one side believes all humans should kill themselves to reduce emissions (i believe that would solve the problem, you go first:) and the other wants to just keep on going, everything is fine. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead…

both sides suck…how about compromise instead of just stupid bullheaded yelling that the other side’s solution doesn’t work while nothing gets done. find a common reason to unite…maybe we could end our oil dependence and maybe that will end our wars to control it…free up our economy and bring our soldiers home rather than tie it down and them dying.

gkam says
When discussion or contempt is insufficient to deter these who choose to believe what is convenient, we must resort to ridicule.

What??? what discussion? believe what is convenient…global warming is fully vetted and completely understood, we really know everything? maybe believe that global warming is a man created movement to create a global cause that will require global governance. does anyone that wants to post here truly believe that the UN won’t eventually step in demand some money to “fix” the problem. This statement reads that same from both sides when you sit in the middle.

jpsays:
2. Why does the proportion of global warming skeptics in Chapter 21 of American Government, 11th Edition, not reflect the proportion (<1%) in the peer-reviewed scientific journals?

…i don’t know maybe because it isn’t a peer reviewed scientific journal…its a textbook!!! A textbook that some 6th grader is going to go whatever over while texting his buddy. Please tell me the proportion of skeptics to believers that were reflected on the IPCC report?

We have the knowledge to solve the problems if we could all just get along and listen to each other with compromise in mind rather than all or nothing…we just keep getting nothing.

To: richard dot blake at harcourt dotcom

Subject: American Government annual meeting questions

Cc: bocallaghan at riverdeep dot net

Richard Blake
Senior Vice President, Communications and Government Relations
Houghton Mifflin

Dear Mr. Blake:

As a shareholder and a taxpayer, I am very disappointed and upset, and
I am going to do something about it.

I intend to ask three questions at the next Riverdeep annual general
meeting regarding this article by Brad Johnson:

http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/04/11/houghton-mifflin-factcheck/

1. Is “not a single sentence” of your statement about the critique of
the “American Government” high school textbook true?

2. Why does the proportion of global warming skeptics in Chapter 21 of
American Government, 11th Edition, not reflect the proportion (<1%) in
the peer-reviewed scientific journals?

3. What will be done to correct these egregious errors?

I look forward to your reply. If there is a prompt retraction and
recall of the defective textbooks, then I will no longer need to
attend the next annual meeting.

Thank you.

…

cc: Barry O’Callaghan, CEO Riverdeep Holdings (Ireland)