Very interesting. As pointed out on OregonCatalyst, new polls show that the public is increasingly skeptical of the global warming agenda. Not only does concern over global warming rank dead last on the list of issues in a poll done by Rassmussen, but a majority of people in another poll question whether warming is man made to begin with.
This is great news, but you can bet that it will be ignored by Ted Kulongoski and President Obama, who will shove an economically ruinous Cap & Trade scheme down our throats anyway. In political terms, however, this is good for Republicans, as long as we stay solid in opposing this stupid idea. We can hang the disaster of Cap & Trade right around the necks of all the Democrats who support this idiocy, knowing that the people are on our side.
The fact is, voters just aren't that stupid. They recognize a hidden agenda when they see one.
Ironically, The Funny Paper today once again revealed its arrogance and disdain for the public, in its editorial bashing Measure 57. They wrote something that I thought, when I readit, that they could have easily been talking about Cap & Trade:
"It's tough for voters to think much about costs and economic implications when they are bombarded with campaign rhetoric designed to scare the living daylights out of them..."
They were actually talking about Measure 57, trying to explain why voters bought it. (Because they are stupid.)
And The Funny Paper is convinced that the stupid voters will also buy their crap about global warming, since they have been trying to scare the living daylights out of them for the last decade.
Well, it ain't working. Voters bought Measure 57 because they want the government to do what it is supposed to do - keep us safe. They are rejecting global warming because they know it is just another power/money grab by the ruling class.
But if your point of departure is contempt for voters, you misinterpret both acceptance of M57 and rejection of global warming hysteria. That is where The Funny Paper finds itself now.
Time and again telling us we are stupid. Great way to build readership!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I suggest making an analogy about the Ku Klux Klan in Oregon in the 1920's, a minority of the population, using their influence on the legislature to bring about race laws discriminating against blacks and Asians and compare that to the vocal left minority that is influencing the legislature to make stupid destructive laws that undermine the fabric of individual rights and economic freedoms. Although the liberal left is not organized into one organization, their constituency is made up of groups like PETA, Moveon.org, ACORN, BlueOregon.org, BikePortland.org, and many others which all act, discriminate, shout down their opposition and organize like the KKK.
The Pew Research poll reported that Global warming as at the bottom of the list (not Rasmussen as you imply)... the Rasmussen poll was the one that found that a plurality (%44) do not believe that Global Warming is man-made while %41 do think it is man-made (%9 are undecided and the other %6 attribute it to other causes). It would have been nice if the article had included the margin of error. I suspect it would be a statistical dead heat if they had.
However, the facts about global warming are independent from poll results; just as the existence of black holes cannot be determined by polls.
So, just to ease my mind, you're not saying that the %41 that believe that Global Warming is man-made are stupid are you?
You are right I got the pollsters backwards. Oops.
No, I am not saying anything about the people who buy the AGW hypothesis. I am saying The Funny Paper thinks voters are stupid - that they were persuaded by demagoguery on M57, just as they expect them to be persuaded by global warming demagoguery.
But in truth, voters liked M57 because it locked up some criminals, and they DON't buy the AGW demagoguery that The Funny Paper has pushed relentlessly for 10 years.
Since when should federal officials make decisions based on polls of an uneducated electorate?
Half the US population does not even believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection, an hypothesis that has been established by facts for about 100 yrs now.
The American public -- let's be honest -- are essentially ignorant.
So let's not accept the results of public polls when making policy but the findings of our most educated scientists, who we pay a lot of money every year to do real and solid research.
That's right. The U.S. liberal elite look down at the rest of us as IGNORANT. Thanks for making that crystal clear, David. You're a true-blue collectivist.
"Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe since that instant."
Also known as the "Bibbitty-Bobbitty-Boo" Theory
Gratify my ignorance David; I'm curious to know how carbon dating works. Do scientists pull dates out of thin air or is there any science behind claiming a fossil is 100 million years old as opposed to 50 million years old as opposed to 50 billion years old? And if there is no evidence of what happened prior to said BANG, then how do you get your carbon dating numbers?
All this 'knowledge and discovery' has largely been gathered in the past couple hundred years. The elitists who control what is published for educational purposes have selected and highlighted scientists who best support their agenda, and the David Appell's of the world cling to it with an unexplainable faith.
Did you know evolution was introduced into public schools based on physical evidence? Yes, it was a neanderthal tooth. It was later discovered the "proof" was actually a pig's tooth, but the they continue to shove evolution down our throats.
After reading the Appell comment the first thing that came to mind was who's first traditionally (academics) when the cultural revolution occurs.(goes to re-education camp)
Natural selection - dave ?
Anon -
You can't date dinosaur fossils using carbon dating - using that method can only take you 60,000 years back. Instead scientists measure the half-life of isotopes like Uranium-235 in the rock surrounding the bones. Since the isotopes they use have a long half-life, they can get a pretty good estimate of the age of the rock.
The assumption is that the bones are relatively quickly buried.
Post a Comment