Adam

Many scientists today are beginning to find empirical data suggesting the sun has more to do with the temperature of the earth. Some scientists will argue that to suggest carbon dioxide is the cause has no real science behind it. The tipping point may be coming with regard to science telling us that our proposed theory of global warming was misconstrued. There is evidence that global cooling is underway, and that solar activity, or the lack of solar activity is the cause.

If that happens, will people have the courage to abandon the theory or will the follow through with the proposed solution because it is politically expedient? Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. I have not seen conclusive evidence that global warming is man made, nor have I seen conclusive evidence that carbon dioxide is a cause.

The point about poisoned environments is well made, and one I believe in completely. I believe organizations have an obligation to serve the communities within which they operate, and many have done so profitably. This includes protecting the environment and population from pollutants generated in manufacturing processes.

We cannot ignore the economic impact of our decisions. I could pose an argument that those driving the carbon debate are doing so for economic gain, and those we are attempting to help are bearing the brunt of that economic system. Many millions of dollars have been gathered in the name of carbon credits. I do not like that system and find it morally bankrupt.

Thank you for the kind words regarding my response. You can attack my arguments any time. I appreciate the debate and respectfully look forward to another response.

Thank you for your comment.

I will agree to disagree with you, but I would like to add that the Global Warming argument is wrapped up. Everyone from 1st graders to top world scientists and from people sowing rice paddy’s to world leaders know that Global Warming is real. To say the argument “is still open” is like saying that we have not proven the world is round or that we landed on the moon.

I also do not believe that you think that poisoned air water and soil is a “human right.” Perhaps you can explain how trying to clean up the poisons that beset us on a daily basis is “treading” on anyone’s rights, unless perhaps you think that people have a right to pollute and harm. If that is the case, we have a whole different discussion going on.

Your response was well written and your position about respecting people is spot on. However, we can cause harm through omission and lack of knowledge. It is when you gain the knowledge that your actions, even though inadvertent, cause harm, that change must take place.

I’m open to discussion on this, if perhaps you see a flaw in my opinion. We can all teach each other and we look forward to respectful dialogue.

Thanks for the comment. I always look forward to reading what you think about our articles. Your link to the spending chart was really interesting from a “big picture” point of view re. Gov. Spending and Deficit workings.

FYI, the Sons and Daughters statement I made was most likely came from watching “Braveheart” the night before. But I’ll take the compliment.

Thanks Jon

The sentence, put forward by Navi Pillay, is patently ridiculous. And I mean this sentence: “basic rights such as food, water, shelter, health, life and self-determination” – doesn’t make any sense. The idea that everything is to be provided for everyone because it is their human right is either adolescent utopianism, or pragmatic Marxism.

Still, if we go that way, if America and the world follow the suicide spiral of entitlement and welfare spending for the purpose of sustaining everyone’s human rights, then you can bet I’m going to put myself on Navi’s list and collect my human rights instead of working for them because I’d really rather spend my days drawing pictures and writing my memoirs than working for somebody else.

Thanks Twilight