It failed because its rediculous. Note to leftist wackos... if you don't want to use plastic bags, DON'T! Just keep your ideals the hell out of my life. I am sick of your attempted intrusions into my liberty.

"Big money can come in and run deceptive scare campaigns, but in the end, people who care will defeat the people who scare," said Green Bag Campaign spokesman Brady Montz.

LOL - What? I'm all out of tinfoil beanies but is there a plastic bag mafia pushing its weight around in Seattle?

LOL - Good grief...

And the Republican plan for helping the environment is...

There are already enough laws on the books about the environment.  Government does not need to regulate everything in life.  Just enforce already existing laws.

Which laws exactly aren't the government enforcing that you believe will have a marked impact either on increasing alternative energy production, reducing our dependence on oil, and preventing global warming (still going with the 90%+ of scientists are correct over a handful of conservative pundits on this one)?

Really, which laws solve these problems?

Your claim about 90% of scientists is false.  Where are you getting your numbers from?  Which scientists?  Geologists?  Climatologists? Gynacologists?  The guy who came up with the hypothesis of gloabl warming has backed away from his claims.  We all want to get away from foriegn oil but the only way to produce the large continous gigawatts (if not terarwatts in the future) of power needed for this country, we will need nuclear power.

For information on global warming please see below.   United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html   Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assess...   All of them clearly state that 1) greenhouse gases keep the planet warm 2) the level of greenhouse gases has incrased dramatically in the past 30 years 3) this dramatic increase is greater than the increase of the hundreds years before that time 4) much of this increase has been the result of the burning of increasing numbers of fossil fuels 5) the increase in greenhouse gases will have an impact on increasing planetary temperatures. The debate is largely over how large and how fast the effect will be felt, however the standard scientific estimation approximatly 3-7 degrees Farenhite, which the reports go on to say, would be unprecedented according to our best knowledge of history.   To review, the major environmental agency in the US, a major UN/International group, and the group which provides much of the information on this topic all believe it to be real and to be a problem. Could you please tell me where you are getting your information?

Man-made global warming is a myth.  You should actually read the recent IPCC report.  We have cooled by close to two degrees over the last twenty years. Studies from Nature and Science have confirmed this  You still have not answered my question about the 90% of scientists.
Where is melted South and North Poles?  That's right, NASA's constellation of weather satellites have shown that the ice pacts over both poles have increased.  Don't believe me?  Take a look at long duration photography over the last 30 years.
The theory of man-made global warming cannot be proven because all there is no way to experiment.  Global warming is only a hypothesis, you follow Scientific Method to prove it is a theory.  They have observations and a hypothesis but no experimentation and postulates to validate a theory. Global warming is junk science.

By the way, global warming people are now straying away and saying that we are now in global cooling or blaming the cooling on Solar Minimum.

 

For the 90% please see the following articlee (which by the way, wasthe first of many in a basic google search, if you would like to look at more)

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health/most-scientists-believe-human-induced-global-warming-is-real-survey_100144654.html

Now I again challenge you to produce some facts. If what you are saying is true then please, present it here, but at the moment you are just making unsubstantiated claims.

As for global warming being a hypothesis, its true, it cannot be tested, I don't think anyone denies that. The question that comes to mind is why are you so adamently opposed to accepting global warming. It seems that this can be broken down into 4 scenarios.

1) You are right and we do nothing: likely the world continues as it is

2) You are right and we do something anyways: the world has much less pollution, more alternative energy, and more green jobs

3) you are wrong and we do something anyways: see #2, but with the added benefit of not being the victims of global warming (ie, rising oceans, mass extinctions, etc)

4) you are wrong and we do nothing: the world continues as it is, except that future generations are stuck dealing with the problems of global warming and much less able to deal with them than we are today

Why do you want to be scenario #1 or 4?

Anonymous,  by the way give your self at least a descent fake name, there are plenty of anonymous posters here.

You do not know what you are talking about.  There are no such things as facts in science.  Fact is a legal word not a scientific one.  In Science, there are only observations, hypothesises, experimentation, postulates and theories.  I do not need to produce any evidence because the global warming crowd's evidence was found false since it does not follow Scientific Method.  I suspect you do not have any education in the sciences? 

Before you ask,I do have two degrees in science and engineering and working on a third.  I am also a trained scientist of 19 years.  I have seen so much junk science and science twisted to meet political agendas.  Global warming is the biggest scam I have seen since "Cold Fusion".  I do not need to refute your websites, just look at past posts in Paloustics in which I refute findings from a Chemical Engineer who went by the username "Nick".  He had many logical arguements but I was able to refute his findings.  I have also had arguements against a user named "Truthy", a Polysci student who thought she could use debating tactics and "facts" against my science and she lost.

I will not answer your idiotic scenarios but I will give you something to think about.  The Earth is big and old.  I do not know if you believe this or not but I do believe that the Earth is over 4.5 billion years old by theory of urainium half-life decay.  Geologically speaking, Man has not even existed in a blink of an eye in the life of this planet.  We have emerged from one of many Ice Ages 10,000+ years ago.  Geological evidence has shown that the Earth has had many warm periods with temperatures that varied from freezing to 50 degrees celsius (about 120 degrees of your Farenheit).  Is this so called warming natural since we have just come out of an Ice Age?

Man has only existed for 30,000 years and we have only taken weather measurements for the last 100 years.  I think it arogant that man thinks that they can influence the temperature of the Earth.

So then, to sum up, you offer no scientific observations or experiments of your own, nor any to refute those I presented (if you wish to call them observations rather than facts then so be it), but rather fall back on the "the Earth goes through various changes in climate". Now this is true, but had you bothered to read some of the articles I presented for you then you would have seen that the change in the last 30 years has been dramatically greater than in hundreds of years past. Now you are welcome to present some scientific evidence to support anything, but until that point you really are doing little more than parroting Fox News talking points. If you want people to take your arguments seriously in politics, science, or really anything you need to present more of a well-reasoned argument than "man-made global warming is a myth". I'm sure they must have taught you that during the amount of schooling you have received.