Must see Global Warming Hoax video. Global warming is finished. | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Must see Global Warming Hoax video. Global warming is finished.

Is it me or is everything insane to you? It must really stink to be the only sane person in the world.

Please address the points and stop acting insane. ;)
 
I agree completely...and from the presenter's opening comments, it seems he might agree on some level, too. I think what is at stake here is the huge task of significantly reducing CO2 emissions...it does boggle the mind. Some say it would be impossible to reverse anyway...we might only be able to slow it. In any case, the financial systems and profiteers (who probably run this planet) cannot realistically allow such an upset. I think that is what is really motivating a good part of this debate. Change is fine to talk about, putting it "where the rubber meet the road" is another matter.

No whats at stake here is your ignorance and willingness to believe that CO2 is harmful. It isn't.
 
A number of things triggered alarm bells before the speaker started talking: the cue has 'freemarket' written on it (images of corporate profiteers putting profit before environmental concerns), the guy introducing the speaker said he admired Maggie Thatcher (greed is good kind of person), then the speaker was 'Lord' someone, which makes him part of the British establishment.

The British establishment is made up of people who went to certain select schools and universities. These institutions are a spring board for jobs in the: civil service, army, secret service, judiciary, politics, finance and the media. All the 'regulatory bodies' in the UK which have no real powers and choose not to exercise them anyway are full of Lords and Sirs and Lady's. It was one such regulatory body the FSA (Financial Services Authority) which was supposed to keep the banks under control...fine job they have done of that!

Lordships are given to some people to initiate them into these unelected elites (usually because they have bought them 'cash for honours') or they are inherited. Many aristocracy are descended from the Norman knights that conquered England in 1066, and they still bear their Norman names and many still hold the land their anscestors carved up between them. They took the land by force and they held onto it because they make the laws. A self contained elite ruling over people they think are inferior. If you ever wondered why there are so many castles in the UK it is because they built these to hold onto their power. hence the popularity of the Robin Hood story!

The speaker spouted a load of Latin in his talk. This is done for a couple of reasons. One is to overawe his audience who if they are impressed by his education and intelligence are more likely to believe what he has to say (primitive propaganda technique), the other is to prove his superiority (which is instilled in him from his birth, then at school then at university) and finally it allows him to show off his classical education which he got at his elitist university. Greek and Latin are staples of the British elite. What was the defining feature of ancient Greece?....SLAVERY. A belief in the superiority of one set of people over another (the essence of rascism).

The British believed they were the inheritors of democracy from the Greeks, they believed they had a right to carry the torch of democracy into the 'darker' corners of the earth. They exploited whole continents and shipped millions of slaves from Africa, because they believed in their 'god given' superiority. They built all their architecture in Greek or classical style and adopted Roman law. America then felt they took on the torch of democracy, built buildings in the classical style, exploited other countries and believe in their 'god given right to do things'. And so the sickness continues.

Why is this relevant to climate change? I think damage to the environment comes from a certain mindset. It is the same mindset which allows the cruel treatment of people. It is a mindset of inequality and belief in superiority. The speaker in the video leeches arrogance from every pore in his body. He reeks of privilege, dishonesty, double dealing and a belief in his own superiority. I am wary of anyone with Lord in front of his name. It is just a way of exerting power or superiority over others.

I thought the speakers attempt to blame the left for the deaths of people from AIDs was a disgusting twisting of facts. The profit hunting pharmaceutical companies used capitalist patents to stop anyone else producing the drugs which could have saved those people. This twisting of facts is the primary form of propoganda used in the novel 1984 (written by someone who worked in the propaganda department of the BBC responsible for deseminating information which would keep the British public on script, during the war). Lets not forget it is rampant capitalism and consumption which is causing the conflict in the world and the environmental damage, for a rampant capitalist to turn around and accuse the left of these things is Orwellian DOUBLETHINK (more really basic propaganda).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Satya
Verbal sewage

Not a single rebut of any of his points, just fallacies. Your post was an exercise in verbal masturbation. Please If you want to address his points that he backed with science feel free. I am still waiting for one of you liberals to do this. The science is settled, global warming is not a threat, its not man made, it is not bad for the environment. CO2 is natural and we have had no effect on the climate. Whats lost in the shuffle of all this aside from untold trillions in wealth redistribution, halting the growth of the 3rd world, is TRUE environmentalism which seeks to clean up real pollution and not magic pollution that doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
The background to this situation is completely relevant.

This same struggle has been going on for millenia, global warming is just a new battleground for it.

That man stands for something which has been keeping the majority of people down for a long time.
 
A number of things triggered alarm bells before the speaker started talking: the cue has 'freemarket' written on it (images of corporate profiteers putting profit before environmental concerns), the guy introducing the speaker said he admired Maggie Thatcher (greed is good kind of person), then the speaker was 'Lord' someone, which makes him part of the British establishment.

The British establishment is made up of people who went to certain select schools and universities. These institutions are a spring board for jobs in the: civil service, army, secret service, judiciary, politics, finance and the media. All the 'regulatory bodies' in the UK which have no real powers and choose not to exercise them anyway are full of Lords and Sirs and Lady's. It was one such regulatory body the FSA (Financial Services Authority) which was supposed to keep the banks under control...fine job they have done of that!

Lordships are given to some people to initiate them into these unelected elites (usually because they have bought them 'cash for honours') or they are inherited. Many aristocracy are descended from the Norman knights that conquered England in 1066, and they still bear their Norman names and many still hold the land their anscestors carved up between them. They took the land by force and they held onto it because they make the laws. A self contained elite ruling over people they think are inferior. If you ever wondered why there are so many castles in the UK it is because they built these to hold onto their power. hence the popularity of the Robin Hood story!

The speaker spouted a load of Latin in his talk. This is done for a couple of reasons. One is to overawe his audience who if they are impressed by his education and intelligence are more likely to believe what he has to say (primitive propaganda technique), the other is to prove his superiority (which is instilled in him from his birth, then at school then at university) and finally it allows him to show off his classical education which he got at his elitist university. Greek and Latin are staples of the British elite. What was the defining feature of ancient Greece?....SLAVERY. A belief in the superiority of one set of people over another (the essence of rascism).

The British believed they were the inheritors of democracy from the Greeks, they believed they had a right to carry the torch of democracy into the 'darker' corners of the earth. They exploited whole continents and shipped millions of slaves from Africa, because they believed in their 'god given' superiority. They built all their architecture in Greek or classical style and adopted Roman law. America then felt they took on the torch of democracy, built buildings in the classical style, exploited other countries and believe in their 'god given right to do things'. And so the sickness continues.

Why is this relevant to climate change? I think damage to the environment comes from a certain mindset. It is the same mindset which allows the cruel treatment of people. It is a mindset of inequality and belief in superiority. The speaker in the video leeches arrogance from every pore in his body. He reeks of privilege, dishonesty, double dealing and a belief in his own superiority. I am wary of anyone with Lord in front of his name. It is just a way of exerting power or superiority over others.

I thought the speakers attempt to blame the left for the deaths of people from AIDs was a disgusting twisting of facts. The profit hunting pharmaceutical companies used capitalist patents to stop anyone else producing the drugs which could have saved those people. This twisting of facts is the primary form of propoganda used in the novel 1984 (written by someone who worked in the propaganda department of the BBC responsible for deseminating information which would keep the British public on script, during the war). Lets not forget it is rampant capitalism and consumption which is causing the conflict in the world and the environmental damage, for a rampant capitalist to turn around and accuse the left of these things is Orwellian DOUBLETHINK (more really basic propaganda).

I enjoyed reading your post and I agree with you on many points.

I find it curious that Billy has so much faith in this Lord Monckton yet is so quick to accuse those environmentalist of having a political agenda --and we know Monckton is exempt of that...how? Things are not black and white. I am not a Gore supporter, and I also find this Monckton character suspect. I am no scientist and don't claim to be one, therefore I will make no attempt at refuting his claims (or rather, what he chooses to present in this video) with my own limited knowledge on the subject matter.

However, here is a published article from a reputable scientific source documenting Lord Monckton's errors. Billy, since you have challenged others to refute the facts presented by the video you posted, will you take up the challenge of addressing the details in this article with your scientific knowledge?
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't know the extent of global warming.

If it is happeneing i don't know the extent to which people are responsible if at all.

What i am concerned about is that there are profit hunters who will exploit the environment and people for a quick buck. These people will exercise their power and influence to carry on their activities. They will deny any wrong doing whilst raking in the profits.

Remember when they told you cigartettes don't give you cancer? Thats the tip of an iceberg (probably melting).

Thanks firstjudge, I am British and thought a little background info would help here. Britain has some serious problems. Don't get me wrong there is much i love about it, but I think the US did well to break off!
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed reading your post and I agree with you on many points.

I find it curious that Billy has so much faith in this Lord Monckton yet is so quick to accuse those environmentalist of having a political agenda --and we know Monckton is exempt of that...how? Things are not black and white. I am not a Gore supporter, and I also find this Monckton character suspect. I am no scientist and don't claim to be one, therefore I will make no attempt at refuting his claims (or rather, what he chooses to present in this video) with my own limited knowledge on the subject matter.

However, here is a published article from a reputable scientific source documenting Lord Monckton's errors. Billy, since you have challenged others to refute the facts presented by the video you posted, will you take up the challenge of addressing the details in this article with your scientific knowledge?

This article is a joke, the guy admits right on the top of his spiel that this isnt intended for publication and that these are his opinions.

Be that as it may look at this rock solid reasoning.
Monckton: global mean surface temperature has not risen since 1998 and may have fallen since late 2001.​
Wrong and Cherry Picking: Both of these claims, no warming since 1998 and cooling in 2007/2008 are familiar to anybody who has watched online discussion of climate in recent years. 1998 as a whole was anomalously warm in all temperature measurements, and some months in 2008 appear to have been anomalously cool. If you look at 8- or 11-year trends rather than 7 or 10 as of mid 2008, temperature is up. This is hardly unexpected given the complexity of Earth's coupled oceans and atmosphere, and it is worth referring back to the definition of climate itself to see what's wrong with this sort of argument based on looking at the temperature in any given month or year. From the IPCC AR4 WG1 Glossary (Annex 1), p. 942:
IPCC: Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the average weather, or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period of time ranging from months to thousands or millions of years. The classical period for averaging these variables is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization. The relevant quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation and wind. Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical description, of the climate system. In various chapters in this report different averaging periods, such as a period of 20 years, are also used​
When you look at 20-year or 30-year averages, the temperature rise through the present is extremely clear.

He is talking about 20 or 30 year averages... Monckton in the video talks about averages dating back to the 1700s... this article is a real joke.

He doesnt even use any evidence to back up his assertion that "temperature rise through the present is extremely clear" Are you serious?
 
The background to this situation is completely relevant.

This same struggle has been going on for millenia, global warming is just a new battleground for it.

That man stands for something which has been keeping the majority of people down for a long time.

Uhhh yeah, no. More like global warming is a scam to keep the 3rd war poor and destitute by taking away their ability to modernize rapidly with technology that works by using 250 trillion dollars to give them wind farms that will not meet their growing needs. And why is the global warming scare backed by central banks and the UN which is of course controlled by central banks?
 
I honestly don't know the extent of global warming.

If it is happeneing i don't know the extent to which people are responsible if at all.

What i am concerned about is that there are profit hunters who will exploit the environment and people for a quick buck. These people will exercise their power and influence to carry on their activities. They will deny any wrong doing whilst raking in the profits.

Remember when they told you cigartettes don't give you cancer? Thats the tip of an iceberg (probably melting).

Thanks firstjudge, I am British and thought a little background info would help here. Britain has some serious problems. Don't get me wrong there is much i love about it, but I think the US did well to break off!

Dont confuse wanting to help people with buying into a scam made to play on those sympathies. The only way to help people is to let thier countries develope and not hinder thier progress, when thier standards increase things get better.

When the government took a 3rd of our agricultural land away to promote BS bio diesels the world food prices spiked and people are literally starving to death today more then ever before. Dont pretend that food prices haven't gone up here. He says it in the vid, a burger costing 2 dollars instead of 1 for us is an inconvenience, for people in haiti their mudpies have doubled too and now they cant eat. THANKS Environmentalists!
 
You arent seeing the big picture, 250 trillion in money is why you should care. And We arent effecting the environment as they say we are. There are not more hot days, I remember the summers being much hotter when I was a child with temps going into the 100s all summer long, whereas for the past 10 years we barely break into the high 90s. Storms are not increasing as shown with his scientific data. Thats all media sensationalizing.

According to hisdata. Remember, it's easy to skew info into a certain direction if you want to. There are many different viewpoints; one will not significantly impress me. Take the time to look at a couple different sources and different sides. It's very easy to present information as legit without giving the whole picture or choosing which information to say and/or omit.

Storms have been more intense in the past 40-50 years. However, there's a question as to whether this trend will continue or what's causing it.
And it also depends on the sources:
http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/global-temperature.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_100_yrs.html
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/anttemps.htm
http://www.cejournal.net/?p=765

In fact, it's actually kind of an enigma right now. There is debate whether the world is cooling, warming, or neither, or cooling in some places and warming in others. It's not an easy, clear-cut thing like most people would like it to be -- there are many factors, including ocean/wind currents.
Here's a good quote from the last article:

"But don
 
No whats at stake here is your ignorance and willingness to believe that CO2 is harmful. It isn't.
Once again, CO2 has the potential and can change climates dramatically.

As to how we're affecting it is what's being drawn into question.
 
Uhhh yeah, no. More like global warming is a scam to keep the 3rd war poor and destitute by taking away their ability to modernize rapidly with technology that works by using 250 trillion dollars to give them wind farms that will not meet their growing needs. And why is the global warming scare backed by central banks and the UN which is of course controlled by central banks?

I'm not sure i trust the speaker in that video Billy. I am going to avoid taking a stance on global warming because i don't know the facts.

I have concerns the same as you concerning the issue you have raised above and I am looking for more answers concerning this. Any information would be gratefully received.

What i do know is that whatever forces (for a better want of a word) have been at work they have made a real mess of the planet so far. I am very wary of Lord Monckton though.
 
According to hisdata. Remember, it's easy to skew info into a certain direction if you want to. There are many different viewpoints; one will not significantly impress me. Take the time to look at a couple different sources and different sides. It's very easy to present information as legit without giving the whole picture or choosing which information to say and/or omit.

Storms have been more intense in the past 40-50 years. However, there's a question as to whether this trend will continue or what's causing it.
And it also depends on the sources:
http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/global-temperature.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_100_yrs.html
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/anttemps.htm
http://www.cejournal.net/?p=765

In fact, it's actually kind of an enigma right now. There is debate whether the world is cooling, warming, or neither, or cooling in some places and warming in others. It's not an easy, clear-cut thing like most people would like it to be -- there are many factors, including ocean/wind currents.
Here's a good quote from the last article:

"But don
 
Once again, CO2 has the potential and can change climates dramatically.

As to how we're affecting it is what's being drawn into question.
He addresses that. watch the video if you actually care to know about it.
 
I'm not sure i trust the speaker in that video Billy. I am going to avoid taking a stance on global warming because i don't know the facts.

I have concerns the same as you concerning the issue you have raised above and I am looking for more answers concerning this. Any information would be gratefully received.

What i do know is that whatever forces (for a better want of a word) have been at work they have made a real mess of the planet so far. I am very wary of Lord Monckton though.

Luckily you dont have to trust him on his word, he uses facts and research. Go with that.
 
He addresses that. watch the video if you actually care to know about it.
He addresses what? Our contributions to CO2 levels or does he dispute scientific evidence that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and directly affects climates?
 
He addresses what? Our contributions to CO2 levels or does he dispute scientific evidence that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and directly affects climates?

If you would watch the video you wouldnt have to ask me about the video. I KNOW its a long video, around 90 minutes. But PLEASE just watch it, if you have all the evidence you need later on to come back and throw in my face I am FINE with that. But don't sit here and argue from a point of ignorance on what I am saying and what the video has said. It is a waste of both of our time. Its a leap of faith to challenge your views I understand this, I try to do it all the time. I was actually once a rabid money hating liberal in college, long time ago. It took a lot of discussion and seeing opposing viewpoints for me to get realistic about things.

What I am asking you to do is watch the vid to completion with an open mind, discount the few political puns he makes and just focus on his research and his sources. Then come back to me and give me your impression.
 
Luckily you dont have to trust him on his word, he uses facts and research. Go with that.

Fair point. I will watch the rest of the video and try and not let instincts get in the way of the 'facts'.

It does seem to me that people on any side of a debate are able to wheel out their 'experts' who will contradict the argument of the 'experts' on the other side.

The 'facts' are usually decided by who gets to write the history. This can be lying by omission as much as distortion of the truth.
 
What was the defining feature of ancient Greece?....SLAVERY.

And there was me thinking it was either philosophy, democracy, literature and/or homosexuality.

The things we learn, eh?
rolleye0011.gif