Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Spend trillions of dollars to combat climate change, or face "extinction of the human race". OOGABOOGA ARE YOU SCARED YET?   (nytimes.com ) divider line
    More: Unlikely, extinction, rich countries, energy production, climate change, economic output, island nations, spending, humanitarian  
•       •       •

8965 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Dec 2009 at 8:53 PM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



658 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-12-09 09:06:59 PM  

bearsfolks: I'm scared alright...of the Government and it's giveaways and taxes. We are going to run this country into bankruptcy.


The country was actually bankrupt in 2007. And while the markets burned, George fiddled with himself....
 
2009-12-09 09:07:10 PM  
Do you believe in the global warming fraud?
Yes - Congratulations. You're picking up the tab.
No - We'll see you next year to see if you changed your mind.
 
2009-12-09 09:07:11 PM  
The phrase is EVERYBODY PANIC, subby. Or doesn't this issue fall into the standard media fear-mongering category?
 
2009-12-09 09:07:23 PM  
$10 TRILLION may SEEM like a lot of money now, but when gas is at $150.00 per gallon, and a loaf of bread costs $200.00, it won't seem so bad.

Just trust them, America.
 
2009-12-09 09:07:35 PM  

chu2dogg: But Bush?


Well, he DID squander a lot of our money on pointless poorly-executed wars.
 
2009-12-09 09:07:58 PM  
I had some global warming yesterday, so I just opened the window and that cleared it right up.
 
2009-12-09 09:09:06 PM  

yakmans_dad: bearsfolks: I'm scared alright...of the Government and it's giveaways and taxes. We are going to run this country into bankruptcy.

Over 1 trillion poured into Iraq. Over 6 years. Over 200 billion per year.

No *BANKRUPTCY* moans from the Right Wing.

Strange.

A fraction of that to mitigate AGW and the Right Wing goes nuts. Sounds like an attempt to fan a concern troll into votes to me.


Okay math question for you.
Which is more:
1 trillion over 6 years (the war)
10 trillion over 20 years (the AGW from the article).

Yes the war is a fraction of the AGW but it is one in which the fraction is greater than 1.
 
2009-12-09 09:09:08 PM  

Farker T: $10 TRILLION may SEEM like a lot of money now, but when gas is at $150.00 per gallon, and a loaf of bread costs $200.00, it won't seem so bad.

Just trust them, America.


No no, that's the result of unions and the minimum wage. Get it right.
 
2009-12-09 09:09:13 PM  
more accurate headline

Climate Deal Likely to ManBearPig Big Price Tag
 
2009-12-09 09:09:26 PM  
I'm just scared of scientifically illiterate politicians and voters...
 
2009-12-09 09:10:53 PM  

jimi32: Well, ya' know, that the Earth has some changes...it gets hot, and it gets cold.


Derp.
 
2009-12-09 09:11:27 PM  
Mr. Potatoass: jimi32: Well, ya' know, that the Earth has some changes...it gets hot, and it gets cold.

You sound old.


I've been here since the beginning....

All this shiat about the "Earth" is deceiving... The Earth will be fine. But, humanity will not.
Carbon and what not...
4.6 billion compared to 1.2 million years....
Earth wins again!
 
2009-12-09 09:12:16 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Okay math question for you.
Which is more:
1 trillion over 6 years (the war)
10 trillion over 20 years (the AGW from the article).

Yes the war is a fraction of the AGW but it is one in which the fraction is greater than 1.


But the $10T figure is for the whole world, not just us.
 
2009-12-09 09:12:47 PM  
Wow. It'd be unpossible for the same folks that control global oil, mining, energy, etc. to be profiting from this; wouldn't it?
 
2009-12-09 09:12:58 PM  

Flappyhead: I'm confused, how is this ACORNs fault?


Always remember Poe's Law.
 
2009-12-09 09:13:14 PM  

Kome: I'm just scared of scientifically illiterate politicians and voters...


What, you're not scared of scientifically illiterate reporters too? I think if we had fewer idiot reporters, we'd have fewer idiot voters, which would lead to fewer idiot politicians.

But, people smart enough to understand science rarely major in journalism, for some reason.
 
2009-12-09 09:13:31 PM  
What if the computer generated climate models are wrong and the world community is just egging the USA into spending itself into such deep bankruptcy that we end up as a hopelessly third world nation.
 
2009-12-09 09:13:33 PM  

BuckTurgidson: All these lazy-ass all-mouth wannabe free-market libertarian capitalists want to do is sit on their fat, dependent asses, go on the Internet, and biatch.


And even worse: Accept EVERY form of corporate propaganda that is fed to them as absolute fact. Everything the "anti climate-change crowd" uses as evidence that there isn't a problem is simply propaganda spread by oil and coal corporations. I wish they'd all take up smoking because I'm sure that big tobacco is still willing to tell them that smoking is safe.

Oh that's right...science and clear-thinking people have pretty much won that 'debate'.
 
2009-12-09 09:13:57 PM  

Farker T: $10 TRILLION may SEEM like a lot of money now, but when gas is at $150.00 per gallon, and a loaf of bread costs $200.00, it won't seem so bad.

Just trust them, America World.


/that's a global price tag
 
2009-12-09 09:14:04 PM  

ghare: chu2dogg: But Bush?

Well, he DID squander a lot of our money on pointless poorly-executed wars.


Because that's relevant when talking about squandering money in a massive transfer of wealth scheme.
 
2009-12-09 09:14:31 PM  

ghare: Kome: I'm just scared of scientifically illiterate politicians and voters...

What, you're not scared of scientifically illiterate reporters too? I think if we had fewer idiot reporters, we'd have fewer idiot voters, which would lead to fewer idiot politicians.

But, people smart enough to understand science rarely major in journalism, for some reason.


Voters come from the grave...the system is fixed.
 
2009-12-09 09:14:39 PM  

Chunky Pumpkinhead: more accurate headline

Climate Deal Likely to ManBearPig Big Price Tag


hahahahahahah manbearpig like on the tv show!!!!
 
2009-12-09 09:14:46 PM  
I think it's amazing that liberals couldn't see spending money on a known threat with the invasion in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. but are more then willing to give up trillions on something that is NOT a scientific fact is being caused by man nor anything to show that even if we did spend trillions, what would be the result?

Would hurricanes stop?n How many years would it take? Once it was reversed, would we stop spending the money? If you believe we would stop spending the money, I've got a bridge for you.

When Reagan tried to stop a $100 M helium program in Arkansas that was created around WWI, the political pressure was huge. Do you think global warming or some other crisis won't be thought up.

Farking sheeple.
 
2009-12-09 09:14:50 PM  
Pointing out bad behavior by someone else is not an excuse for other bad behavior.
 
2009-12-09 09:15:18 PM  

Melgania: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6369971.stm


We don't know who struck first, us or them. But we do know it was us that scorched the sky...
 
2009-12-09 09:16:07 PM  

glenlivid: BuckTurgidson: All these lazy-ass all-mouth wannabe free-market libertarian capitalists want to do is sit on their fat, dependent asses, go on the Internet, and biatch.

And even worse: Accept EVERY form of corporate propaganda that is fed to them as absolute fact. Everything the "anti climate-change crowd" uses as evidence that there isn't a problem is simply propaganda spread by oil and coal corporations.


(citation needed)
 
2009-12-09 09:16:19 PM  

Mean Daddy: something that is NOT a scientific fact


Just like evolution, amirite
 
2009-12-09 09:16:38 PM  
How is global warming bad? New Orleans was almost wiped off the face of the earth and we're rebuilding it? Why, so we can have a crappy football team in the South?

Is that your plan, the oceans rise, wipe out houses and rebuild them? What do I get for my $10 T?
 
2009-12-09 09:16:51 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Okay math question for you.
Which is more:
1 trillion over 6 years (the war)
10 trillion over 20 years (the AGW from the article).

Yes the war is a fraction of the AGW but it is one in which the fraction is greater than 1.


Dude are you farking serious? Infrastructure upgrades have actual value between blowing shiat up. If we spent money fixing this problem we would get real tangibles things in return, not holes in the landscape and dead corpses.
 
2009-12-09 09:17:16 PM  

GAT_00: I love how the right is willing to spend trillions on blowing shiat up, or being ready to blow shiat up, but isn't willing to spend a dime fixing things.


"Is it fixed?" "Well, I think so, but Scientist Burr Lee Mann over there says that my calculations are all wrong, and Scientist Jablonsky argues that we're attacking the wrong problem. Oh, and all those political activists say we're deforesting."

"Is it blown the hell up?" "Yes sir, there is only a smoking crater filled with rubble, debris, and ash."


/Not saying I agree
//I just understand their investment thinking
 
2009-12-09 09:17:44 PM  

wtfisthat: What if the computer generated climate models are wrong and the world community is just egging the USA into spending itself into such deep bankruptcy that we end up as a hopelessly third world nation.


$10 trillion global expenditures over 20 years does not equal "The US alone is going to spend $10 trillion this year."

Just FYI.
 
2009-12-09 09:17:51 PM  
eldipsh*t

Oh, that's right, there's scientific consensus. That's close enough, right eldipsh*t?
 
2009-12-09 09:17:55 PM  

Kome: I'm just scared of scientifically illiterate politicians and voters...


What I find most baffling about this whole thing is how people outside climate science circles are even given a platform to yap about it so much.

Every other day I see a generic survey attached to a climate article in the Mainstream Media along the lines of "Do you agree that Global Warming is caused by human activity?". WTF? It's really the same as a cancer research article asking the general population "Do you agree that this latest potential breakthrough will lead to finding a cure for cancer?". What the heck can average people possibly know to even have an opinion worth surveying?
 
2009-12-09 09:18:48 PM  

wtfisthat: What if the computer generated climate models are wrong


www.grida.no

Well, if the past models are to be believed, they have been pretty accurate looking backward.
 
2009-12-09 09:19:10 PM  
It *is* rather amusing how the deniers run around like chicken little screaming "OMG!!! IT WILL DESTROY THE ECONOMEEEZ!!!!" whenever solutions are proposed...

But I'm sure their pants-wetting is based on sound science.
 
2009-12-09 09:19:15 PM  

wtfisthat: What if the computer generated climate models are wrong and the world community is just egging the USA into spending itself into such deep bankruptcy that we end up as a hopelessly third world nation.


So the deregulation/free market/tax cuts/wars-on-credit crowd haven't achieved that already? Interesting.

Cause if you're so concerned, you should be screaming at the top of your lungs about how much we piss away on defense spending alone.
 
2009-12-09 09:19:21 PM  

Jaakobi: even if you don't believe in AGW, it would still be better to get off of fossil fuels. Cars stink, and the sooner we get rid of gasoline run cars, the better. I happen to think it would be a good thing to keep cities and the countryside clean, and who really doesn't like clean air?


What people don't tend to realize is that we're taking our most valued resource and burning it. Without oil, there's no plastic, little medicine, etc. Look around you. How many things around you have no component made from oil? And all the things you THINK have no oil-based components still probably do, though you don't know it. And all those things that truly don't were probably manufactured using equipment that has essential components made from oil (aside from the power needed to run that equipment). We continue to torch this most-valuable resource, and when it's gone, baby, it's gone! THAT'S my motivation, not global warming, which could still have a myriad of other natural causes.
 
2009-12-09 09:19:44 PM  
Well, it's been a hell of a ride.
 
2009-12-09 09:19:54 PM  

Mean Daddy: How is global warming bad? New Orleans was almost wiped off the face of the earth and we're rebuilding it? Why, so we can have a crappy football team in the South?

Is that your plan, the oceans rise, wipe out houses and rebuild them? What do I get for my $10 T?


Good to see you're also in favor of getting rid of those goddamn darkies.
 
2009-12-09 09:20:36 PM  
"Spend trillions"? no...."Give" trillions to the underdeveloped world, and all will be OK.

What will they do with all that money? Don't ask, citizen. Just do it.

What is GM doing with their bailout money? Building a billion dollar factory. In Brazil. Ya, rly
 
2009-12-09 09:20:42 PM  

chu2dogg: ghare: chu2dogg: But Bush?

Well, he DID squander a lot of our money on pointless poorly-executed wars.

Because that's relevant when talking about squandering money in a massive transfer of wealth scheme.


You can't really be this stupid.
 
2009-12-09 09:20:53 PM  
We have to do this NOW. Give as all your money!
Biggest crock of shiate ever.

i302.photobucket.com
 
2009-12-09 09:21:07 PM  
I like the "Everybody Panic" turtle.
 
2009-12-09 09:21:33 PM  

AR55: dead corpses


Are there other kinds now? :-|
 
2009-12-09 09:22:06 PM  

Mean Daddy: I don't understand science and I am PROUD that I am stupid!


Ok, Bart, stay after class.
 
2009-12-09 09:22:11 PM  

thomps: Farker T: $10 TRILLION may SEEM like a lot of money now, but when gas is at $150.00 per gallon, and a loaf of bread costs $200.00, it won't seem so bad.

Just trust them, America World.

/that's a global price tag


Sorry, I forgot to deduct the portion to be paid by China, India, Pakistan, Mexico and Micronesia.

Make that $9.99999999999 trillion.
 
2009-12-09 09:22:21 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: "Spend trillions"? no...."Give" trillions to the underdeveloped world, and all will be OK.

What will they do with all that money? Don't ask, citizen. Just do it.

What is GM doing with their bailout money? Building a billion dollar factory. In Brazil. Ya, rly


yes, god forbid american companies attempting to develop market share in emerging markets.
 
2009-12-09 09:22:21 PM  

jimi32: Mr. Potatoass: jimi32: Well, ya' know, that the Earth has some changes...it gets hot, and it gets cold.

You sound old.

I've been here since the beginning....

All this shiat about the "Earth" is deceiving... The Earth will be fine. But, humanity will not.
Carbon and what not...
4.6 billion compared to 1.2 million years....
Earth wins again!


www.granateseed.com
"why do you get keeled? Because you ask "why do I get keeled?"
 
2009-12-09 09:22:35 PM  

Mean Daddy: I think it's amazing that liberals couldn't see spending money on a known threat with the invasion in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. but are more then willing to give up trillions on something that is NOT a scientific fact is being caused by man nor anything to show that even if we did spend trillions, what would be the result?

Would hurricanes stop?n How many years would it take? Once it was reversed, would we stop spending the money? If you believe we would stop spending the money, I've got a bridge for you.

When Reagan tried to stop a $100 M helium program in Arkansas that was created around WWI, the political pressure was huge. Do you think global warming or some other crisis won't be thought up.

Farking sheeple.


Hey I'm all for investing in "Green" technology. Copenhagen isn't.

It's a massive transfer of wealth scheme from 'rich' countries to 'poor' countries. Y'know, poor countries like India and China. Even the IPCC says that India and China will not "go green" until the West takes the lead. And we will do that by paying for their energy infrastructure as well as paying for our own.

In fact, this transfer of wealth will make it more difficult to invest our limited resources in the proper technologies at home. Making us more dependent on fossil fuels and energy imports, while subsidizing foreign countries to be the economic leaders of the future.

It would be incredibly easy to make a carbon tax and have each country invest in their own renewable resources. But that would mean responsibility and not being able to punish the rich whitey (eg. YOU)

But hey, why don't we just talk more about Bush's deficit, because that will make the whole issue much brighter in your little minds.
 
2009-12-09 09:22:47 PM  

Hick: We have to do this NOW. Give as all your money!
Biggest crock of shiate ever.


Is this a joke?

Stupid Poe's Law.
 
Displayed 50 of 658 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report