Originally Posted by BillCosby

lol........ I am not surprised......

Here you have a clear case.. THe public has served...........

Personally I find the disparity astounding......

These are questions put forth by the media.......... Not the well informed if they want to be public...........

It is not the public that has asked only three times in 2,000 about it........

Originally Posted by Teri B.

It's Al Gore's fault. He should have run again. Nah, I do think the topic will gain some momentum in the next few months though, particularly in the California primary.

Originally Posted by Titanium Cat

I don't blame the public entirely. But look at this board as an example. How many posts are there seriously discussing the positions of the candidates on climate change? And how many are there talking about whether Hillary staged crying or things of that nature? I guess I get tired of blaming the press when it doesn't seem that most people are really interested in going past the very rudimentary first stage of just accepting it's a problem. To be fair the details can be pretty technical and there isn't a single solution, it's going to have to be a variety of them.

Yeah but when they talk about Kyoto you hardly hear any real level of details about it or alternatives. You'll get maybe 10 seconds of cap and trade and then you'll hear a couple of the controversies surrounding the issue and then they move on. It's the media's fault because they want to present things that are more popuplar (more sexy) and it's everyone's fault that many of those things are trivial in nature.

However I expect you'll get more questions in the general election. There really isn't much of a difference between the positions of the Democratic candidates. McCain is probably the only Republican with any sort of serious plan to combat climate change. Hopefully there will be more questions. Maybe the public has to start asking them if the press won't.

Originally Posted by BillCosby

Originally Posted by Titanium Cat

Part of the reason is that it involves a lot of science and the media doesn't like going into such topics in detail. Too many viewers have extremely short attention spans when it comes to things that they don't have the background to understand or are just too lazy to even try to understand.

It's why the media (especially FOX News) gives a fair bit of air time to the so called global warming skeptics, rather than addressing the science it becomes a spitting contest instead which sadly enough is often better for ratings.

Originally Posted by DRS112

Am I the only one who watched the history channel show on the other day that gave the top 7 ways humans were likely to cease to exist? It was pretty interesting really...

Originally Posted by Titanium Cat

I saw it advertised but I never watched. The astroid thing will eventually happen, how well we will be prepared for it is another matter. Of course the Xtian alliance is pushing for nuclear war, might as well get it over with quickly.

Originally Posted by DRS112

I think asteroid was 4 and nuclear war was 3....Climate change was number 1.

Originally Posted by Titanium Cat

I can't remember the order.

Climate change could dramatically reduce the human population but it wouldn't wipe us out. It certainly won't be fun for a great number of people regardless.