ABC News slams the President on Global Warming.

Now this is refreshing.  ABS News Reporter Bill Blakemore slams the President for continuing to insist there’s a debate over whether global warming is man-made or natural among various scientists even though, much like Evolution, no such debate actually exists. 

ABC News: A Perfect Storm Descends on the Nation’s Capital

In the White House, only hours after that old elm had fallen, Bush was addressed by a reporter, thus: “I know that you are not planning to see Al Gore’s new movie, but do you agree with the premise that global warming is a real and significant threat to the planet?”

“I have said consistently,” answered Bush, “that global warming is a serious problem. There’s a debate over whether it’s manmade or naturally caused. We ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary … to be good stewards of the environment, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil…”

OK let me interrupt the coming rant from Mr. Blake for a moment here to point out the idiocy of the President’s logic in the above statement. He says the debate over whether it’s man-made or natural is unsetlled, but that we need to get beyond the debate and start implementing the technologies necessary to fix the problem.

Here’s my questions for our dimwitted President: If the debate isn’t settled then how are we to know which technologies need to be implemented to solve the problem? If you can’t say that the bruning of oil is definitely one of the causes of global warming then why would you think switching to an alternative energy source would be of benefit? If you believe it’s possible that these changes may be natural then what pray-tell are the technologies that we could possibly put in place to alter this natural pattern or, for that matter, should we even consider altering what you think might be a natural phenomena?

Now back to a rather amazingly good rant:

The President—as far as the extensive and repeated researches of this and many other professional journalists, as well as all scientists credible on this subject, can find—is wrong on one crucial and no doubt explosive issue. When he said—as he also did a few weeks ago—that “There’s a debate over whether it’s manmade or naturally caused” … well, there really is no such debate.

At least none above what is proverbially called “the flat earth society level.”

Not one scientist of any credibility on this subject has presented any evidence for some years now that counters the massive and repeated evidence—gathered over decades and come at in dozens of ways by all kinds of professional scientists around the world—that the burning of fossil fuels is raising the world’s average temperature.

Or that counters the findings that the burning of these fuels is doing so in a way that is very dangerous for mankind, that will almost certainly bring increasingly devastating effects in the coming decades.

One small group of special interest businesses leaders—those of some fossil fuel companies—have been well documented by journalist Ross Gelbspan and others to have been fighting a PR campaign for 15 years to keep the American public confused about the wide and deep scientific consensus on this.

They’ve aimed, as Gelbspan explains, to keep us thinking that (to borrow the president’s words this morning) “There’s a debate over whether it’s manmade or naturally caused”—though no open and thorough journalism this reporter knows of can find any such thing.

It’s does my heart good to see ABC News laying the smackdown on the President’s continuing efforts to hem and haw his way through an issue that’s already starting to show an impact on this planet and will continue to do so for generations to come.

Link via AMERICAblog.

5 thoughts on “ABC News slams the President on Global Warming.

  1. Bull$hit: We ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary … to be good stewards of the environment, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil…

    If he’d said ‘… become less dependent on oil’ I’d think he understood it but, he doesn’t believe what he’s saying.
    He just parrots well-worn platitudes to give the impression to numb-fucks that he knows stuff. wink

  2. Just like any other politician he’s got money in his back pocket from a large contributor.  Why give up that money when you don’t have to.  If he really did care, there would be a coal tax on every automobile, we would already have SUV’s that average 40mpg, without using hybrid technology, we would have hybrids that get 100mpg and don’t have to be special ordered or hacked, we would have more than two fuel choices at every pump, and even if you wanted to use gasoline, it would be twice as inexpensive, if everyone of these measures listed were implemented.

  3. This stat is quite well known

    4% World Population
    20%+ of world energy use

    Less well know is this from The Independent newspaper a few years back.

    5% of US energy is used by business leaving computers on overnight

    Maths makes this 1% of the world energy is used by US business leaving computers on overnight. Not doing anything for the most part, just quietly humming away, killing the planet…

  4. You know it’ll never actually happen, but gee wouldn’t the following be nice for a change:

    Reporter: You know what, birdbrain, shut up, just shut up. (looks around frantically) Cripes! Can I “talk” to whomever’s “behind the curtain” on this? Hello, Oz, anybody home? Come on, please! I’m getting nowhere talking to this “sock puppet.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.