It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Irrational George- on the issue of global warming...sense?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:12 PM
Today, this question was asked of our president: And this is the answer;

by Dr. Forbush @ 6:42 pm
Today at the White House George W Bush was quoted in an answer to a question about Global Warming spurred by the recent unusual weather in Washington DC saying the following.

“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…”


Huh??? I'm sorry, but this man has no brain cells. He's a machine, programed and his computer has many bugs.

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:28 PM

Instead of fighting over the cause, this take steps to prepare for the inevitable.

I don't see anything wrong with his answer.
Unlighten me please?

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:53 PM

Originally posted by dgtempe

answered Bush....There’s a debate over whether it’s manmade or naturally caused. We ought to get beyond that debate

1. There is no scientific debate about whether human activity is contributing to global warming. Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. In 2002, the Bush administration’s EPA concluded that global warming the the last 20 years was “due mostly to human activity.”

Science Magazine Source
Quoted Source

In December 2002, Bush announced that his administration planned to study the issue of climate change for five more years rather than be forced into any action regulating fossil fuel emissions. The question of global warming was put on the back burner.
Midway into Bush’s first term, the Panel, a United Nations sponsored panel consisting of hundreds of scientists, had come to the conclusion in October 2002 that pollution created by humans has “contributed substantially” to global warming.
While the Bush administration officially “studied” global warming, his right-wing ideological allies at the competitive Enterprise Institute and the Reason Public Policy Institute publicly derided global warming as some paranoid liberal hoax. Meanwhile, renowned Department of Defense security planner Andrew Marshall led a secret team of risk assessment experts who found global warming to be a greater threat to U.S. national security than al Qaeda. Marshall drafted Peter Schwartz, the former head of planning at Royal Dutch Shell Group, among others, to study what the president was dedicated to ignoring. Co-author Schwartz said that climate change “should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national security concern.”

The Pentagon “secret report” on global warming emerged briefly, albeit in Britain, as an election year issue. While neither Bush nor Kerry seemed overly concerned with debating the contentious issue of global warming, the British Observer ran the following lead on Sunday, February 2, 2004: “Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.”


Friends of the Bush administration are already prepared to make billions upon billions of dollars, follow the oil money as gas prices hit above $3 a gallon this year and the oil industry made billions in profits off the katrina disaster last year, openly refusing to invest any of that in communities. Watch each natural disaster and watch the stock values and it will be clear why the Bush adminstration is smiling while helps the world go to hell.

[edit on 26-6-2006 by Legalizer]

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:56 PM
The link isnt working...Anyway, it sounds a bit weird not to mention the fact that this is the same answer he gives over and over- verbatum.

He doesnt focus on his answer--- You dont get it?

new topics

top topics

log in