The American Spectator

louis tully| 11.17.09 @ 12:14PM

A Romneyesque flip-flop. Where do the Whigs find these guys?

Bob| 11.17.09 @ 2:43PM

Palin's flip-flop:

Newsmax:

"What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?

A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made. "

From the Couric interview:

" Couric: What’s your position on global warming? Do you believe it’s man-made or not?

Palin: Well, we’re the only Arctic state, of course, Alaska. So we feel the impacts more than any other state, up there with the changes in climates. And certainly, it is apparent. We have erosion issues. And we have melting sea ice, of course. So, what I’ve done up there is form a sub-cabinet to focus solely on climate change. Understanding that it is real. And …

Couric: Is it man-made, though in your view?

Palin: You know there are -- there are man’s activities that can be contributed to the issues that we’re dealing with now, these impacts. I’m not going to solely blame all of man’s activities on changes in climate. Because the world’s weather patterns are cyclical. And over history we have seen change there. But kind of doesn’t matter at this point, as we debate what caused it. The point is: it’s real; we need to do something about it."

ALL politicians flip-flop (including Obama and the Dems), because their primary goal is reelection, not governing.

But then again, you guys have something against Pawlenty and not Palin, so you can't be objective. I'm still for Romney, flip-flops and all. I'd rather have someone educated and successful rather than someone who doesn't know policy/governmental issues and is a quitter.

Adam Smith| 11.17.09 @ 3:06PM

Another GOP windsock who has not done his background basic science check on the latest debunkings of this scam.

Let's hope he knows for sure what direction that wind is blowing.

Bob| 11.17.09 @ 3:53PM

Adam, do YOU understand the basic science? We know that greenhouse gas emissions have grown dramatically since the start of industrialization and that is clearly due to human activity.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechan.....alghg.html

We also know that there is a global warming trend over the longer term. The unintelligent non-scientists point to the recent decade where temperatures have declined, but this also occurred in the early 1900's and in the 1950's (i.e., every 50 years), and the longer term trend continued.

http://solar-center.stanford.e.....o2.svg.png

That's why the majority of scientists believe there is a connection with human activity. However that cannot be directly linked through scientific research and is why a minority of scientists disagree with the connection. They all agree on the long term warming trend and growth in greenhouse gas emissions -- that is just fact.

After doing some significant research on this myself, I believe the probabilities are that some global warming trends are due to human activity, but no one has been able to effectively quantify that part due to human activity and that naturally occurring. In any event, I think we should spend more money on research, just in case, and not be an Al Gore chicken little and hurt our economic health more. Research is a lot less expensive than the alternatives. But to say that global warming is a "scam" and that human activity is NOT a contributing factor is just plain dumb.

By the way, I won't support cap and tax or or carbon credits until more research is done.

Pete2| 11.17.09 @ 7:48PM

Others have done research also on "global warming" and have come to far different conclusions than you Bob. In fact, quite a few climatologists now believe we are in a global cooling cycle and the majority believe that this is all naturally driven, not manmade. Many who were advocates of GW have suddenly become skeptics because they see the data does not back up the contentions of alarmists like Gore. I suggest you read sites like ICECAP and others which show just how wrong the alrmists are. I also think you should listen to what Dr Bryson has to say about GW, since he pretty much founded the science of climatology. In other words, the debate is far from over, there is no consensus whatsoever, and most now believe GW ended a decade ago and what you are seeing in the rise of CO2 is more the renmants of natural GW and not a cause.

JimE| 11.17.09 @ 10:34PM

MORON ALERT! Bob wants more money directed to ACORN under the guise of research.

philfl63| 11.17.09 @ 9:54PM

Good God, is this guy for real. I keep looking for either the strings that control these marionettes or the hand that is inserted up their butts controlling the ventriloquist dummy.

Franklin| 11.18.09 @ 12:39AM

Excuse me? Flip-flop?? Has anyone else ever changed their opinion when faced with new information showing that your old opinion is wrong (isn't that what just came out of the BBC recently)? Give the guy a break - he just found out that he was wrong and HE IS ADMITTING IT! Isn't that refreshing for a politician?!

SandyC| 11.18.09 @ 9:51AM

No Franklin, your boy Pawlenty doesn't get a pass. He should have withheld judgement and comments until he had more facts. He is about as exciting as McCain, and, McCain said it's Pawlenty's turn next. No thanks.

martin j smith| 11.18.09 @ 8:07AM

And here comes BOB--The provocateur and seminar poster. This poster does same things on many other issues. He wants to antagonize and cause rage. He is a plant and nothing more. He is not for real--he is a Democrtat Party Obamabot !!

martin j smith| 11.18.09 @ 10:25AM

My concern about Pawlenty's "flip flop" is not only this particular issue because of the enormopus effects cap and trade policy would have on our economy--but to avoid another MacCaine Presidential run--which was more like a hobble.
I want to vote for a person because I like his positions not just because it is a vote against the other candidate. What I do not want is a candidate without the will to win and if this Pawlenty person turns off the conservative base
he will lose. Romney,Huckabee, or any of the other candidates from the last election could be problematic for me as well. I hope there is a candidate that at least wants to win. MacCaine not only did no have the will to win--I do not even think he wanted to win. I think the Republican Party has a real problem because there is a in my view a gap between the conservative base and the so called moderates. Wanting to "get along" is fine to a point but the current Democratic Party does not want to get along--they want to be the only party in town. The elections of 2010-and 2012 will be telling. Unless the Repubs have candidates that have dthe will to win,the Republican Party will be in trouble.

Thomas| 11.18.09 @ 10:50AM

Pawlenty is a politician. He says what he thinks the people want to hear, with sincerity. The media has been selling the idea of man being responsible for global warming for two decades and many Americans believe it to be true. Just as they touted human responsibility for the coming ice age in the '70's.

As to Bob's assertion that only a minority of scientists do not adhere to the human origins theory of the increase overall global temperatures, that is simply not true. In both UN sponsored climatological conferences {2007 and 2009}, the scientists overwhelmingly stated, in the unedited report, that there was no evidence that human activity had a measurable effect upon global temperature increase. And this was at a time when global temperatures were still increasing. The UN summary reports of these two conferences were diametrically opposed to the unedited reports. Today, there are even more scientists who do not support the hu8man origin global warming theory. It is interesting to note that the big supporters of human origin global warming are governments and private concerns that stand to make money from defending the planet from humanity in the form of fees and taxes and the "back to Eden" environmentalists who are not noted for their accuracy in anything concerning the environment.The current push for international treaties to save the planet from human pollution has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with a transfer of wealth from the current industrialized nations to the expanding economy nations and the third world. These treaties place almost the entire burden for controlling emissions on the countries that already do the best at controlling them and give a pass to some major polluters and future polluters.

To be fair, it is widely acknowledged that human activity does significantly impact the environment on a local level. Urban areas such as LA, Boston, The Lake Erie corridor, NY have all caused detrimental effects to the local ecology, by their very existence. In all cases, most of the unwanted detrimental effects have been addressed and effectively mitigated.

Sean| 11.18.09 @ 12:30PM

Looks like Pawlenty is going to be one of the new idiots pushed onto the Republican party. If Republicans can nominate McCain they can nominate this idiot also. This guy is so easily swayed by the MSM.

lapotp lcd screen| 11.24.09 @ 1:08AM

e1705 ac adaptere1705 ac adapter
d505 ac adapterd505 ac adapter

ugg classic cardy| 12.5.09 @ 9:41PM

Welcome to our website: http://www.infls.com
As the commodities we supply are of excellent quality and low price,
we have won a very good reputation from our clients all over the world.
If you are interested in any of our products, please don't hesitate to contact with me by email.
i trust that through our cooperation we shall be able to conclude some transactions with you in the near future.
Website: http://www.mbtshoe.co.uk
Best regards!