Actually, there no longer exists such thing as a free market, and what has failed has been collectivism/cartelism/fascism disguised as 'reform'. So-called progressives/liberals are (and have been) in bed w/Big Corps just as much as 'conservatives'. What, pray tell, would YOU force on everyone in lieu of free markets?
Regulation. Weve seen free markets before, and we learned they must be regulated.
If, by saying, 'our actions' you mean bombing another country, then YES they do have a right to do something. If you mean by me driving a gasoline powered car, do 'they' have the right to make me stop, then "no". I don't recall our Constitution covering anyone but American citizens, and I our elected Reps should be serving their constituents, not foreigners.
Global warming effects everyone, they have a right to defend theirselves if our pollution is causing it.
I have, and it is. Thats why the Green Religion is against it.
Another chap ad hom? Please, spare me. What exactly did you read? It wouldnt possibly be an "agenda" book would it?
I agree! This is what happens when NON-free market forces prevail.
But if we let the free maret rule, those with the most money win!
So, WE ARE THE ENEMY! I admit--I LOVE my consumer driven lifestyle! Guilty as charged!
We love it, until we have to deal with its concequences.
I wonder, how much electricity are you using to maintain YOUR lifestyle?
As little as possible.
You've said your wife is a lawyer. I assume you two make decent money?
How many cars and what types do you two own?
1, saturn SC2 Gets 40 mpg. I havent driven it in almost a year.
How big of a place do you live in?
Do you fly?
Like I said, I have MUCH respect for those who live the way they want others to. I have less respect for hypocrites who want SOMEONE ELSE to sacrifice. I'll never understand why so many 'liberals' think poverty is noble. Probably because they've never experienced poverty.
Poverty isnt normal, however I believe people should live more simply, or just smarter.
Or, that carbon-levels have no correlation to temps. That WATER VAPOR is, by far, the largest 'greenhouse' gas. Facts rarely convince religious fanatics, unfortunately.
Tell me you didnt just use the water vapor argument..... This is one of these "scientists find laughable" arguments, and I dont blame you, but those who make you think water vapor is relevant.
Ask yourself, why does it matter if it is the strongest and most abundant?
Water vapor naturally regulates itself. It never (normally) naturally gets to high or low. When temps get warmer, there is more evaporation (therefore cooling) and we then get more rain. If there is too little water vapor, then more is diffused out of the seas, and water vapor increases. Because of this cycle, it doesnt effect overall global temps, it doesnt add
to the greenhouse effect, it just keeps it stable. It doesnt stay in the atmosphere long enough to have a long term effect. CO2, on the other hand, has an athospheric lifespan of over 100 years
, which allows for the abundant concentrations in the atmosphere.
Its like having a campfire, and you regularly place logs on to keep the fire going. When you add them regularly, its like water vapor. If you start adding more, faster, the fire will be more intense. You break the equilibrium.
But a true ad hom.
Thats the things about ad homs, they are unproveable opinions that are used to distract from the debate and are most often used when no other argument can be presented.