I don't even know what to say. You agree with dramatically reducing CO2 emissions, but oppose even the feeblest possible legislation to do so. You agree that the environmentalists have a point about CO2 emissions, but call them "eco-fascists". You call it a religion, blind worshippers of the sainted Gore, but actually grant the basic correctness of their beliefs about our environmental impact. You rant and rail against "alarmism", so long as it coincides with your political opponents' beliefs, but mention how a "nudge" could "plunge the planet to excess cooling," which would be "catastrophic." You call your opponents "Fascists", and anything you oppose "Fascism", which borders on Godwinning the thread, but oppose anyone calling anyone else any other names, and call for everyone to keep a level head and not exaggerate?
I don't get it. Maybe I should just leave it be. I can make sense out of Pete's beliefs, but all I'm getting from you is a contradictory hodgepodge of political likes and dislikes.
-Jester
I don't get it. Maybe I should just leave it be. I can make sense out of Pete's beliefs, but all I'm getting from you is a contradictory hodgepodge of political likes and dislikes.
-Jester