate refugees... then this list will be hilarious

'gay rights' didn't even make the list.

Global climate change should take second place to the economy, but only second. We can't rebuild the infrastructure without a robust economy to fund it.

Stopping Ryan Seacrest should be much higher

Weaver95: 'gay rights' didn't even make the list.

Neither did 'gay marriage'.

BladBoy: Weaver95: 'gay rights' didn't even make the list.

Neither did 'gay marriage'.

Ach, schnap!

opiumpoopy: That's priceless: I'm keeping that one for the next global warming thread...

Because the masses are who we should definitely rely on for informed, long-term decision making.

How can something be in dead last and be between two other things? Check your logic there, subby.

American public last year: ZOMG gas crisis!!111 We need more efficient cars!!!!

American public this year: The price is down, I'm gunna buy me an SUV.

We have short attention spans. Who knew?

And in the Middle Ages, stopping the plague was a top public policy priority, while rat and flea control came in dead last, below stopping Savonarola and forcing people to bring out their dead.

GOOD!

Now hopefully Obama can actually give the United States an energy policy for the first time in.... ever.... which should be able to do some appeasing for the climate Chicken Littles too - if done right. I want some of the same goals as the climate change religion crowd, but for practical and geopolitical reasons. So there's obviously room for everyone to be happy.

But all this BS propogandizing of science isn't helping.

Solving the energy problem will fix global warming.

Convert to solar. 5% of sunlight that falls in Arizona can power the entire US for 2 years.

Gore is right, we need to commit to being 100% carbon free within 10 years (a tall order, but you have to think big).

It'll also spur the economy. Where is the downside?

I'm confused, and only looked at the graph, but could someone explain this to me:

85% of Americans said the economy is the top priority.

Doesn't that mean that the other things should only add up to 15%?

/was never good at math...

sirbissel: I'm confused, and only looked at the graph, but could someone explain this to me:

85% of Americans said the economy is the top priority.

Doesn't that mean that the other things should only add up to 15%?

/was never good at math...

Think checkboxes, not radio boxes.

[Shrugs]

I can live with that.

Perhaps we can improve the economy BY fighting global warming and creating "green jobs"?

That's a stupid list. Why are "environment" and "global warming" listed separately? Why are various economic issues listed individually as opposed to the catch-all "economy"? Why are "medicare," "healthcare," and "health insurance" all separate issues?

deltabourne: lso spur the economy. Where is the downside?

It will drive up the cost of energy, which will drag the economy. "Green" jobs are make-work that you or your children will eventually be paying for. Would you stimulate the economy by having people dig holes and fill them up again? After all, it's a jorb! A jorb that produces nothing of value.

Rev. Skarekroe: That's a stupid list. Why are "environment" and "global warming" listed separately? Why are various economic issues listed individually as opposed to the catch-all "economy"? Why are "medicare," "healthcare," and "health insurance" all separate issues?

Because they are? Just because they all involve medical care doesn't mean the basis of the issues aren't entirely different.

beerbaron: "Green" jobs areMr. Bush's War is make-work that you or your children will eventually be paying for.

FTFY

RemyDuron: Because the masses are who we should definitely rely on for informed, long-term decision making.

The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.

deltabourne: Think checkboxes, not radio boxes.

Yes, but supposedly the question is the "top" priority. Can one really have a half-dozen top priorities?

And WTF is up with 45% voting for "moral decline"?

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Mr. Bush's War is make-work that you or your children will eventually be paying for.

bu bu but Bush! You are a moran. Even assuming the war was "make work", one bad turn does not deserve another. But I'll let those rabid right wingers over at PBS make my argument:

Link (new window)

Furthermore, assuming Slowbama doesn't squander the victory, we will be looking back on the Iraq war as the key turning point in Middle-East history, and Bush will be hailed for his actions.

But morans on the internet are qualified to judge history as it is being made, I guess, and always know what the future holds.

And in the Middle Ages, stopping the plague was a top public policy priority, while rat and flea control came in dead last, below stopping Savonarola and forcing people to bring out their dead.

This.

beerbaron: It will drive up the cost of energy, which will drag the economy. "Green" jobs are make-work that you or your children will eventually be paying for. Would you stimulate the economy by having people dig holes and fill them up again? After all, it's a jorb! A jorb that produces nothing of value.

What the fark are you talking about? Renewable energy produces nothing of value? Can you please tell me what you think we will be using for energy sources in 100 years?

BTW the cost for solar energy over any long term period is much cheaper than oil.

Global Warming is dead. It was a hoax. Al Gore is a douche.


Now they are calling it "Climate Change", as too many retards have too much invested in it.

Rev. Skarekroe: That's a stupid list

Yup. The trolls'll love it.

deltabourne: Solving the energy problem will fix global warming.

Convert to solar. 5% of sunlight that falls in Arizona can power the entire US for 2 years.

Gore is right, we need to commit to being 100% carbon free within 10 years (a tall order, but you have to think big).

It'll also spur the economy. Where is the downside?

If you want to pay to replace all the cars currently on the road, be my guest. Quite frankly, I think it's WAY too expensive and unrealistic. Not everyone can afford to buy a car at the drop of a hat. And very few have a couple thousand dollars lying around to convert their car to run on something other than gas.

Ryan Seacrest ruins New Year's Eve for me. That and the Jonas brothers.

Climate change issues are highly sensitive to how the question is asked. A poll last month put 'tackling climate change' at 75%, right behind the economy and ahead of Iraq.

/some might have thought that a football metaphor

The dipshiats didn't get the memo. they are plowing full steam ahead with their earth religion, rest assured. If these shallow atheists can't worship dirt, they got nuthin.

deltabourne: beerbaron: It will drive up the cost of energy, which will drag the economy. "Green" jobs are make-work that you or your children will eventually be paying for. Would you stimulate the economy by having people dig holes and fill them up again? After all, it's a jorb! A jorb that produces nothing of value.

What the fark are you talking about? Renewable energy produces nothing of value? Can you please tell me what you think we will be using for energy sources in 100 years?

BTW the cost for solar energy over any long term period is much cheaper than oil.

sure and a great source of energy if you live in a desert. We haven't seen the sun around here in a week or so. I know it's out there, I can see the opaque glow move across the sky.

How is that going to work???

nicksteel: sure and a great source of energy if you live in a desert. We haven't seen the sun around here in a week or so. I know it's out there, I can see the opaque glow move across the sky.

How is that going to work???

I don't know where you live, but let's say it's somewhere north of the 40th latitude. You receive 1600 hours of insolation a year. The desert gets 2400. That's a 50% difference, big but not impossible to overcome. It would probably take utilizing less than 0.2% of your state to power the entire thing using pure solar power.

Ameritards

/it's only the earth
//fark the next generation!

deltabourne:

What the fark are you talking about? Renewable energy produces nothing of value? Can you please tell me what you think we will be using for energy sources in 100 years?

BTW the cost for solar energy over any long term period is much cheaper than oil.

Really? Did you get that degree in Ignoring Inconsistent Energy Production, Environmental Degredation of Equipment and Long Distance Transmission Losses from the University of Reality Can't Defeat Hope?

Gated Community Organizer: Now they are calling it "Climate Change", as too many retards have too much invested in it.

So they want "Climate Stagnation" now?

sarcastrophe: RemyDuron: Because the masses are who we should definitely rely on for informed, long-term decision making.

The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.

Unfortunately, that is also the best argument against every other form of government, a five minute conversation with whoever is empowered.

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

bigevildan: Once again public ignorance clouds a serious and important issue. If we don't stop Ryan Seacrest now, who knows what he will do?

Well done.

beerbaron: bu bu but Bush! You are a moran.

So Operation Iraqi Futility was somehow Obama's work? Or was it Clinton's?

Even assuming the war was "make work", one bad turn does not deserve another.

RemyDuron: opiumpoopy: That's priceless: I'm keeping that one for the next global warming thread...

Because the masses are who we should definitely rely on for informed, long-term decision making.

Climate change is a scientific issue.

Responding to climate change is a political issue. And the masses don't give a shiat, it would appear. Quel surprise.