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

[muir]

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

The things we learn, eh?

Not if you want to justify gaining a large labour force very cheaply.

Thats what this is all about isn't it....justification? Different sides in an idealogical struggle are presenting facts about the environment to justify their political or economic stance.

The British used different beliefs to justify their mistreatment of people. The same will be done over the global warming issue. I can't see through the smoke and mirrors at the moment, but my gut tells me i don't like the speaker in the video. I have a load of reasons for that which i put in my post.

Billy is right in pointing out i shouldn't go on instinct alone. Until i have the hard facts to back up my instinct i can't debate.

 

[Billy]

Not if you want to justify gaining a large labour force very cheaply.

Thats what this is all about isn't it....justification? Different sides in an idealogical struggle are presenting facts about the environment to justify their political or economic stance.

The British used different beliefs to justify their mistreatment of people. The same will be done over the global warming issue. I can't see through the smoke and mirrors at the moment, but my gut tells me i don't like the speaker in the video. I have a load of reasons for that which i put in my post.

Billy is right in pointing out i shouldn't go on instinct alone. Until i have the hard facts to back up my instinct i can't debate.

I always thought it was ironic that the birthplace of democracy was also one of the most slave owner-ish societies ever...

 

[sookie]

Billy we actually agree on something!!



Is the world about to end.....

 

[Sithious]

Billy we actually agree on something!!



Is the world about to end.....

Actually it is.

Stock up on food, toilet paper and seeds, it will be more worth than diamonds in the time ahead.

 

[muir]

I always thought it was ironic that the birthplace of democracy was also one of the most slave owner-ish societies ever...

I know what you mean. I guess it depends how wide you open up the voting. If democracy means that a few very wealthy and powerful families get to vote then they may still believe in their right to exploit people outside that power structure.

If you open up the voting to everyone, then the powerful have to manipulate the many in order to get them to vote how they want. They put out information to support their view, true or otherwise.

It is because of all the missinformation surrounding the environment that there is even a debate. Who to trust and who not to trust?

 

[Billy]

Billy we actually agree on something!!



Is the world about to end.....

Why do you think my Avy is of Apocalypse? YOU ARE ONLY DELAYING THE INEVITABLEEEE!!

 

[Billy]

I know what you mean. I guess it depends how wide you open up the voting. If democracy means that a few very wealthy and powerful families get to vote then they may still believe in their right to exploit people outside that power structure.

If you open up the voting to everyone, then the powerful have to manipulate the many in order to get them to vote how they want. They put out information to support their view, true or otherwise.

It is because of all the missinformation surrounding the environment that there is even a debate. Who to trust and who not to trust?

Well I look at it in terms of motivation.

Who would benefit from Global Warming being decided by consensus and not science and brought forward as the standard even if its factually incorrect?

Intrusive governments who wish to use it as leverage to gain more control and more power over the masses. Its the same argument you are making.

Global warming is also backed by the central bankers who have destroyed world economies with meddling and credit inflation who then turn around in a sour economy they caused and bail out their buddies in big business, by printing more fake money. Their friends get bailed out, but in a few months the money is worth less and prices increase. Me you and everyone else end up soaking up the hit.

Make no doubt about it, this global warming thing is about money and power. Not environmentalism.

The people who began many of the oldest environmentalist groups have all left and departed, Lord Monckton is one of them, they left when the big government and bankers came in and took over the movement as a form of monetary and industrial control. Its very insidious.

 

[randomsomeone]

No whats at stake here is your ignorance and willingness to believe that CO2 is harmful. It isn't.

Whoa...watch it Billy boy!!! Remember, kool-aid comes in many flavors.

 

[Kavalan]

I know what you mean. I guess it depends how wide you open up the voting. If democracy means that a few very wealthy and powerful families get to vote then they may still believe in their right to exploit people outside that power structure.

If you open up the voting to everyone, then the powerful have to manipulate the many in order to get them to vote how they want. They put out information to support their view, true or otherwise.

It is because of all the missinformation surrounding the environment that there is even a debate. Who to trust and who not to trust?

You seem to be hung up on titles... Granted this will sound hypocritical to the conversation I had with Billy last night, but why does it matter? If hes was some Baron from France would it make a difference? The Title is IRRELEVANT to what is said it's the person who can skew data. The only thing the title means is that I may want to work under him as he would elevate me. Elitism is pervasive in human society.

Sensationalist media and the fact that the only way to fight it is using it as well... A vicious circle. Thus the means that was used in the lecture but granted a little more professionalism would have been nice and just a bank of all sources, data, and notes(for free). Then again I wouldn't have the time to sift through it all.

 

[bamf]

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.

I'm not trying to argue with you about anything. I'm simply asking you what it is he is claiming. I don't currently have the time to watch the video so I'm asking you for an extremely brief summary.

I'm trying to get at whether or not he is arguing that co2 (be it natural or man made) has no effect on climate, or if our co2 isn't effecting the climate. There is a huge difference between the two and I'm trying to understand what viewpoint he is coming from. That's all.

 

[Billy]

I'm not trying to argue with you about anything. I'm simply asking you what it is he is claiming. I don't currently have the time to watch the video so I'm asking you for an extremely brief summary.

I'm trying to get at whether or not he is arguing that co2 (be it natural or man made) has no effect on climate, or if our co2 isn't effecting the climate. There is a huge difference between the two and I'm trying to understand what viewpoint he is coming from. That's all.

Just watch the video, there is a LOT of content on it and I wouldnt feel right about boiling down 90 minutes of speech into 1 single point.

Take your time.

 

[BenW]

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)...

Not sure where you got said "images" from.
Well, I have an analogy...
Pulled from here.

Prettymuch any power-hungry corporate organization you will encounter is not only NOT an advocate of free-market policies, but is in fact vehemently against them.
Corporations leech off of taxpayers and establish monopolies and disproportionate concentrations of wealth via special privileges granted to them by the government.
Corporations subsist SOLELY through the corruption of free market ideals.

Therefore, removing the hand of the government from the economy is diametrically opposed to their interests.

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 happen to agree that patents cause a plethora of problems and are are, frankly, inherently evil.
However, capitalism is not to blame for the legal and ethical buttfuckery that is intellectual property in modern soceity.
Once again, the government is.
They alone grant and enforce patents.

Without the government's muscle and violence, IP is unenforceable.
In a truly free market, IP ceases to exist.

Now...
If you want a good example of the economic left being bourgeois idiots and fucking things up, I have a great one for you.

[youtube]tIvNopv9Pa8&fmt=18[/youtube]

 

[randomsomeone]

While I found his presentation unnecessarily caustic, I do actually hope he is right and that we can take the Climate Change debate off the table...that will have to come from some scientific consensus, though....and if his questions do raise other scientific considerations in the wider research community, all the better. Let's wait and see. He does seem to have some legitimate regard for the broader environmental issues of our day, and I applaud that.

 

[muir]

You seem to be hung up on titles... Granted this will sound hypocritical to the conversation I had with Billy last night, but why does it matter? If hes was some Baron from France would it make a difference? The Title is IRRELEVANT to what is said it's the person who can skew data. The only thing the title means is that I may want to work under him as he would elevate me. Elitism is pervasive in human society.

Sensationalist media and the fact that the only way to fight it is using it as well... A vicious circle. Thus the means that was used in the lecture but granted a little more professionalism would have been nice and just a bank of all sources, data, and notes(for free). Then again I wouldn't have the time to sift through it all.

I won't discount what someone says just because they have a title, but titles in the UK have all sorts of baggage that come with them. In recent years there has been a 'cash for honours' scandal where people were paying politicians money in return for titles. This corruption is nothing new its just someone recently blew the whistle to the public.

Then you have Lords who are part of the establishment. To be part of that is to uphold something which i disagree with so i am hostile to that.

For me the word 'Lord' is loaded with potential meaning. I will not allow this to affect what i think of what the person is saying, but i will keep it at the back of my mind.

 

[muir]

Not sure where you got said "images" from.
Well, I have an analogy...
Pulled from here.

Prettymuch any power-hungry corporate organization you will encounter is not only NOT an advocate of free-market policies, but is in fact vehemently against them.
Corporations leech off of taxpayers and establish monopolies and disproportionate concentrations of wealth via special privileges granted to them by the government.
Corporations subsist SOLELY through the corruption of free market ideals.

Therefore, removing the hand of the government from the economy is diametrically opposed to their interests.

I happen to agree that patents cause a plethora of problems and are are, frankly, inherently evil.
However, capitalism is not to blame for the legal and ethical buttfuckery that is intellectual property in modern soceity.
Once again, the government is.
They alone grant and enforce patents.

Without the government's muscle and violence, IP is unenforceable.
In a truly free market, IP ceases to exist.

Now...
If you want a good example of the economic left being bourgeois idiots and fucking things up, I have a great one for you.

[youtube]tIvNopv9Pa8&fmt=18[/youtube]

Are you advocating anarcho-capitalism?

 

[dMP2]

CO2 is harmful? Oxygen is to us as CO2 is to plants. That is a simple basic scientific fact (I don't need to cite this, just take a basic biology/botany class). Perhaps it isn't, then, the pollutant bloviated about. If many of the environmental religious zealots had their way and removed CO2 from the atmosphere... It would kill all plant life and destroy the planet inconveniently not saving it. There would be NO trees to hug. Now that is an inconvenient truth, how ironic.

CO2 isn't harmful? Ummm, an imbalance of any gas in the atmosphere, including Oxygen (so useful and necessary to us), can be a very bad thing. Try to light a match in an atmosphere of hydrogen... The whole planet wouldn't last long. Sadly, we are releasing a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere that used to be buried in the ground. I think the global warming enthusiast are over blowing it with pseudo-science, but we can't continue to do this for too long...

So, lets all take a nice deep breath of that wonderfully mixed and balanced atmosphere... And realize that we can really seriously harm the environment and increasing the power of morally and fiscally corrupt governments isn't the way to avoid it.

INFJs are generally the intellectual moral leaders of sorts. If we argue endlessly and lose our heads over this, what will the rest of society do?

 

[BenW]

Are you advocating anarcho-capitalism?

Yes.

 

[muir]

Yes.

Where do you stand on the global warming debate?

 

[BenW]

I don't believe humans have had any significant effect on climate change.
I think many people are drawn to the idea due to their self-important nature.

I don't believe that it's impossible.
We just haven't.

Even if humans have effected climate change, it has NOT been from CO2 emissions.
We make up such a small percentage of annual global CO2 emissions ("we" meaning EVERYTHING we as humans do... breathing, cars, factories, etc...), that casual fluctuations from the natural sources of emission make the percentage we contribute essentially meaningless.

However, I believe people should be held responsible for cleaning up the messes they make.
As such, I must point to the fact that pollution generated by the governments of the world are among the worst sources.
And they, unlike individuals, private organizations, and even gigantic corporations, are completely unaccountable for it.
They can do whatever the fuck they feel like; they gave themselves the authority to do so.

 

[sookie]

All I have to say is that I just walked my dog. I had a short sleve shirt on and I could have worn sandles. This is not typical of NEW ENGLAND

Especially when I just finished putting up my Christmas Tree.

Christmas + No Coat + New England +Possible use of sandles= Global Warming

This does not compute, lol