Quote of the day

posted at 10:00 pm on January 2, 2009 by Allahpundit

“Professor James Lovelock, a geo-scientist and author of the Gaia hypothesis, in which the Earth is a quasi-living organism, is one of those who is less optimistic. He believes that a plan B is urgently needed. ‘I never thought that the Kyoto agreement would lead to any useful cut back in greenhouse gas emissions so I am neither more nor less optimistic now about prospect of curbing CO2 compared to 10 years ago. I am, however, less optimistic now about the ability of the Earth’s climate system to cope with expected increases in atmospheric carbon levels compared with 10 years ago,’ he told The Independent. ‘I strongly agree that we now need a ‘plan B’ where a geoengineering strategy is drawn up in parallel with other measures to curb CO2 emissions.’”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

He should help the planet by committing suicide….

Tim Burton on January 2, 2009 at 10:10 PM

Like any well-trafficked site of this kind, HotAir draws in its share of both scholar and knave, but i dont get how this comment is even remotely useful.

Mike D. on January 2, 2009 at 10:29 PM

Maybe you could take the fall back position of characterizing his answer of being a disproportionate response.

snaggletoothie on January 3, 2009 at 2:15 AM

Yea crosspatch, I consider myself pretty scientifically knowledgeable, but climateaudit flies so far over my head its not even funny. I love it when he shows some of the ridiculous locations of some of the monitoring stations (on black top, next to air conditioning units, etc), but when he’s talking about how he’s deciphering some complicated equation to prove that the IPCC has been exaggerating their numbers by 0.16%, I’m lost.

jimmy the notable on January 3, 2009 at 2:26 AM

Sometimes I daydream that the Earth has been cured – The Greenies get everything they hoped for. CO2 is under control, greenhouse gases have been banished, the ozone layer is healed, global population is at the optimal level 0f 500 million, vanished habitats have been restored, extinct species are being resurrected by DNA scientists – and then, in a twinkling, an asteroid the size of Kansas blows us back to the Precambrian.

Happy times. :)

Venusian Visitor on January 3, 2009 at 3:09 AM

Meh…….

Seven Percent Solution on January 3, 2009 at 3:14 AM

blah.

If they try I may have to sic my missle guided dolfins after them.

I don’t NEED global warming. It is -25 right now and I am cold as HECK!

upinak on January 3, 2009 at 3:26 AM

Hopefully the global financial meltdown will put an end to grants for Lovelock and the other global warming / cooling / climate change fetishist tools.

Ares on January 3, 2009 at 3:51 AM

But but but Gaia created us. She knows what she’s doing. How dare you question Gaia’s wisdom? If we are killing the Earth it is because she wants us to. She’s billions and billions (Sagan voice) years old. Right to Die! Right to Die!

/watching lib’s faces go all angry like

- The Cat

MirCat on January 3, 2009 at 4:22 AM

Keep a very close eye on Nancy Pelosi because having bought the idiocy of AGW, she is determined to institute draconian legislation to change our lives. Her power is particularly dangerous.

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2009 at 7:13 AM

the situation is now so dire that we need a backup plan that involves the artificial manipulation of the global climate to counter the effects of man-made emissions of greenhouse gases.

The iron fist of liberalism/communism/totalitarianism/socialism/what have you…has been already played too heavily. Revolt now. They told us and have shown us (illegal immigrant amnesty, financial crisis, “global warming” now “climate change”) that they will use a fever pitch fear crusade to “throw long and deep.” This is 100% manure and is only ONLY a front to control the world. This is disturbing stuff…and Obama hasn’t even been elected yet and he will be on board, certainly.

Onlineanalyst, I agree about Pelosi.

Does anyone feel bile rising when you SEE these people??? Guess it’s that awful mental illness called conservatism acting up again.

Mommypundit on January 3, 2009 at 7:34 AM

Hasn’t heard Earth has taken it’s chill pill when the sun broke in Oct 2005.

The rush for Obammunism’s new taxes is on. Plan “B” — Pay more in taxes to the government so government scientists can pretend to control the weather. Hey wait a minute, that sounds a lot like plan “A”. And how do the taxes fix the climate? No one wants to say.

If the sun doesn’t fix itself in a few years, growing seasons shorten, then we won’t be able to grow enough food. Maybe that is the real plan “B”, deciding who gets the food.

tarpon on January 3, 2009 at 7:39 AM

I love it when he shows some of the ridiculous locations of some of the monitoring stations (on black top, next to air conditioning units, etc), but when he’s talking about how he’s deciphering some complicated equation to prove that the IPCC has been exaggerating their numbers by 0.16%, I’m lost.

Most of that stuff you like comes from wattsupwiththat, and Andrew Watts tends to keep it simpler for mainstream audiences.

rhodeymark on January 3, 2009 at 7:43 AM

Hopefully, this global warming mania will turn out to be a passing fad. I saw one report recently that tried to associate elevated CO2 with global cooling and thus we should control CO2 emissions to control cooling. Any excuse for cap & trade legislation will do I guess. I sure hope we can filibuster that turkey of an idea before we collapse our economy by driving all our manufacturing to China and Inda.

KW64 on January 3, 2009 at 7:55 AM

Artificially control the weather? What could possibly go wrong!

coondawg on January 3, 2009 at 7:58 AM

Yes, I see it all now. We are the weather. Therefore, to control the weather, we must be controlled. Simple. Diabolically simple.

OldEnglish on January 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM

Dr Roy Spencer has a new blog that is worth the read.

I have been a fan of this guy for some time and his book is a good read. Obviously AlGore is not a big fan.

conservnut on January 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM

Gaia controls the weather? What utter nonsense. These idiots must be graduates of The Captain Planet School of theology.
As far as CO2 is concerned, they are believing a fallacy per Roy Spencer, meteorologist:

Now, no matter how much CO2 we pump into the atmosphere each year, the biosphere takes out an average of 50 percent of that extra amount. Even after we triple the amount of CO2 we produce, nature still takes out 50 percent of the extra amount.

kingsjester on January 3, 2009 at 9:21 AM

Sounds like BS to me….

DL13 on January 3, 2009 at 9:22 AM

How about this – man is, to our best knowledge, the top of the evolutionary chain. If that is the case, then isn’t industrialization, de-forestation and the effects of all our activity perfectly NATURAL, and not to be interfered with???!!!!

J.J. Sefton on January 3, 2009 at 9:24 AM

He should help the planet by committing suicide….

Tim Burton on January 2, 2009 at 10:10 PM

Like any well-trafficked site of this kind, HotAir draws in its share of both scholar and knave, but i dont get how this comment is even remotely useful.

Mike D. on January 2, 2009 at 10:29 PM

Maybe you could take the fall back position of characterizing his answer of being a disproportionate response.

snaggletoothie on January 3, 2009 at 2:15 AM

I don’t think the remark was knavish at all. It’s in keeping with the green philosophy, isn’t it? The thing is, the greenies won’t be the ones committing suicide. They’ll leave that unpleasantness to the lower breeds, just as now they can’t seem to let go of their cars and nice houses and other pollutants.

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 9:43 AM

How about this…man was created by God along with the Universe. As such, God is in control of the planet and the climate! Man is not! God does not need man’s assistance in maintaining what he created, thank you very much! When man is able to create something out of nothing (like time and material) then I will listen to him…until then, we should shut the hell up and worship the Creator!

sabbott on January 3, 2009 at 9:45 AM

Global Warming? Global Cooling? Climate Change? Great descriptives.

And when all’s said and done, the solution will be the same as always–adapt to whatever is prevalent, or become extinct. Been that way for millennia, and it’s not likely to differ in the future.

irongrampa on January 3, 2009 at 9:45 AM

How about this – man is, to our best knowledge, the top of the evolutionary chain. If that is the case, then isn’t industrialization, de-forestation and the effects of all our activity perfectly NATURAL, and not to be interfered with???!!!!

J.J. Sefton on January 3, 2009 at 9:24 AM

That’s a good point, which I’ve tried to raise with some “green” types I know, but it’s no use. They find the man/nature artificial dichotomy far too useful. Environmentalism is a religion.

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Translation: We’ve milked this tit dry, let’s suck on the other one.

Gwillie on January 3, 2009 at 9:54 AM

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Exactly. Just pointing out yet another example of left-wing HYPOCRISY.

J.J. Sefton on January 3, 2009 at 9:55 AM

How about this – man is, to our best knowledge, the top of the evolutionary chain. If that is the case, then isn’t industrialization, de-forestation and the effects of all our activity perfectly NATURAL, and not to be interfered with???!!!!

J.J. Sefton on January 3, 2009 at 9:24 AM

No it is not natural. Lets use a beaver as an example. The lowly beaver will build a damn and flood a valley in order to create a better habit for its family group. In the process many species are killed or displaced. This is a natural thing, is good for the earth and keeps nature in balance. On the other hand man will build a damn and flood a valley in order to create a better habit for its family group. In the process many species are killed or displaced. This is a not a natural thing, is very bad for the earth and throws nature out of balance. Why is beaver good and man bad? It’s quite simple really. The lowly beaver is not aware of its environment past what is required to live as comfortable as it can. It has no concept of its impact on the world nor do the other beavers. Now man is very aware how his lust for a comfortable life impacts the world and so do the other humans. Unlike the beaver man can also choose to live differently and thus have less or no impact on the world. But the most important difference between man and beaver is that the beaver doesn’t have whiney assed liberal beavers crying about the earth being a living being; a pathetic one that can’t take care of itself and needs the help and guidance of whinny assed human liberals in order to live.
It’s that simple.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 9:56 AM

No it is not natural. Lets use a beaver as an example. The lowly beaver will build a damn and flood a valley in order to create a better habit for its family group. In the process many species are killed or displaced. This is a natural thing, is good for the earth and keeps nature in balance. On the other hand man will build a damn and flood a valley in order to create a better habit for its family group. In the process many species are killed or displaced. This is a not a natural thing, is very bad for the earth and throws nature out of balance. Why is beaver good and man bad? It’s quite simple really. The lowly beaver is not aware of its environment past what is required to live as comfortable as it can. It has no concept of its impact on the world nor do the other beavers. Now man is very aware how his lust for a comfortable life impacts the world and so do the other humans. Unlike the beaver man can also choose to live differently and thus have less or no impact on the world.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 9:56 AM

So where exactly do man’s abilities to reason and affect the environment step outside the realm of “nature” and become “supernatural”?

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM

All I know is more and more research shows AGW to be a farce. When it is proven to be a farce this year, I’m personally going to sue ManBearPig-AlBore. He’s made about 100 million off of his global warming BS, my suit will be for 110 million dollars for infliction of mental stress by the King of the Moonbats………..

adamsmith on January 3, 2009 at 10:12 AM

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 9:56 AM

So, what are we supposed to do – shoot the beavers, the humans, or the enviro-nuts?

OldEnglish on January 3, 2009 at 10:13 AM

I have only one question: How many environmentalists are on the Conservative side of the illegal immigration debate?
Answer: None because they are deathly afraid of being called “racists” more than they care about the planet and thus they direct all their energy at established society hoping to leverage, as usual, Liberal white guilt.
They are cowards.

DerKrieger on January 3, 2009 at 10:21 AM

Artificially control the weather? What could possibly go wrong!

coondawg on January 3, 2009 at 7:58 AM

What could go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong…….

Johan Klaus on January 3, 2009 at 10:24 AM

coondawg on January 3, 2009 at 7:58 AM

Are you a “Black and Tan” or a “Blue Tick”?

Johan Klaus on January 3, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Rrrright, Lovelock. The planet won’t be safe until we arrive at the new (totalitarian) world order.

The best that crap like this merits is mockery.

petefrt on January 3, 2009 at 11:14 AM

So where exactly do man’s abilities to reason and affect the environment step outside the realm of “nature” and become “supernatural”?

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM

In first world nations were liberals dominate culture.
Remember the people of many third world nations still cling to the silly belief that gods control the climate. First world liberals know that it is really man that controls climate. They also know that it is their destiny to control all things in order to save the earth from being controlled by evil humans that wish to control all things and thus deny the natural order of the universe.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 11:28 AM

So, what are we supposed to do – shoot the beavers, the humans, or the enviro-nuts?

OldEnglish on January 3, 2009 at 10:13 AM

Not the beavers because they are natural and all things natural are good.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 11:30 AM

Not the beavers because they are natural and all things natural are good.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 11:30 AM

Out here in Colo. we kill the bast@%$ when they start gumming up our irrigation. We talk over whiskey and kill over water.

thomasaur on January 3, 2009 at 11:37 AM

So where exactly do man’s abilities to reason and affect the environment step outside the realm of “nature” and become “supernatural”?

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Mozart.

Next question?

jeff_from_mpls on January 3, 2009 at 11:47 AM

They also know that it is their destiny to control all things in order to save the earth from being controlled by evil humans that wish to control all things and thus deny the natural order of the universe.

jmarcure on January 3, 2009 at 11:28 AM

I am glad that that was cleared up.

Johan Klaus on January 3, 2009 at 11:50 AM

Shame if this crap brain ever gets his wish… These guys are without conscience, just bright insane ideas. If they get their way, the Earth will become uninhabitable due to man make global weather…
***
Watch a finely tuned clock as it keeps time even through the normal touching and jostling of the world around it. Then… let some halfwit know-it-all start poking around in side the mechanism…
***
Call God or something after they start with that plan, cause God will be the only one that can reverse what they do.

RalphyBoy on January 3, 2009 at 11:51 AM

So where exactly do man’s abilities to reason and affect the environment step outside the realm of “nature” and become “supernatural”?

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Mozart.

Next question?

jeff_from_mpls on January 3, 2009 at 11:47 AM

I would use J. S. Bach’s works as an example, but the thing is that what makes the works of both Bach and Mozart great is that they’re as “natural” as breathing.

ddrintn on January 3, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Man of the year, 2009.

Entelechy on January 3, 2009 at 2:20 PM

Save the whales

John the Libertarian on January 3, 2009 at 3:22 PM

Save the whales

John the Libertarian on January 3, 2009 at 3:22 PM

Trade them for valuable prizes.

OldEnglish on January 3, 2009 at 5:32 PM

GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISM = JUNK SCIENCE

junkscience.com

TheMightyQuinn on January 3, 2009 at 7:04 PM

WTF is he going to say when the Yellowstone Uber-Volcano blows more CO2 into the atmosphere than his instruments are able to read? Should we be buying volcano credits?

The Biggest Hoax, Evah.

shaken on January 3, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Controlling the climate is not difficult. It is all about the timing.
The last ten years of cooling temperatures has not been too good for the global warming followers.

bOB4094 on January 3, 2009 at 11:48 PM

I have a few question that has been bugging me about global warming, climate change, what ever you want to call it. If as the statistics say, that man is responsible for 1% of the co2, what is the big deal? If, plants produce oxygen from photosynthesis and we eliminate co2, what will replenish the oxygen? If the lack of solar flares causes the earth to cool along with the rest of the solar system, where is the connection to co2? Since the hole in the ozone layer changes with solar flares, magnetic pole shift, and temperature, what does this have to do with co2? Why are politicians so stupid? Just asking.

N4646W on January 4, 2009 at 3:44 AM

N4646W on January 4, 2009 at 3:44 AM

“Stupid politicians” is an oxymoron.

Johan Klaus on January 4, 2009 at 10:10 PM

“Stupid politicians” is an oxymoron.

Johan Klaus on January 4, 2009 at 10:10 PM

My mistake, should have done some research on that one.

N4646W on January 4, 2009 at 11:07 PM

“Stupid politicians” is an oxymoron.

Johan Klaus on January 4, 2009 at 10:10 PM

No, I think that’s a redundancy.

SKYFOX on January 5, 2009 at 4:57 AM

Comment pages: 1 2