Tom the Dancing Bug by Ruben Bolling for May 30, 2014

And of course:

“BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!”

You just made me waste a whole bunch of keystrokes, daDoctah.

But it will be interesting to see what the usual pro-pollution people have to say about this strip…if they bother to show up. It must be hard for them, given their inability to admit they were wrong.

This strip is so correct.But mainly that the depiction is what will happen in the USA.In the rest of the world we will most likely blame your “Neocons”.However, I am hopeful that beneficial change will happen sooner. Even in the USA renewable energy sources are starting to gain, despite preference for importing your energy sources.

Ben who??

A sane area between corporate greed and liberal lunacy? Corporate greed = unfettered pollution. Liberal lunacy = annoying people espousing wind turbines and solar panels. Why not the best of both worlds?

@libsmasher wrote“maybe some of these Kool-Aid drinkers will awaken. "Nice self reference. Maybe some day you will kick the kool aid habit.

Folks often use the phrase “common sense” to mean, “my opinion is superior to yours.”

Actually, lower taxes specifically on fossil fuels would be very helpful, because government’s large net incomes on these fuels motivate it to see climate deniers as a more equal set of citizens than the rest of us.

Hansen, of the Kharecha and Hansen duo that last year published a “Prevented Mortality” paper in Environmental Science and Technology, has proposed a “Fee and Dividend” deal where government’s fossil fuel income would all be given to the citizens in equal dividends.

Unfortunately he doesn’t seem to understand that this income is already very large, and a proposal to divide it back out to the people would do well at election time; he proposes an added Fee, which would not.

I guess we could all go back to being hunter/gatherers, but I don’t see that idea catching on.

proof? really? I didn’t hear about that. Just the usual “declarations” as excuses to tax . . .

Don’t worry. Mother Nature will clean up the mess, and take care of everything.

Either I haven’t had enough to drink, or I’ve had too much, but I’m not clear on your meaning. If I take you literally, you are right, although they could care less about the poisons. It was all about the cash. If the money had been in lunar topsoil conversion to fuel, we’d be colonizing the moon now.

Geneticist Sean Carroll outlines six common tactics in denial campaigns: “First, cast doubt on the science. Second, question the personal motives and integrity of the scientists. Third, magnify genuine disagreements among scientists, and cite non-experts with minority opinions as authorities. Fourth, exaggerate the potential harm caused by the issue at hand. Fifth, frame issues as a threat to personal freedom. And sixth, claim that acceptance would repudiate a key philosophy, religious belief, or practice of a group.” And for those who invoke the idea that jobs will vanish if climate change (anthropogenic) is addressed by governments I would like to say: those jobs already vanished to poor countries, where the wealthy corporatists are not constrained by wage controls or even basic human rights. Rooting for the über wealthy is rooting for those that have no loyalty to anything but profits.

You remind me of what I tell folks when it’s 10 below; “There is no such thing as cold, merely the absence of heat”. I have found that it doesn’t impress them.

And the proof is . . . . I must be a liberal basher to ask for it. The C02 “model” is not conforming to the “theory”, but don’t worry, the government knows best how to tax you.