Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Unthinking cap

By Tom Toles

c_07162010.gif

***

Friday rant, hot and bothered edition

How long could I go before twisting this hot summer weather into some screed about climate change? Apparently only this long. Deniers never tire of this game: when it's cold in the winter, that's "evidence" about climate trends, and when it's warm in the winter, they say "If this is climate change, I'll take it!". So why should I be any different? But there IS a difference. For deniers it's all a big game of scoring cheap points.

For everyone else, the climate debate has been for decades now about the degree of conclusiveness of the evidence, measured against the practicalities of reducing carbon output. Now, the evidence is massively supportive (the scientists' e-mail "conspiracy" has been debunked, please be aware). But because the pro-carbon people are still unprepared to reduce carbon in ANY meaningful way, they are cornered into a position where they have to argue that there is NO compelling evidence. And so that is the position they take.

So let me be the first to haul out the heavy artillery of WWII analogies on this issue and call the climate legislation obstructionists the Neville Chamberlains of the planet. We have SUV's in our time. If there is a current issue on which people are absolutely discrediting themselves, in a way that current science and future calamities will hold them accountable for, this is it. "If this is responsibility, I'll take it!" Well, you've got it. --Tom Toles

***

sketchicon_ver1.jpg

s_07162010.gif

By Tom Toles  | July 16, 2010; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  Environment & global warming  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Reality check
Next: Much ado about nothing

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:

Comments

"What caused the planet to warm in the late 1800s and early 1900s before there were SUVs?"

There was this little thing called the Industrial Revolution, which brought along with it increased productivity, which brought along with it more prosperity, which brought along with it more people, which brought along with it increased industrial activity, which...

The reason the curve takes the shape of a paraola is that, it is not a simple function but one which feeds on itself.

Posted by: jonroesler | July 20, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Oh sure, now we're being compared to Neville Chamberlain. Wasn't he the one who turned his back on the English king when all the world's most eligible bachelor wanted to do was marry "the woman I love?" Oh for goodness sake: carbon isn't as bad as all that anyhow. Aren't we made of it? That and sea water. Besides, where would the war have gone -- badly, I suppose -- had there not been an abdication and King George VI. He could give Hitler a run for his money any day of the week. So could his wife, The Queen Mum, for that matter. That's how I've heard it.

Posted by: dudeupnorth | July 19, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm not pro or con on this issue, but in 1976 science was predicting significant cooling and loss of grain production in Canada and the American mid-west which would lead to food shortages. What happened to that?

Posted by: mocmao | July 18, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Tom, obviously your not looking at the “big” picture.

That is for billions and billions of years the earth has been perfecting the task of filling it’s every void and cavern with hydrocarbon fossil fuel. Therein created through the life cycles provided by desalinated fresh waters de and re forestation and the subsequent animal life forms.

Thank goodness for the advent of man’s exploitation, if it were not for that fact, the earth would eventually fill to capacity and with ignition become at best a smaller version of the sun, or at least a super nova.

So you see Tom man’s greed serves a better good, would you rather be a slow burn or a flash? Rah Rah…BP

Posted by: rayburchard1 | July 18, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

JONAHandtheFISH

Thank you. I know where all the space based weapons and microwave cancer devices are being hid by the government. Area 51. No, really, I'm serious!

Posted by: pararanger22 | July 16, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Tom I feel your pain. You are doing your part to conserve but see all of those who are not and do not even care. Theirs is a very selfish attitude. ME ME ME Those type of people will do anything to get what they want no matter the cost to someone else.

The sad truth is the things we fail to recognize or acknowledge that people can not feel, see, hear, or even smell are the elements that will be the death of US all. HAARP is one of those programs. Our space based weapons progam is another. The Earth's atmosphere is being ravaged by devices and programs that our media is not fully allowed to acknowledge. People's health are also being damaged by celluar towers and ELF microwave that can target any individual's mind or body. People raise money to fight cancer and at the same time our tax dollars go to projects that promote or cause it. What a bi-polar dysfuctional race we have turned out to be. The prophetic reality that our World will be turned upside down is most definitely coming true! If not the planet itself most definitely society as a whole.

Posted by: JONAHandtheFISH | July 16, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Rhodan offers no facts but confirms what the right knows to be true: liberals don't have any. Libs are unwilling to debate; no courage.

Posted by: pararanger22 | July 16, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

What caused the planet to warm in the late 1800s and early 1900s before there were SUVs? And, if scientists can't adequately explain the reason for the "Little Ice Age" how can they predict the future of climate adequately? There have been warmer periods than this in the ancient history of the planet...caused by dinosaur flatulence?

Posted by: CAservative | July 16, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Reading the Ostrich camp one cannot help but conclude that never int eh hsitory of man has so much nonsens be said by so few blind to so many.


the concept of repsonsiblity remains too scary to phatom for the reps.

Posted by: Rhodan | July 16, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse


Gee, Toles, what a clever way of saying those of us with SUV's (sic) are Nazis.


Posted by: quiensabe | July 16, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Toles (and simpleteon1 and earlybird1),

Tsk, tsk. Another rant from 'My Private Cartoon World' Toles that complains the conservatives do not follow the facts or even know them then continues on offering not a single supported fact of his own.

As I reside in the UK, land of the crack-scientists that promulgate this lie, I can tell you that no inquiry here would be unsupportive of climate change. They didn't completely absolve the scientists involved. Anyone who actually read some of the emails with an open mind would conclude that the hub of the scientific community will not tolerate ANY debate on climate change.

Some things to consider (try and be honest with yourself & don't google it):
1 - Name one scientist (w/out looking him/her up on the internet) that has written anything supporting climate change.
2 - Name one 'debate' on climate change between those who believe in it and those who don't.
3 - Explain the hockey stick.
4 - Name and explain the scientist/statistician's claim that the hockey stick and climate change theory/theorists are dead wrong.

BTW: remember when scientists called it 'global warming'? Then explaining cold winters by saying the global warming equates to global cooling too? Now its PC and the Strat Comms message to say 'climate change'. If scientists were so sure, why change the name?

The truth:
You can't name one let alone two scientists that guarantee that climate change is real.
You can't remember one debate between a pro-climate change theory person and an anti-climate change person.

Etc., etc. There hasn't been a debate. The left will keep claiming there has been one.

This is the Y2K of this decade!

How many jobs could we create if we drilled for more oil in AK, Gulf, and shale in Colorado? A: 1000s.

How many jobs have been lost because of the anti-nuke libs that have forced us to go slow on building up nuclear power? A: 1000s.

How many jobs will be lost if the WH gets their way on the oil-drilling moratorium?
A: 1000s

The left is ruining our country. Lefties: throw yourselves in that Toles Coffin drawing and free America from liberal stupidity!!

Posted by: pararanger22 | July 16, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

"W lived a much more "eco-friendly" life than his critics. "

Tell that to the Segway that humiliated the little pissant.

Posted by: aprilglaspie | July 16, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

" this is it. "If this is responsibility, I'll take it!" Well, you've got it."
AMEN!

Posted by: cbctouby | July 16, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

The left likes science, the right theology
And Adam's rib is their biology
So fighting warming is a righteous war
'Cause God created Al Gore

Posted by: sherm1 | July 16, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Kevin71707, I didn’t attack algore … if anything he attacked his masseuses like a love sick poodle!

Seriously though, why should I alter my lifestyle one iota when the screaming mimis of the alarmist community DO NOTHING to change theirs. It’s the time honored “let them eat cake” mentality. I always thought it kind of ironic that W lived a much more "eco-friendly" life than his critics.

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | July 16, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Nice Rant but you can’t put a price on carbon in America because that would be a tax. The vast majority of Republicans in the House and Senate have signed and kept a no new taxes pledge. So America is left with finding a way to make pollution more expensive without taxing it. Similarly, we have to reduce our massive deficit without raising taxes…But lowering taxes is fine because according to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, there is no evidence that tax cuts reduce revenue.

It’s hard to argue with people that make up their own facts and have a bigger megaphone, Fox News, to declare their facts Fair and Balanced.

Posted by: EarlyBird1 | July 16, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

"But because the pro-carbon people are still unprepared to reduce carbon in ANY meaningful way, they are cornered into a position where they have to argue that there is NO compelling evidence."

Pug proves this point quite adequately by attacking Al Gore, rather than refute your argument. Gotta love the parrots.

Posted by: Kevin71707 | July 16, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Global warming is real. It's happening. Anyone who denies it is simply letting their ideology trump reality. Hopefully they don't make the same wishful thinking-over-science mistakes with things like smoke detectors or seat belts.

Posted by: simpleton1 | July 16, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Alarmists never tire of this game: when it's hot in the summer, that's "evidence" about climate trends, and when it's cold in the summer, they say "climate change affects specific regions differently". So why should I be any different? But there IS a difference. For alarmists it's all a big game of scoring cheap points.

Works both ways, dont it Tommy ol boy.

And speaking of refusing to reduce carbon in meaningful ways, I’ll remember you say that the next time I see the Alarmist in Chief, masseuse raping AlGore driving to one of his many 10,000 squarefoot ocean front homes in his convoy of SUV’s.

Consistency is a heck of a thing Tommy ol boy.

Posted by: SharpshootingPugilist | July 16, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

The Europeans are ready to abandon cap and trade because it does not work. They are talking carbon taxing based on how much you pollute. We should carbon tax. Forget this stupid idea of off sets, they are nothing more than indulgences for the religion of global warming theory. They have done nothing to reduce carbon yet they are making carbon traders like Gore super rich.

A carbon tax would actually encourage people to reduce carbon to save on the tax instead of buy cheap indulgences.

Posted by: flonzy1 | July 16, 2010 9:03 AM | Report abuse

I don't understand what deniers think the goal of the climate-change 'hucksters' to be. Where is the motive? What is their interest in deceiving the world? No. It is obvious that they are advancing the idea of mad-made climate change because they, you know, actually believe it and have faith in the science behind the theory.
On the other hand, can you not see that there are very real and obvious motives in denying man made climate change? This alone should give people pause in evaluating what to believe.

Posted by: jwweitzel | July 16, 2010 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Insanecommenter certainly lived up to his name, didn't he?

Look, contrary to the insanity previously asserted, eeeeeeeven if the so-called "Climategate" conspiracy theory was completely on the money, you've still only discredited one scientist. That's a matter for his employer. His research is backed up by thousands of others, so for the rest of us not signing his paycheck, so what? I ask you. So what?

Posted by: hayesap8 | July 16, 2010 1:56 AM | Report abuse

Let me give you a parting word of advice.

If you're reduced to complaining on the Internet? You're insignificant, totally-irrelevant to the issue. And you're insignificant & totally-irrelevant for good reason.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 16, 2010 12:34 AM | Report abuse

Hell, I'd restrict myself to the "end-game": the polar caps are gone. What then?

Temps continue to rise. We've got a runaway greenhouse effect.

The undersea methane-hydrates melt.

Whither, Venus?

What can you really say about this that is intelligent?

Nothing.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 16, 2010 12:25 AM | Report abuse

...what, are you still using your pen for anything more than drawing cartoons and cashing your paycheck? :)

silly boy...you shouldn't take such risks with the cash-cow. You're paid to draw political cartoons, not give political commentary.

On this one you've bitten-off far more than you can chew. If the average temperature rises by 1C/year and the average water-level rises by one foot/year as a result then that's pretty-much all that you need to say. The water will do the rest of the talking. You violate the Law of Brevity.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 16, 2010 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Toles this January after the 100+ year record for snowfall in DC was broken by snowzilla you opined about following climate patterns not weather. You are a liberal and of course your principles are situational always changing more often than the weather. The fact is the disgraced head of the manmade global warming hoax, no not Gore the crazed sex poodle, but Prof Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, says there has been no evidence of raising global temps since 1998. Don't believe that either because these people pushing the manmade global warming fraud are hucksters not scientists. Science doesn't require propping up by cartoon propaganda or fake polar bear pictures, but a fraud does.

Posted by: insanecommenter | July 15, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Debunked Mr. Toles? Mr. Mann was found innocent of wrongdoing but found to be too secretive with his data and proceedures. Why not have everything out in the open? Warmers hate the fact of the "little ice age". The cool periods 1650, 1770, and 1850 with warm periods in between. Our climate is chaos driven. There is no way that we can control all of the variables that create our climate. The carbon tax is a one dimensional remedy that will damage our economy and hurt people who already have trouble paying their bills. But heh, that is the Left, everyone shares the same misery. Why don't you needle Brazil about cutting down the rainforest? Come November all of the Left's scams that haven't been pushed through yet are done for including Cap and Trade. But what do I know? I can only walk on water when it is frozen.

Posted by: bobbo2 | July 15, 2010 7:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company