What is the story with you trying to link stuff together that really has no link. Global Warming is not linked with smoking. Global Warming is not linked with creationism. You are the king of strawman arguments.
It's the anti-intellectualism that's popular. Scientists are the "elites" who look down on the good, decent working man. This is an offshoot from the "plain folks" propaganda technique where the politician attempts to convince others that he's "of the people" where others are not. This is done by faking an accent (ie. George W. Bush) as well as convincing people that the "elites" are against them and not like them. Republicans have been using this regularly because it is effective, and the logical outgrowth of this is for listeners to take it to the next level of anti-intellectualism.
Exactly. On a side note, I think it's breathtaking how the world's only remaining superpower is so riddled with stupidity, ignorance and brazenly corrupt self-interest. Just when you think the tide may have turned, the zealots start pulling the country back down. You would think that they would respect the democracy that they so claim to love by acknowledging the result of last year's exercise in democracy. Evidently, democracy only works properly if they get their own way. But I digress.
Not exactly. If memory serves, the Supreme Court essentially appointed Bush in 2000, and Kerry was "swiftboated" in 2004. By the time the truth came out, the damage to Kerry had already been done. No one on Obama's team had spread deliberate lies about the other side in the manner that Rove played the game for Bush. In both cases, there was a lack of fair play in Bush's two victories in one form or another, whereas there was no lack of fair play in Obama's victory. In fact, it was as clean an exercise in democracy as you had ever seen and will likely ever see in your lifetime.
well what we know is that the top of the ice was expanding and I will wait and see what the meansurements show regarding the entire mass. Again - I see no reason not to conserve. I just can't believe the b.s. solution is to pay reparations to the third world based on what? speculation about our contribution to warming?