think

I stand corrected already. NASA claims "Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*:" Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. I used the wrong group in saying the "scientific community" rather than "climate scientists". Although the climate scientists that NASA recognizes would be a very important group of scientists considering that is their field of expertise. You may disagree and that is your choice but last time I checked NASA had a pretty solid reputation. Feel free to post your sources. I'm not against hearing differing opinions. But please provide sources. I may not agree with your sources or find them to be of poor quality as you do of mine sometimes but at least you'll have something to base your opinion on. Please don't take offense if I don't respond. This is just a forum and not every post gets responded to. I spend a lot of time researching and vetting sources to use and don't always respond as it's a lot of work to try and source my positions for a serious discussion. And likewise many times I post and no one responds. So I just make my best case to try and inform people of my position move on. It's up to others to decide if my position is well sourced, vetted and of a high quality worthy of consideration for their own position on an issue. I posted the above article because it both shows there are Republicans concerned about climate change and that it there may be a possibility for cooperation. A rare thing now days but hopefully even people who may disagree on many issues can find areas they do agree.

I'll agree with NASA and 97% of the scientific community that humans are the primary driver of climate change. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But one anonymous opinion without any factual basis really doesn't say much does it.....

Do you believe humans are a primary source for climate change? If many Republican still don't think humans cause climate change it may be because their Republican president and congress persons keep telling them that. But NASA and the overwhelming majority of scientists are saying otherwise as pointed out in my source.

CO2 levels are rising by both natural and man made sources. However man made sources and their impact are well documented:

Name calling and baseless opinion is all you have come up with. You claim to understand the economics behind tax incentives but provide no evidence and facts to back your claims. Feel free to provide your information on why tax incentives will work. Overall though research shows that tax incentives have a negative effect on states and the nation:

We can discuss how both Amazon and Google operate but that has nothing to with the tax incentives does it.

Can you understand that tax incentives represent tax revenue that will be lost and needed to cover an increase in expenses that will occur. Where do you think current tax revenue goes to? If Amazon isn't paying those taxes the rest of the businesses are then somebody has to make up for that shortfall. Obviously it will be the tax payers. So Google and other businesses are providing the same jobs without the tax burden to the system. Amazon doesn't need the tax cuts.

Will Google also creating a new campus in NYC that will create thousands of jobs without asking for any tax incentives be discussed? While Amazon walked away from $3 billion in tax incentives that it's workers and the tax payers of New York would have made up for Google didn't ask for a dime of tax handouts.

From the Washington Times: From Fox News:

Excellent clip. Been awhile since I've seen it. Thanks for that!

Social Security has been around 80 years. Grow up and join reality. Either that or find an Alex Jones forum. You'll fit right in....

The one where you start off the conversation by calling me a sock puppet and then immediately start playing the guilt by association game by claiming the author was no good because of who their dad was? Starting off your response with an insult and then using guilt by association to discredit a source is a non starter for me. I normally don't respond to stuff like that. Sorry. If you had legitimate criticism of the author based on HIS record that's another thing entirely. And the rest of it was just garbage. History has shown what FDR did and what happened was he got Social Security started which Hoover called socialism. So if you're claiming Hoover didn't call Social Security socialism which is what this thread is about go ahead. Otherwise i'm not wasting my time with your conspiracy theories, guilt by association, and accusations of being a sock puppet.