tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post4921190434001650014..comments2008-04-18T09:15:02.526-07:00Jesse Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00297127385884430247noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-57873874557917300072008-04-18T09:15:00.000-07:002008-04-18T09:15:00.000-07:00Here's a more reasonable approach to this issue. Global warming is not happening. And EVEN if it were, it really is not a big problem at all. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=557374&in_page_id=1770" REL="nofollow">This article says it all.</A><BR/><BR/>See you in the funny papers,<BR/><BR/>RJReasonable Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-77611642519069439672008-04-11T07:00:00.000-07:002008-04-11T07:00:00.000-07:00Sitting on the sidelines watching the discussion develop has been fascinating. It started out as a shouting match, then has slowly developed into a very substantive, meaningful dialog. Would Joe Romm have gotten the attention of the guys at BI if he didn't go off like he did? Hard to say. But it seems to have worked. I hope it continues -- and remains constructive.Rick Lambertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-71862925039907736342008-04-10T20:49:00.000-07:002008-04-10T20:49:00.000-07:00Can't tolerate such behavior! <BR/><BR/> Substantive and constructive debate about our course of action only!<BR/><BR/>We need to be intentional about what kind of movement we're creating and what kind of behavior we want to allow !<BR/><BR/>Sounds like a mutual admiration society.<BR/><BR/>No debate, no questioning or objective thinking, allow no creativity of thought unless it is yours.<BR/><BR/>Sorry folks,not my cup of tea. I think a guy named Adolph beat you to the punch about 75 years agoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-84811824014341628442008-04-10T09:19:00.000-07:002008-04-10T09:19:00.000-07:00Jesse, thanks for reining this in a bit and trying to keep it focused on constructive discussion.<BR/><BR/>As a 24/7 climate activist, I object to sensationalizing these kinds of disagreements. "David vs Goliath?" "Fault line in the climate movement"? Please tone it down. It's distracting and disheartening. We need to gel as a climate movement, not implode in ridiculous divisions.<BR/><BR/>Shellenberger & Nordhaus seem to go out of their way to make it sound like their suggestions (such as highlighting the need for massive investment in clean tech R&D) are "paradigm shifts" that no one else has thought of. <BR/><BR/>Let's keep our eyes on the ball, and recognize that both carbon pricing and a new Apollo Project are necessary, and that both depend on coming together of a climate movement that has so far been elusive.<BR/><BR/>in solidarity,<BR/><BR/>PhilPhil Mitchellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13628008991715709218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-31842249989257574612008-04-09T22:10:00.000-07:002008-04-09T22:10:00.000-07:00It appears Joe and Ted have buried the hatchet - for now - and are engaging in an excellent debate on the policy substance at Climate Progress now. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/09/so-what-co2-price-will-we-need-for-450-ppm-nordhaus-breakthrough-inst-weigh-in-sort-of/#comment-10700" REL="nofollow">I highly recommend people head here to check it out.</A><BR/><BR/>I can't believe how much digital ink Romm wasted attacking Pielke - and eventually dragging the entire Breakthrough Institute into it - often times (heck, frequently!) in an overly personal and vicious, almost obsessive way, before getting to this point - and how much time Breakthrough staff had to spend in response. This debate has waged on all week. <BR/><BR/>And how long would it have taken to get down to substance if Romm had just started with the honest questions and critiques in <A HREF="http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/09/so-what-co2-price-will-we-need-for-450-ppm-nordhaus-breakthrough-inst-weigh-in-sort-of/" REL="nofollow">his latest post</A>, or if Ted and Breakthrough had responded by clearly articulating their policy position and (very valid!) concerns, <A HREF="http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/09/so-what-co2-price-will-we-need-for-450-ppm-nordhaus-breakthrough-inst-weigh-in-sort-of/#comment-10693" REL="nofollow">as Ted succinctly does here?</A><BR/><BR/>Thanks to both Joe and Ted for getting down to business. There's nothing more important to be debating than what it's really going to take to solve the climate crisis. We simply <I>have</I> to get this right!Jesse Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09507816491681297425noreply@blogger.com