Dead? Far from it. The sapience of Blaise Pascal will never die. His quote of observing two kinds of men in the world i.e. “...those sinners who will consider themselves saints and saints who consider themselves sinners” is as pertinent to day as when he wrote it in the 17th Century. Indeed the former part of Pascal’s moral equation brings to mind many of the Politicos and entertainers discussed in this electronic publication. It’s as if they somehow expect adulation for their relentless lying villainy.

Dear Fart Marple,

Since Blaise Pascal died in 1662 and you claim to have worked with him, that would make you more than 345 years old.  You are indeed, an old fart.

Thanks, Albert!  Entrepreneurs could make much money off global warming rectification.  By the way ,it is nonsense to call it Social Darwinism the love of plutocracy; call it Spencer -Randism after Herbert Spencer[ Social Statics] and Ayn Rand[Atlas Shrugged]; it belittles Darwin and he was against that nonsense!Regulated capitalism , the known ideal,has not led us down the road to serfdom and our constitution of liberty allows it[ allusions to Rand and von Hayek]This capitalism is in line against global warming .

If we can live without harming the environment or each other wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Without a debate over scientific evidence pro or con isn’t it implicit knowledge to anyone alive that exhaust fumes escaping from cars, smoke from coal burning power plants, and raw sewage spewing into the ocean, are by nature bad and harmful to all?

Do you remember your first cigarette and how you coughed and choked and after you took up smoking how your bronchitis was ten times worse and lasted much too long?  Don’t you just KNOW that some things are bad for you and should be avoided if at all possible?  There is no need for scientific studies. The truth is quite clear.

Blaise Pascal observed,” Reason is the slow and torturous method by which those who do not know the truth discover it”.

If someone has a plan to improve the quality of life here on earth doesn’t that deserve national attention by the media and more importantly by the tax payers of America?

We as taxpayers contribute hundreds of millions of dollars each year to the government which in turn sets goals and spends the money to achieve those goals.  My contribution may only be a few thousand dollars, but when all Americans make a contribution the sum of the pot becomes enormous.

In the same manner if each one of us can conserve a little more, doesn’t your gut level intuition tell you that we can accomplish much together towards reducing pollution and reducing our dependency on foreign oil?

And shouldn’t we be telling the government to spend our hard earned tax dollars on achieving goals that are environmentally friendly towards the Earth AND the people who live here? War would not be considered an environmentally friendly goal by the way. 

All else being equal; given the choice to pollute or not to pollute the answer is obvious.

Mr. jkoch I knew Blaise Pasacal, I worked with Blaise Pascal, Blaise Pascal was a friend of mine...Mr. jkoch, Al Gore’s a tired ass individual. Ya gotta drive a stake in the ground to see if he’s movin’ and he sure’s hell ain’t no Blaise Pascal...he ain’t even Roman Hruska.

Let Al chose his mission.  He may be right that his electoral days are past.  His devotion to educate about Global Warming may be a Pascalian wager.  Even if the odds of a doomsday are only 10%, his effort may contribute at least marginally to conservation, which may be good thing, even if the greenhouse effects are nil.  Meanwhile, another campaign for office might do no good at all, even if he wins.  And his Google dividends will prevent that he starve or have to grovel for votes.

Global Warming is not an easy doomsday scenario to sell to Americans.  First, scientists do not all agree, and effects appear only gradually over a lifespan, with limited tangible effects.  It is hard enough to erradicate smoking or obesity, even though the ill effects are much easier to prove.

Any rationing of CO2 production restrains the US the most and would be a sop for China.  Red America would incinerate any US official who raises gas taxes or caps drive miles.  The addiction to cheap fuel is much more potent than any fondness for tobacco or burgers.

High energy prices, more than suasion, may be the final arbitrer.

Q: “are people in the industrialized world, and in particular in the United States prepared to accept these facts and take meaningful steps to counter them”

A: No

That’s why we are all going to die.  Well, of course we are all going to die.  I should clarify.  By “we” I mean “we as a species” and by “die” I mean “all die at once in an environmental cataclysm (or political cataclysm that flows from therefrom) rather than spaced out one at a time, which is the usual way we die.”

I, however, take solace in the fact that this will probably happen more than one hundred years from now and I’m only scheduled to survive for another fifty.  I win!

Thank the Great Spirit for Al Gore!! 

There are always going to be those jerks that will continue to say there is no global warming even if they see it with their own eyes!

I saw the film An Inconvenient Truth and urge everyone to go and take as many friends as they can.

Global warming is more a Political dynamic than Geophysical one. I have no doubts that another Leftist regime in the wake of this present, vicious, neo-Conservative disaster would work wonders in terms of putting it into a timely perspective; redefine and lessen its impact.

At least we can be grateful that Fart Marple doesn’t vote....

Leaving aside the phenomenon of global warming itself, regarding which overwhelming evidence seems to indicate both that it does exist and that it is directly related to human activities - most importantly the burning of fossil fuels - the question becomes, are people in the industrialised world, and in particular in the United States prepared to accept these facts and take meaningful steps to counter them ? And if such a desire on the part of the people does exist, will existing political structures suffice to channel it to those who are in a position to take the necessary decisions to implement these steps ? The fate of the planet may well depend upon the answers to these questions....

Hey wait a minute, Fart Marple don’t bully nobody. But I do remember in them 2000 debates that Ol’ Frozen Ass Al Gore did walk up try and bully The Decider though...You remember that? Looked for the world like he was getting ready to play “The Alpha Male” and whip his ass. Bush just looked at him and nodded curtly. Even that stupid, contrived and obvious stunt didn’t work. But it it did make Tired Ass Al look like a bigger fool than he probably is. Karl Rove must have been helping with ideas in his campaign. Face the music pal: If you can’t come out better than 2nd place in a debate with as renown a Intellectual, Foreign Policy expert and skilled an orator as George W. Bush, then you better start lookin’ for a new line of work. He’s failure as a Politician, Global warming or no global warming. And while I never vote, I can tell you that if the Democrats are gonna run this refrigerated mannequin a second time, something is very amiss. He oughta get in the Movies, I’d cast him in a Spaghetti Western as the Undertaker.

Fart Marple’s noncomment (#10924) is typical of reactions to verifiable facts by schoolyard bullies. They resort to namecalling and gutless taunts.

I ain’t no idiot. Al Gore’s a tired ass individual. If there is a Global Warming Crisis, it ain’t thawed him out yet. A weekend spent on the surface of Venus wouldn’t thaw him out.

Right on.  This is the kind of candor we need far more of in the public sphere.

I can already hear the Dittoheads warming up to try and shout this down.  These people need to be reminded that they are idiots.  They need to be reminded of this quite often because, well, they are idiots.