Comments on: Environmental Politics and Election 2008 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/ a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:37:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Don Hawkins http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21501 Don Hawkins Sun, 01 Jun 2008 00:34:33 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21501 Go to google and type James Hansen web site. It is a Columbia web address Go to google and type James Hansen web site. It is a Columbia web address

]]> By: Don Hawkins http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21500 Don Hawkins Sun, 01 Jun 2008 00:30:18 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21500 This should be it. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/ This should be it.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/

]]> By: anthony innes http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21497 anthony innes Sat, 31 May 2008 23:50:27 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21497 Don Hawkins could you provide the web address for James Hansen. thanks for the heads up . Don Hawkins could you provide the web address for James Hansen.
thanks for the heads up .

]]> By: Don Hawkins http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21434 Don Hawkins Sat, 31 May 2008 00:09:26 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21434 Go to James Hansen's web site and read his last two posts. Go to James Hansen’s web site and read his last two posts.

]]> By: bozhidar balkas http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21427 bozhidar balkas Fri, 30 May 2008 21:44:05 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21427 prior to 1800 there were ab 28o parts per mn of co2 in the atmosphere. today there are 380 parts per mn. we can easily exceed double the amount that existed in 1800. scientist believe (believe and not know) that that's a dangerous threshold.. it's, to me, a timely warning. even so i abuse the planet much more than a nepalese or congoleses does. i'm married. my wife doesnt't want to sell the car. she wants to watch tv. she's always cold; so the heat goes on. then she buys processed food. i say let's cancel that damn zionist paper. she says, i want my paper! and she says what's zionism? and why u don't like obama? i say, because he's a crook just like 99.95% of politicos and clergy. with a billion housewives like that and u can see the problem. thanx prior to 1800 there were ab 28o parts per mn of co2 in the atmosphere. today there are 380 parts per mn. we can easily exceed double the amount that existed in 1800. scientist believe (believe and not know) that that’s a dangerous threshold.. it’s, to me, a timely warning.
even so i abuse the planet much more than a nepalese or congoleses does.
i’m married. my wife doesnt’t want to sell the car. she wants to watch tv. she’s always cold; so the heat goes on. then she buys processed food.
i say let’s cancel that damn zionist paper. she says, i want my paper!
and she says what’s zionism? and why u don’t like obama? i say, because he’s a crook just like 99.95% of politicos and clergy.
with a billion housewives like that and u can see the problem. thanx

]]> By: Lloyd Rowsey http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21426 Lloyd Rowsey Fri, 30 May 2008 21:29:58 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21426 Not believing environmentalism is more important than "nuclear weaponry...and social justice" -- I'm in B-I-G trouble, bigger trouble than even skeptics of global warming like Freeman Dyson. But not even deserving to be heard? Looks like all us Dissident Voice folks struggling "for peace and social justice" might just as well call it a day, join the new secular religion, and Be Green. Not believing environmentalism is more important than “nuclear weaponry…and social justice” — I’m in B-I-G trouble, bigger trouble than even skeptics of global warming like Freeman Dyson. But not even deserving to be heard?

Looks like all us Dissident Voice folks struggling “for peace and social justice” might just as well call it a day, join the new secular religion, and Be Green.

]]> By: Lloyd Rowsey http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21412 Lloyd Rowsey Fri, 30 May 2008 15:58:41 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21412 I hope to finish reading this interview later today. The introduction and Joshua Frank’s first reply put me in mind of the last two paragraphs of an article in the current (on-line) issue of the New York Review of Books by Freeman Dyson, about how the concern for global warming has over-ridden what skeptics consider more important issues, including “environmental degradation.” The article is titled “The Question of Global Warming” and can be accessed at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21494 It’s last two paragraphs are: “Environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion. And the ethics of environmentalism are fundamentally sound. Scientists and economists can agree with Buddhist monks and Christian activists that ruthless destruction of natural habitats is evil and careful preservation of birds and butterflies is good. The worldwide community of environmentalists—most of whom are not scientists—holds the moral high ground, and is guiding human societies toward a hopeful future. Environmentalism, as a religion of hope and respect for nature, is here to stay. This is a religion that we can all share, whether or not we believe that global warming is harmful. Unfortunately, some members of the environmental movement have also adopted as an article of faith the belief that global warming is the greatest threat to the ecology of our planet. That is one reason why the arguments about global warming have become bitter and passionate. Much of the public has come to believe that anyone who is skeptical about the dangers of global warming is an enemy of the environment. The skeptics now have the difficult task of convincing the public that the opposite is true. Many of the skeptics are passionate environmentalists. They are horrified to see the obsession with global warming distracting public attention from what they see as more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet, including problems of nuclear weaponry, environmental degradation, and social injustice. Whether they turn out to be right or wrong, their arguments on these issues deserve to be heard.” I hope to finish reading this interview later today. The introduction and Joshua Frank’s first reply put me in mind of the last two paragraphs of an article in the current (on-line) issue of the New York Review of Books by Freeman Dyson, about how the concern for global warming has over-ridden what skeptics consider more important issues, including “environmental degradation.”

The article is titled “The Question of Global Warming” and can be accessed at

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21494

It’s last two paragraphs are:

“Environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion. And the ethics of environmentalism are fundamentally sound. Scientists and economists can agree with Buddhist monks and Christian activists that ruthless destruction of natural habitats is evil and careful preservation of birds and butterflies is good. The worldwide community of environmentalists—most of whom are not scientists—holds the moral high ground, and is guiding human societies toward a hopeful future. Environmentalism, as a religion of hope and respect for nature, is here to stay. This is a religion that we can all share, whether or not we believe that global warming is harmful.
Unfortunately, some members of the environmental movement have also adopted as an article of faith the belief that global warming is the greatest threat to the ecology of our planet. That is one reason why the arguments about global warming have become bitter and passionate. Much of the public has come to believe that anyone who is skeptical about the dangers of global warming is an enemy of the environment. The skeptics now have the difficult task of convincing the public that the opposite is true. Many of the skeptics are passionate environmentalists. They are horrified to see the obsession with global warming distracting public attention from what they see as more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet, including problems of nuclear weaponry, environmental degradation, and social injustice. Whether they turn out to be right or wrong, their arguments on these issues deserve to be heard.”

]]> By: Dogwood http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21411 Dogwood Fri, 30 May 2008 15:18:29 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21411 "Real environmentalists should only vote for real environmentalists" Yes, Rich....Thank you And his name is Ralph Nader “Real environmentalists should only vote for real environmentalists”

Yes, Rich….Thank you

And his name is Ralph Nader

]]> By: Rich Griffin http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/environmental-politics-and-election-2008/#comment-21405 Rich Griffin Fri, 30 May 2008 13:02:07 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=2089#comment-21405 Thank you for this insightful interview. Real environmentalists should only vote for real environmentalists, that's all I want to add to this excellent article. Thank you for this insightful interview. Real environmentalists should only vote for real environmentalists, that’s all I want to add to this excellent article.

]]>