So-Called Mock Outrage (now with admission of error)
I wonder sometimes if I am blatantly partisan. I have been around my fair share of politicians and political stunts (also causing some of my own) and I wonder why some people feel the need to try and create something out of nothing.
So-called greenhouse gases
Yes, oh my! Shock! Awe!
Why is this not an issue? Because he is right. They are so-called greenhouse gases. They are so-called because of the effect the carbon has in the atmosphere, creating a type of greenhouse for the hot air. The real name for them is CFCs or something of the sort. I prefer to call them greenhouse gases. That is what Harper meant Jason. Watch it over and over again, see what you want to see for Liberal gain, but he believes the science, and it is reflected, albeit badly, in the Clean Air Act.
While we whine about harper saying greenhouse gases, we are gonna have to hear about the so-called Liberal record on cutting greenhouse gases...
So instead of inventing conspiracy theories and accusing Harper of ridiculous things, let’s focus on what he actually is doing wrong. There is plenty to work with. We have to focus on what we did well...
Update: Apparently, I have an issue with my grade 8 Science teacher and the definiton of greenhouse gases. I admit my error.
Secondly, to those like Werner Patels, who believe I do not know how to speak English, if 18 years of English school havent changed that, then I guess I will never speak English as well as Stephane Dion.
I do however dare anyone to pit Harper's so-called controversial comment to our so-called record on greenhouse gases as a government. It won't be pretty. The 2007 issue will be the economy. We know the economy. We did that well!
So-called greenhouse gases
Yes, oh my! Shock! Awe!
Why is this not an issue? Because he is right. They are so-called greenhouse gases. They are so-called because of the effect the carbon has in the atmosphere, creating a type of greenhouse for the hot air. The real name for them is CFCs or something of the sort. I prefer to call them greenhouse gases. That is what Harper meant Jason. Watch it over and over again, see what you want to see for Liberal gain, but he believes the science, and it is reflected, albeit badly, in the Clean Air Act.
While we whine about harper saying greenhouse gases, we are gonna have to hear about the so-called Liberal record on cutting greenhouse gases...
So instead of inventing conspiracy theories and accusing Harper of ridiculous things, let’s focus on what he actually is doing wrong. There is plenty to work with. We have to focus on what we did well...
Update: Apparently, I have an issue with my grade 8 Science teacher and the definiton of greenhouse gases. I admit my error.
Secondly, to those like Werner Patels, who believe I do not know how to speak English, if 18 years of English school havent changed that, then I guess I will never speak English as well as Stephane Dion.
I do however dare anyone to pit Harper's so-called controversial comment to our so-called record on greenhouse gases as a government. It won't be pretty. The 2007 issue will be the economy. We know the economy. We did that well!
par / by Anthony à / at 3:15 p.m.
15 Commentaires:
This was also my interpretation of the quote.
But: let this be known; had a Liberal said it, the Conservatives would not hesitate to bring it up months later when the context is faded. If, in a year's time, someone brought up 'that time soandso called them so-called greenhouse gasses,' the denial wouldn't matter as much as the accusation. I'm afraid that's just partisan political algebra, and if we're too good for it, good for us, but we can't expect others to emulate our nobility.
Antonio,
Shouldn't you be attending to your studies? It's embarrassing to watch your efforts as political commentator.
That's not how the term "so-called" works in English.
Note that when I refer to the "so-called" fiscal imbalance, I do so because I think it is a crock. Ditto for Harper and greenhouse gasses.
CFCs are the OZONE killing chemicals.
GHGs are different, and is an appropriate term, but the outrage over it was over done.
Save the outrage for an important issue, or else outrage becomes pointless.
Minor quibble, CFC (chlorofluorocarbons) are different than so-called GHGs.
I used the term 'so-called' because GHGs actually have other names, like: H20 (water), CO2 (carbon dioxide), etc.. but are commonly called GHGs.
American Heritage Dictionary's primary meaning for "so-called" is "commonly". Its secondary meaning is "incorrectly".
Harper's english is fine, as Antonio points out.
so-called record on greenhouse gases as a government
By so-called I assume you mean 'commonly'?
;-)
On a side note, Environmentalists love Dion. Only the politicians of other parties and the non-Denise writers of this site run down his record.
And actually, it isn't even all non-Liberal politicians:
"If they try to say he was anything other than a very strong environment minister, they're making it up." ~ Elizabeth May
That's not how the term "so-called" works in English.
It depends if you're talking about the sociological or the political definition Rob.
It depends if you're talking about the sociological or the political definition Rob.
Ha!
Always good for a laugh, Jeff.
You're English is fine, Antonio, but when it's your second language (is it?), then you will invariably run into problems with nuances, as is the case here with "so-called". That's all I meant. No offence intended. I wish I could write French as well as you write in English (but I am constantly working on it and hope to do a bilingual blog at some point in the future).
Antonio with shockingly little knowledge on this subject, you really should be quiet.
CFC's are clorofluorocarbons and removed from refridgeration coolants in the 90's. They are not greenhouse gases which are primarily methane and CO2. That's Carbon Dioxide for the Scientifically challenged such as yourself and Mr. Harper.
The greenhouse nature of CO2 can be PROVEN scientifically beyond a doubt in about 30 minutes with two glass fish tanks regular air and one with added CO2. The tempurature will increase in the tank with CO2 when light is shined on them. Period. End of story.
There is no "so called" and any grade 6 student who pays attention in Science would know that.
Too bad you didn't pay attention in Grade Six Science Antonio.
Lol Andrew
that is why you went into engineering and I went into polisci.
I said I was wrong, but if you really think the average Canadian knws the difference, thats a whole other story.
I could have removed the whole comment, but i took my lumps and left it up.
Doesnt change my overall point tho, which is that stephen Harper calling carbon emissions "so-called" greenhouse gases IS mock outrage, to a tee, and that is why journalists were much smarter than that, and did not make an issue out of thin air...
So should we do the world a favor and eat more proscuitto?
Or produce less proscuitto in the first place?
That's it, to cut greenhouse gases, we must all become vegans!
It's relevent because the clip sums up his horrible record in four words from his own mouth. If every Canadian were to see that, I believe it would be a great image for messaging.
Look, when I first read the quote on Cherniak, I though "Harper is an idiot, what a line!"
Then I saw the video, and I realized he meant 'so-called' as in 'commonly-called,' ie, the non-pejorative use of this phrase.
Harper is evil; we need to defeat him; but this is a waste of time. He is bad for the environment, but I don't believe we should attack him by misconstruing his words.
Post a Comment
<< Home