Tweet
Originally posted by Asher
Katrina was overcovered as well. Most people involved in those posts were affected.
Katrina was overcovered as well. Most people involved in those posts were affected.
-
Lots of people was also busy bushy bashing, so if he can be blamed of this indian flooding, post count will certainly rise.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg -
JMJon Miller-
I AM.CANADIAN
GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.Comment
-
How can we blame Bush for this? Come on people lets use our imagination.
Possibilities:
1. Global Warming (was the rain worse than usual during the monsoons? If it was we can blame it without any proof on GW and GW is clearly America's fault and Bush is leading America)
2. I hear the flooding was as bad as it was because a dam failed upstream. Did at any time a during the Bush administration a bill get passed that cut aid to that country? If it was Bush is clearly to blame.
In conclusion:
I blame Bush
Modern man calls walking more quickly in the same direction down the same road “change.”
The world, in the last three hundred years, has not changed except in that sense.
The simple suggestion of a true change scandalizes and terrifies modern man. -Nicolás Gómez DávilaComment
-
Hell, they lose as many people in a train crash.Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the moments that take your breath away.
"Hating America is something best left to Mobius. He is an expert Yank hater.
He also hates Texans and Australians, he does diversify." ~ BraindeadComment
-
It is a disaster and more so because it was unpredicted. Who could have forecast the river would change course in the way it did.
Yes I think the rains were worse than normal, but aren't they all now?
With the extra rain the Dam may have exceeded it design threshold.
Also, India wants to show it is a major economic power and tends not to want to accept aid, vis a vis the 2004 tsunami response, but this level of catastrophe is mindboggling. Not that different from the recent Chinese Earthquake.
I don't blame Bush for this, because this is cumulative effect from earlier disregard of the change in the earth's climate. But I will blame him for future disasters of this scale, for his appalling (Oil interest) policy on this issue.On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZationComment
-
Considering the fact that we don't know why and how climate changes, it's a bit harsh to blame bush for it - even if he's to be blamed for anything evil happeningOriginally posted by Hercules
I don't blame Bush for this, because this is cumulative effect from earlier disregard of the change in the earth's climate. But I will blame him for future disasters of this scale, for his appalling (Oil interest) policy on this issue.
.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Maybe you misread, but I didn't blame Bush for this particular disaster.
But I do blame him for ignoring overwheming evidence from the IPCC on the main contributers to climate change and not acting to address it. Climate change will have major effects on global climate and world economics.On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZationComment
-
Even then, it'd be impossible to say whether any particular future disaster would have happened if we'd never released a puff of CO2 from sources other than our lungs. So you could only blame Bush in a general scapegoat way, not a specific appointed-Brown-to-FEMA way.Comment
-
Don't worry, I didn't misread you - I just don't consider IPCC trustworthy. What is your opinion on a "scientific" document that is modified by politicians before release ?Originally posted by Hercules
Maybe you misread, but I didn't blame Bush for this particular disaster.
But I do blame him for ignoring overwheming evidence from the IPCC on the main contributers to climate change and not acting to address it. Climate change will have major effects on global climate and world economics.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Sorry I don't believe that. His policy and attitude over the 8 years of his presidency has frustrated environmentalists and scientists, and favoured the Oil lobby.Originally posted by Elok
Even then, it'd be impossible to say whether any particular future disaster would have happened if we'd never released a puff of CO2 from sources other than our lungs. So you could only blame Bush in a general scapegoat way, not a specific appointed-Brown-to-FEMA way.On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZationComment
-
Originally posted by Hercules
frustrated environmentalists
such are really tasty - especially toasted.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
If at this stage in the discussion in the global debate, you don't consider joint Nobel prize winners as trustworthy.Originally posted by BlackCat
Don't worry, I didn't misread you - I just don't consider IPCC trustworthy. What is your opinion on a "scientific" document that is modified by politicians before release ?
Who do you trust?On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZationComment
-
I don't contest that, but it's not relevant to my point. I said that no one particular event can be squarely blamed on global warming, only overall trends. You can't say "hurricane X was caused by GW" any more than you can point to a single water molecule in a lake and say "I peed that one into there two weeks ago."Originally posted by Hercules
Sorry I don't believe that. His policy and attitude over the 8 years of his presidency has frustrated environmentalists and scientists, and favoured the Oil lobby.Comment
-
No offense, but Nobel prize winners are usually chosen years after their findings. One thing is that they many years ago were brilliant, but is that a proof that they are it today ?Originally posted by Hercules
If at this stage in the discussion in the global debate, you don't consider joint Nobel prize winners as trustworthy.
Who do you trust?
Question is really if you dare to belive in new findigs or if you are a staunch beliver of old faiths.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Re Nobel prizes, that may well be true in a lot of cases.
I have always being open minded on this issue , but I am very interested in your new findings?On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZationComment
Comment