Originally posted by RagnorakNo, sadly, I am not joking.
Are you joking? When I think of environmental problems, I don't picture somebody like Sean Penn or whatever celebrity you are talking about... I picture dead fish http://www.southbaymobilization.org/newsroom/earth/howarticles/03.0905.InteriorDeptToProbeRovesWaterPolicy_picture.jpg, I picture clearcut rainforests, I picture hundreds of species extinctions a ...[text shortened]... gh to want to take the rest of us with you? Is there anything we can do to help?
D
Yes, I am saying that the environmentalists have done a poor job selling their cause. They turned people off by being too shrewish and nagging. Almost nobody is against clean air and water, nature, animals, etc. But the message of blame, guilt, etc. -- people can't get into it.
That and the fact that submerging Manhattan doesn't seem like that bad an idea to a lot of people. Might be kind of cool as a dive spot afterwards.
"Can people be that idiotic..." Hmmm. You be the judge.
Originally posted by xsI posted this not to profess or deny "global warming,' but rather to bring attention to the fact that debate is no longer allowed and dissenters have been demonized by the media and howardgee. More importantly, the science is not "closed" as Al Gore is fond of saying. Witness what happened yesterday in Detroit and Chicago:
Very good read! as evidenced by the knee- jerk
reactions of the authoritarian "believers".
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/storms/2006-10-12-midwest-snowstorm_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA
Global warming? I think not.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterYou do realise that Global Warming will actually result in a new Ice Age in parts of the world, don't you?
Witness what happened yesterday in Detroit and Chicago:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/storms/2006-10-12-midwest-snowstorm_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA
Global warming? I think not.
D
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWhat about the evidence that the Bush administration has been gagging Environmental reports by NASA and the leading authorities on Global Warming. Is that not a denial of free speech?
Here it is – global warming alarmists are now calling for skeptics to be tried for war crimes, Nuremburg-style:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1782/
What about the fact that the Eastern state of Australia have had the hottest days ever recorded in the last week and bushfires a raging in Tasmania (this probably does not mean alot to you, but Tasmania is one of the coldest and wettest parts of Australia)? If you really think that all the pollutants we spew out everyday is not affecting the environment then you really are ignorant.
US 'tried to gag' global warming critic
Email Print Normal font Large font By Andrew Revkin, New York
January 30, 2006
Advertisement
AdvertisementTHE top climate scientist at NASA has said the Bush Administration tried to stop him from speaking out after he gave a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
The scientist, James Hansen, longtime director of the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said NASA officials had ordered the public affairs staff to review his coming lectures, papers, postings on the Goddard website and requests for interviews from journalists.
Dr Hansen said he would ignore the restrictions.
Dean Acosta, NASA's deputy assistant administrator for public affairs, said the restrictions on Dr Hansen applied to all NASA personnel whom the public could perceive as speaking for the agency.
He said US Government scientists were free to discuss scientific findings, but policy statements should be left to policymakers and appointed spokespeople.
Dr Hansen, 63, a physicist who joined the space agency in 1967, is a leading authority on climate. He directs efforts to simulate the global climate on computers at the Goddard Institute in Manhattan.
In several recent interviews, Dr Hansen said it would be irresponsible not to speak out, particularly because NASA's mission statement includes the phrase "to understand and protect our home planet".
Fresh efforts to quieten him, Dr Hansen said, began in a series of calls after a lecture he gave on December 6 at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco.
In the talk, he said that significant greenhouse emission cuts could be achieved with existing technologies, particularly in the case of motor vehicles, and that without leadership by the United States, climate change would eventually leave Earth "a different planet".
The Administration's policy is to use voluntary measures to slow, but not reverse, the growth of emissions.
Among the restrictions, according to Dr Hansen and an internal draft memorandum he provided, was that his supervisors could stand in for him in any news media interviews.
In an interview on Friday, Ralph Cicerone, an atmospheric chemist and the president of the National Academy of Sciences, the nation's leading independent scientific body, praised Dr Hansen's scientific contributions and said he had always seemed to describe his public statements clearly as his personal views.
NEW YORK TIMES
Originally posted by EsotericHow would I know? But back to the topic of the thread: Why are the "global warming" zealots so intent on demonizing anyone with an opinion contrary to their religion?
Your fluff does not hide the fact that they tried to. Is there something the Bush administration is trying to hide?
Originally posted by RagnorakWhich is it: Global warming or global cooling? The media has been wrong too many times on this issue and they report it like no one has access to LexisNexis or even microfiche.
You do realise that Global Warming will actually result in a new Ice Age in parts of the world, don't you?
D
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterBecause they feel future of our race depends on the human population not ignoring our drastic impacts on our environment. I would say that would be a good enough reason.
How would I know? But back to the topic of the thread: Why are the "global warming" zealots so intent on demonizing anyone with an opinion contrary to their religion?
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterAre you being serious? That last post just shows how little you know about the issue.
Which is it: Global warming or global cooling? The media has been wrong too many times on this issue and they report it like no one has access to LexisNexis or even microfiche.
Why are the "global warming" zealots so intent on demonizing anyone with an opinion contrary to their religion?
All right, I’ll bite:
a) Al Gore and the other “global warming” zealots don’t like and trust “ordinary” people, including most Americans. They think they know what’s best for everyone else, so they create a crisis and demand obeisance for solving it.
b) The European Union would rather hamstring the U.S. economy than compete with it.
c) Many school teachers in America are unqualified for their profession, so they teach their charges social justice, saving the rain forest and global warming. Consequently, the kids come out all revved up for a two-minute hate against anyone that butts heads with their ideology/ecology/zoology/sociology.
d) There is lots of money to be made in crisis management, so all the “global warming” “scientists” and “climatologists” can’t afford for the gravy train to dry up. They have to stop dissenters because their livelihoods depend upon it.
e) Ditto for the various governing bodies of rich Western countries, especially the corrupt United Nations. They manufacture a crisis and then shakedown the taxpayers; they’d especially like to shakedown American taxpayers to finance their globo-tax transfers to the developing world.
Discuss.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSo Al Gore and the 'zealots' are actually doing the EU's bidding?
a) Al Gore and the other “global warming” zealots don’t like and trust “ordinary” people, including most Americans. They think they know what’s best for everyone else, so they create a crisis and demand obeisance for solving it.
b) The European Union would rather hamstring the U.S. economy than compete with it.
Discuss.
Do you consider this a form of terrorism done by European countries against the United States and its sovereignty?
Edit - Come on, ritter, these EU excuses are getting old.