3 ms·

> Hillary Clinton thinks climate change is not a problem and that we should increase our greenhouse gas output as fast as possible. I'd ask that if we must dis

> Hillary Clinton thinks climate change is not a problem and that we should increase our greenhouse gas output as fast as possible. I'd ask that if we must discuss politics, let's avoid hyperbole and be careful to make accurate statements. All the quote above communicates is that you are angry about her position/actions re climate change, or that you simply want to damage her in others' eyes.

willholloway 10y ago
Hillary was for the Keystone pipeline before she was against it. Dr. James Hansen of NASA has written that the Keystone pipeline would be "game over for climate" [1] So I think it's fair to say she doesn't really treat climate change as a pressing problem, unless forced to by political expediency. She also opposes the most sensible solution, a carbon tax. I think the difference between her recently stated positions, and her actual political DNA, as well as that of her financial patrons, makes her a wolf in sheep's clothing on climate. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-...
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Is Dr. Hansen really more credible than Sec. Clinton?
  - willholloway 10y ago
    Well Sec. Clinton thought the invasion of Iraq, and arming the so-called moderate opposition in Syria and Libya were good ideas. Even now with Europe at the brink, she still wants a no-fly zone to protect the moderate mujaheddin and to continue the anti-Russia/Assad chessgame she put into action. She also later decided her initial Keystone support was wrong, and changed her mind. So I'm going to say her judgement is not very good. As far as Dr. Hansen goes, his stance is pretty simple. Look at the weird climate effects we are seeing at >400ppm carbon. Climate was more stable and hospitable at 350ppm, he proposes leveling off emissions and then reducing them greatly by 2050. Pretty basic, rational stance in my opinion. The amount of carbon the Keystone pipeline would deliver would blow us right past our targets.

willholloway 10y ago

Hillary was for the Keystone pipeline before she was against it. Dr. James Hansen of NASA has written that the Keystone pipeline would be "game over for climate" [1] So I think it's fair to say she doesn't really treat climate change as a pressing problem, unless forced to by political expediency. She also opposes the most sensible solution, a carbon tax. I think the difference between her recently stated positions, and her actual political DNA, as well as that of her financial patrons, makes her a wolf in sheep's clothing on climate. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-...

jessaustin 10y ago
Is Dr. Hansen really more credible than Sec. Clinton?
- willholloway 10y ago
  Well Sec. Clinton thought the invasion of Iraq, and arming the so-called moderate opposition in Syria and Libya were good ideas. Even now with Europe at the brink, she still wants a no-fly zone to protect the moderate mujaheddin and to continue the anti-Russia/Assad chessgame she put into action. She also later decided her initial Keystone support was wrong, and changed her mind. So I'm going to say her judgement is not very good. As far as Dr. Hansen goes, his stance is pretty simple. Look at the weird climate effects we are seeing at >400ppm carbon. Climate was more stable and hospitable at 350ppm, he proposes leveling off emissions and then reducing them greatly by 2050. Pretty basic, rational stance in my opinion. The amount of carbon the Keystone pipeline would deliver would blow us right past our targets.