• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

global warming explained

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
NEW YORK CITY - Speakers at a conference on climate change are making the case that the alarmism behind the global-warming bandwagon is politically motivated, has nothing to do with science, and could affect the sovereignty of the U.S.
The second annual International Conference on Climate Change hosted by The Heartland Institute is well under way in New York City. More than 700 registrants have gathered in the Big Apple to hear more than 70 scientists -- representing the views of tens of thousands of their colleagues -- make the argument that media and environmental advocacy groups have it all wrong, that global warming is not a crisis.

One of the headlining speakers to open the event Sunday evening was European Union and Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus, who was welcomed with a standing ovation. Klaus, one of the most outspoken critics of manmade global warming in Europe, says those who propagate global-warming hysteria are like the communists of old Europe. Like global-warming alarmists, he stated, the communists did not listen to opposing views.

"They didn't even try to argue back," said Klaus. "They considered you a naïve, uninformed and confused person, an eccentric complainer....It is very similar now."

Klaus believes that politicians who propagate global warming hysteria only have one goal in mind: control of the public. "It is evident that the environmentalists don't want to change the climate," he said. "They want to change our behavior...to control and manipulate us."

And he warns that those same politicians wish to engage in energy rationing -- all because of a problem that he believes does not exist. Klaus concluded his speech with this remark.

"The environmentalists speak about saving the planet. We have to ask -- From what? And from whom?" said the EU leader. "I think I know [those answers] for sure. We have to save the planet, and us, from them."



Story continues below ...
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=440562
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
His description of communists sounds suspiously like a Liberal?



are like the communists of old Europe. Like global-warming alarmists, he stated, the communists did not listen to opposing views.

"They didn't even try to argue back," said Klaus. "They considered you a naïve, uninformed and confused person, an eccentric complainer....It is very similar now."
 

Steve

Well-known member
NEW YORK CITY - Speakers at a conference on climate change are making the case that the alarmism behind the global-warming bandwagon is politically motivated, has nothing to do with science,

didn't they just say that comrad Obam was going to take the politics out of science.. maybe it's like the earmarks/pork thing..

Obama is going to take it out later after he has his socialist agenda in place...
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Pelosi said earlier this year that she wouldn't even try to bring up a climate-change bill in 2009 because she lacked the votes. She reversed course last month, telling the San Francisco Chronicle that the House would try to set a vote by December to coincide with a global warming summit in Copenhagen, Denmark.

One reason for the change, Pelosi said, was that the government needed the money it could get from the auctioning off of the emissions permits under a cap-and-trade program.

"I believe we have to because we see that as a source of revenue," the Chronicle reported her saying.

That depends on how the cap-and-trade program is designed. The more expensive the permits, the more revenue they will bring in, but that will also mean higher costs for business and higher energy prices for consumers
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&issue=20090223


Global warming BS ---- it's about money and power, NOT science!!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Did you hear where Gore was challenged to a debate on Global warming and he refused. I wonder why he won't even debate the issue? :?

Here's what the Wall Street Journal had on the confrontation this week:

Gore was challenged by Mr. Lomborg, the Danish skeptical environmentalist who thinks the world would be better off spending more money on health and education issues than curbing carbon emissions.

"I don't mean to corner you, or maybe I do mean to corner you, but would you be willing to have a debate with me on that point?" asked the polo-shirt wearing Dane.

"I want to be polite to you," Mr. Gore responded. But, no. "The scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse. We have long since passed the time when we should pretend this is a 'on the one hand, on the other hand' issue," he said. "It's not a matter of theory or conjecture, for goodness sake," he added.

I guess Gore hasn't seen the growing list of Scientists and climatologists that are saying Global Warming is not man made and that the issue is not cut and dried YET. :roll:

.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
LC starts out in the first sentence saying " global change".....and Tam is squealing " global warming".

Stay on topic people.... :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Did you hear where Gore was challenged to a debate on Global warming and he refused. I wonder why he won't even debate the issue? Confused

Look around you Tam, none of them are willing to debate on factual evidence here either. They are all cut from the same cloth!

It's not a lie, if you don't have to defend it!
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Q: The Liberal Left is endlessly pessimistic when it comes to conservative ideals, yet you show that time and time again they have been willing to be deceived during their various visits to Cuba, China, Russia, etc. What explains this apparent contradiction?

A: The believer lives in a state of self-deception and so he also wants to be deceived. Leftists have an extremely difficult relationship with reality, because reality, on every level, contradicts every tenet of the political faith. Conservative ideals, meanwhile, are based on reality. So the [Leftist] believer must create a fantasy world for himself and is extremely grateful to the monsters that he worships when they feed him the lies and false imagery he needs to sustain his vision. The Leftist is pessimistic when it comes to conservative ideals because he cannot accept them, not because he knows or believes that they are false or unworkable. He has to reject them in order to keep his false self alive.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Lonecowboy said:
Pelosi said earlier this year that she wouldn't even try to bring up a climate-change bill in 2009 because she lacked the votes. She reversed course last month, telling the San Francisco Chronicle that the House would try to set a vote by December to coincide with a global warming summit in Copenhagen, Denmark.

One reason for the change, Pelosi said, was that the government needed the money it could get from the auctioning off of the emissions permits under a cap-and-trade program.

"I believe we have to because we see that as a source of revenue," the Chronicle reported her saying.

That depends on how the cap-and-trade program is designed. The more expensive the permits, the more revenue they will bring in, but that will also mean higher costs for business and higher energy prices for consumers
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&issue=20090223


Global warming BS ---- it's about money and power, NOT science!!
Exactly! This whole farce is about fleecing business for all they can! Predictable idiots.
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Cal said:
Lonecowboy said:
Pelosi said earlier this year that she wouldn't even try to bring up a climate-change bill in 2009 because she lacked the votes. She reversed course last month, telling the San Francisco Chronicle that the House would try to set a vote by December to coincide with a global warming summit in Copenhagen, Denmark.

One reason for the change, Pelosi said, was that the government needed the money it could get from the auctioning off of the emissions permits under a cap-and-trade program.

"I believe we have to because we see that as a source of revenue," the Chronicle reported her saying.

That depends on how the cap-and-trade program is designed. The more expensive the permits, the more revenue they will bring in, but that will also mean higher costs for business and higher energy prices for consumers
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&issue=20090223


Global warming BS ---- it's about money and power, NOT science!!
Exactly! This whole farce is about fleecing business for all they can! Predictable idiots.

But you've got to admit what an amazing conspiracy these moonbat environmentalists have cooked up.

Somehow they've managed to get nearly every public university department that deals with atmospheric science to provide them the bogus data that drives their policy goals.

If only Karl Marx had been able to get the climatologists on his side, we would all be flying the hammer and the sickle. :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
When your models only go back to the little ice age, what do you think is going to be the result.

Temp. will rise. Take the models back further, say to when it was warmer than it is now, your data would be less variable, but more accurate.

Ever used EPD's before, much the same idea.
 
Top