Blog reader/commenter/lawyer and Jasper native Drew Thornley was recently interviewed by the Texas Public Policy Foundation on Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.
It’s only 9 minutes long and worth every minute. For every person that doesn’t listen to it, I’ll fly one lap around the world in my private jet.
(By the way… *cough* … *cough*)
No comments, yet...
10:15 am on Sep 27 2007Parker,
I agree with you on most of your points and I am to am sick of the extremes in both directions also. I lean to the right because most of the hypocrites are on the left. Al Gore is a dickhead not because he is liberal, not because he is a Democrat, he is just a dickhead because he is Al Gore. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, has not one callous on his hands, has never done an honest days work in his life. I think the comparison between Al’s house and W’s house is the definition of hypocrisy.
thanks for agreeing but we totally disagree on your understanding of hypocrisy…i don’t see callouses on dubya’s hands either as he’s had everything handed to him in life (don’t be fooled by the good ‘ol boy persona, he’s aristocracy all the way)…if you want to speak about the hypocritical party, look no further than the elephants…the party that likes to tout family values has been the party most embroiled in moral controversy over the past year…of course the dems are full of hypocrites, but what ticks me off to no end is when republicans take some moral high road that they have absolutely no right to
Parker: You said you didn’t listen to my podcast, and you shouldn’t rush to judgment. I believe in conservation: I turn off a light when I leave the room, I don’t leave any water running for any reason, I drive a compact car, etc. If you had bothered to listen to my podcast, you would see that I advocate for focusing on solutions to real problems and not wasting enormous sums of money in a fight that shows little promise of producing any benefit, when that money could go toward addressing real problems.
drew, sorry if my original comment came off as blasting you personally…i intended my original statement to be a more general one toward the two-sided debate which we all hear too much about
i am wary of your consideration of this as a “fight that shows little promise of producing any benefit, when that money could go toward addressing real problems”
what would be the “real problems” in your opinion as i am unable to listen to the clip
No worries; thanks for the note
Poverty, disease, malaria, malnutrition, unclean drinking water, unclean air, AIDS/HIV, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, to name the big ones
There is a truckload of research about how terrible of an investment fighting warming and CO2 is; how its costs far outweigh any possible benefit; if you want to see some of it, I will be glad to get it to you
The point is that the measures proposed to fight climate change and CO2 would be grossly detrimental to national economies: GDP/GNP, employment, incomes; it’s senseless to make the world’s economies worse off, economically and standard-of-living-wise, just to battle the earth and its natural processes and to please a political mob
well…we do agree on much…however i find many of the arguments that link global warming to the real problems that you list quite compelling…i find it beneficial to see how these can go hand in hand rather than treating them all as separate issues that must be checked off a list…it’s easy to see how poverty, disease, malaria, malnutrition, unclean drinking water and unclean air can all be affected by global warming (i’m not a fan of this term simply because of all the controversy it stirs up)…i’m not saying that “global warming” causes these problems, but i do think that the crazy lefty scientists and theologians are on to something, particularly the focus that our rapidly increasing population will leave and is leaving an indelible mark on this planet and can contribute to or alter the earth’s natural processes…do we treat the disease or just ameliorate the symptoms…unfortunately, the issue has become so clothed in political garb that one political mob is unwilling to touch it
Parker,
If Al Gore were a Republican, he would still be a dickhead. W is and arrogant stubborn SOB. I can see that. Al presents himself as a concerned, environmentalist, I don’t see that. W actually lives closer to what Al presents himself as than Al does.
I didn’t present either party superior on morality, you did.
Parker: Thanks so much for writing back with your thoughts. Best, Drew
paul…flagpole…3:10
Parker..see ya at the pole
I was searching for fast cash fast loan online fast bad credit persona at google and got your post LH.com Blog Reader Interviewed On Global Warming | because lightning bugs taste like chicken. in search results. Not very relevant result, but still interesting to read
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong.
i know i’m opening up a can of worms here, but i do have a question
i didn’t get to listen to the post about the anti-global warming thing, but i’m pretty sure i can imagine what he had to say…right wing pundits want to counter what the left wing pundits have to say, both of whom simply do this to appease constituents…can we not re-frame the conversation…can we not look at the attempts to counter global warming and to conserve the environment as aspects of creation care? why do you make fun of or belittle these people’s efforts? if you believe in a creator, don’t you think it prudent to care for the creation that the creator created? so what if a person wants to “fight global warming,” at least they are working to preserve and conserve the gifts that god has given us…i’m sick and tired of both sides of this argument really missing the point…but what do i know…i’m just an idealist seminarian