Is Global Warming the Global Jonestown?
Thomas
paradise" and the appalling loss of life which it resulted in back in
1979 and it was an incredible piece of television. Compelling and very
upsetting. I had no idea that Jones' voice on the speaker system had
been recorded as the mass killings took place. To hear women screaming
as their infants and children were taken from them as Jim Jones shouts
on the microphone "mother, please do not be like this, give your child
up to God."
I know a lot of people over the years have made fun of the Jonestown
thing and Kool-Aid jokes. But this documentary really brought home
what a horrible human tragedy it was. The guy who escaped after her
could not talk his wife out of killing herself and their son was just
heartbreaking to listen too. Coupled with this he also lost his sister
and nephew and niece as well.
What it also brought home was that the most pro-Jones fanatics tended
to be middle-class and above, college educated types who enforced this
lifestyle using dreams of utophia first, paranoia secondly, then
murder later when followers began to question the cult.
So much of the same psychological dynamic at Jonestown, you can
clearly see it again with the Al Gore/AGW folks. But this is even more
frightening as mass media allows this to happen on a global scale
these days and people in the West are even more stupid and sheep-like
than there were back in the 1970's.
As long as there are people who want some uthopian dream and there is
a leader to exploit them it will always happen. Matters not what their
education level is. In fact, I would say the more educated a person
is, the more they are likely to lack real social intelligence and
therefore more more prone to be taken in by cult leaders types.
You can manipulate just about anyone with a false promises which play
on their insecurities, and then later paranoia.
I would not be surprised if any of the eco-projects around the world
don't end up like Jonestown. Watching the Jonestown story at the
begining it was just like these "sustainable" communities with
socialist ideals we see springing up all over with civil servants and
other middle-class easily manipulated types being controlled as soon
as their dream starts to wobble.
The whole Global Warming crowd are all potential Jonestowns in the
making.
If you listen to how Al Gore slowly and patronisingly speaks on TV or
in public, and then Jim Jones at Jonestown on the speaker system. It
is spine-chilling.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
documentary on Jim Jones"
missing your leader?
Talk-n-Dog
Hence the line, Kool-ade drinking green weenies.
Some people never learn.
--
http://DOGi-pedia.Talk-n-Dog.com
********* Koom-Bay-Ya *********
Write to:
"An Inconvenient Truth" The Al Gore Global Rescue Society
20,000 sq ft, Lear Jet Liberal, Way
Taxville Tennessee 11111-1111
Tom Gardner
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com>
wrote in message
news:334782cc-2660-420d...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>missing your leader?
Strike a nerve?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in messagenews:334782cc-2660-420d...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 7:53 am, Thomas <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:" I watched a BBC
> documentary on Jim Jones"
>
> >missing your leader?
>
> Strike a nerve?
na, how about you, are you missing your previous leader jim jones so
bad you need to replace him?
Rob
=================
He does not need too. Al Gore has taken over for the GW k00ks.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com>
> On Jan 29, 8:46 am, "Tom Gardner" <tom(nospam)@ohiobrush.com> wrote:
>
> > "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote in
> > messagenews:334782cc-2660-420d...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jan 29, 7:53 am, Thomas <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:" I watched a BBC
> > documentary on Jim Jones"
>
> > >missing your leader?
>
> > Strike a nerve?
>
> na, how about you, are you missing your previous leader jim jones so
> bad you need to replace him?
> =================
>
> He does not need too. Al Gore has taken over for the GW k00ks.
same old lame tired stuff, look if you want an ex vp to be your leader
you might want to contact him yourself, and if thomas want jim jones
as his leader that's fine to, but lame tired jokes and idiotic insults
are really just posted around here as weak attempts to rally your
little peanut gallery...
Geoff
> If you listen to how Al Gore slowly and patronisingly speaks on TV or
> in public, and then Jim Jones at Jonestown on the speaker system. It
> is spine-chilling.
OK, everyone. It's time to drink your seawater.
Tunderbar
>
> - Show quoted text -
I wonder. When they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start
to massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they get
and how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will some
drink the koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
When agw scientists are publicly seen by everyone for the frauds that
they are, (Mann, Hansen, etc) will they do what is considered the
honorable thing by many eastern philosophies? Will they take their
shame and literally or figuratively remove themselves from this world?
Lloyd
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! OK, the alien spacecraft behind the comet is ready
for you.
Ye Old One
Even after 48 hours I'm still very troubled by the programme.
>
>I would not be surprised if any of the eco-projects around the world
>don't end up like Jonestown. Watching the Jonestown story at the
>begining it was just like these "sustainable" communities with
>socialist ideals we see springing up all over with civil servants and
>other middle-class easily manipulated types being controlled as soon
>as their dream starts to wobble.
>
>The whole Global Warming crowd are all potential Jonestowns in the
>making.
>
>If you listen to how Al Gore slowly and patronisingly speaks on TV or
>in public, and then Jim Jones at Jonestown on the speaker system. It
>is spine-chilling.
There is a big difference. Global Warning has one hell of a lot of
science to back it up. Jim Jones just had his own warped god.
What the programme did was to show how really stupid religion is.
--
Bob.
Mark K. Bilbo
e1487049-f1ec-4d79...@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
<kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> So much of the same psychological dynamic at Jonestown, you can clearly
> see it again with the Al Gore/AGW folks.
Well, there went your credibility...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
At a recent PTL convention, the hotel reported that over 80%
of the conventionites watched at least one x-rated movie on
the hotel's ppv cable...
Thomas
cults) was white, suburban, middle-class, college educated idealists
who were cultivated from the Hippy movement in San Francisco while
Jones was based there.
The profile of the average climate activist is the same as the average
cult member in Western societies. ie: white, suburban, middle-class,
college educated idealist.
More interestingly, and tragic (but equally typically) is that these
white kids whom Jim Jones recruited were walking around San Francisco
going on about "peace love, understanding and getting back to nature
and away from 'the Man'. These same white, suburban, middle-class,
college educated idealists last act on this earth was to slaughter
hundreds of poor inner-city African Americans with poisioned Kool-Aid
made by "the Man'.
It is quite possible, that Jim Jones eco-socialist, organic veg
growing white, suburban, middle-class, college educated idealists
slaughtered more African-Americans in a couple of hours than the KKK
did in a century. Likewise climate activist are trying to stop people
in the third world for enjoying a white, suburban, middle-class,
college educated idealists lifestyle.
Ironic isn't it.
The same people who go around looking for an ideal world, are always
driven by a deep rooted need to control others. Be it though statutory
enforcements, cults and as seen at Jonestown, mass murder in order to
maintain their self-delusion as saviours of others. Hence why so many
civil servants tend to involved in these "climate crisis"
organisations they form.
Like I said, only matter of time before we hear about a mass murder at
some eco-sustainable project populated by white, suburban, middle-
class, college educated idealists. Cults always end up like this.
Mark K. Bilbo
9a289d82-651d-44b2...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com, Thomas
<kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> Like the Global Warming<SNIP>
Global warming is science.
Just because you're mad at Al Gore doesn't change that.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
Fundamentalism means never having to say "I'm wrong."
Thomas
>
> Global warming is science.
So was eugenics.
Bozon
"Thomas" <kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote in message
news:e1487049-f1ec-4d79...@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>I watched a BBC documentary on Jim Jones "socialist, sustainable
> paradise" and the appalling loss of life which it resulted in back in
> 1979 and it was an incredible piece of television.
Jim Jones has morphed into our beloved
"Still-Flogging-Dead-Horse-Socialism" Fran!
Regards
Bonzo
"Attributing global climate change to human CO2 production is akin to
trying to diagnose an automotive problem by ignoring the engine
(analogous to the Sun in the climate system) and the transmission (water
vapour) and instead focusing entirely, not on one nut on a rear wheel,
which would be analogous to total CO2, but on one thread on that nut,
which represents the human contribution." Dr. Timothy Ball, Chairman of
the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP.com), Former Professor
Of Climatology, University of Winnipeg
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> "Thomas" <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote in message
dude thats just weak....
DanielSan
> On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
>> Global warming is science.
>
> So was eugenics.
Computers are also science. Let's get rid of them.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Vote out Brendan Nelson
Tom Gardner
Na, I don't buy into the leader du jour like the AGW folks. It's OK, you guys
need a hobby...even if it is world conquest.
Rich
> Thomas said the following on 1/29/2008 4:25 PM:
>> On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>
>>> Global warming is science.
>>
>> So was eugenics.
>
> Computers are also science.
No, they're technology.
> Let's get rid of them.
You first.
Cheers,
Rich
Jayaprakash
conceding that they are, just using it as an as-if), how exactly does
working to protect the environment we all live in and find more
sustainable lifestyles equal a suicidal lemming-march? Your illucidity
is monumental.
Budikka666
You need to take some of the Hot Aid.
Budikka
Talk-n-Dog
They both have the personality and appeal of a corps.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote:"Na, I don't buy into the leader du jour like the AGW folks.
It's OK, you guys need a hobby...even if it is world conquest."
Interesting, actually it appears you do, its ok though, people like
you typically and predictably find it necessary to make weak attempts
at insults as you have here, no problem for they are your words and
simply reflect your antagonistic desires....
DanielSan
> DanielSan wrote:
>> Thomas said the following on 1/29/2008 4:25 PM:
>>> On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Global warming is science.
>>>
>>> So was eugenics.
>>
>> Computers are also science.
>
> No, they're technology.
So is eugenics.
>
>> Let's get rid of them.
>
> You first.
No way! I love my computer.
Peter Barber
I think you mean "if".
>they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start
> to massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they get
> and how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will some
> drink the koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
>
> When
I think you mean "if"
> agw scientists are publicly seen by everyone for the frauds that
> they are, (Mann, Hansen, etc) will they do what is considered the
> honorable thing by many eastern philosophies? Will they take their
> shame and literally or figuratively remove themselves from this world?
Since you've posted this to alt.atheism (why?), I'll draw an analogy
between AGW and atheism. Atheists sometimes say that they would like
to believe in a god that truly cares for humanity, and who will
reunite us in paradise with our loved ones after we die. We wouldn't
have to worry about natural disasters, war, illness and death, and
would no longer face the task of either finding or creating meaning in
this world. This is more or less what most religions say (when they're
not telling us we're damned for not agreeing with them).
Problem is, the real world doesn't offer any evidence of a god like
this, or of any divine intervention in the universe at all for at
least 13.6 billion years.
The up-side to this is that it motivates us to explore how life could
be better, more fulfilling, rather than just accepting what some
preacher says that some ancient book says. If it turns out one day
that a loving, caring god exists, I suspect he/she would be more
pleased if his creations turned out to have some initiative and an
impulse to look after each other, than if they had killed enough
people over a disagreement about a few sentences in a book.
Similarly, it would be great if the evidence started pouring in that
all the warming trends are artefacts, or that they're explained by
solar activity cycles, that there are robust, negative feedback
mechanisms that keep the climate in check. We'd no longer have to
worry about how we can ensure the survival of our species. This is
what most climate change sceptics say (when they don't simply call us
a load of hippies, eco-terrorists or simply misled by all that secular
science - could you make up your mind which, please?).
Once again, the problem is, there is no evidence that this is the
case. The basic science of climate change is not controversial, even
amongst climate change sceptics. CO2 does absorb in the infra-red,
more CO2 traps more heat, and we are adding more CO2 to the
atmosphere. We know that in the palaeoclimate record, CO2 increase
usually trails temperature increase by several hundred years, but then
there weren't 6.5 billion humans around then, pumping CO2 into the
atmosphere. Even if it wasn't the initial trigger then, it was still
responsible for most of the temperature increase through positive
feedback, and a large CO2 release can itself be the trigger for this
feedback cycle.
The upside of this is that we would derive plenty of ancillary
benefits from all this action that you think is unnecessary. No more
worries about political instability in the Gulf because of all that
renewable energy we generated and reduced car use. Reduced winter
mortality in the elderly through all that insulation. Better health
because we walked and cycled more and cut down on particulate
pollution. Cohesive, viable local communities because we buy local
food and goods wherever possible, and haven't bisected our towns with
motorways. More (and better) support of overseas development because
we're setting a better example, and not demanding that poor countries
compete with each other to grow a few cash crops at unstable prices to
satisfy our demand for cheap food. Et cetera, et cetera.
Do you or the OP really think this vision of the future is so horrific?
Mark K. Bilbo
490ceb2a-c91e-43fb...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
<kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
(Yawn)
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“To die for an idea; it is unquestionably noble.
But how much nobler it would be if men died for
ideas that were true!”
- H. L. Mencken
Thomas
> Do you or the OP really think this vision of the future is so horrific?-
Not me. I live in Ireland I would love some mild winters and even warm
summers. Problem is we have been promised "balmy Irish winters" by the
AGW brigade for about 5 year now and we just got through our coldest,
most frosty and snowy winter in the years. Seems to be happening in
most other countries as well this winter.
So who is taking the piss? People like me who say the AGW stuff is
hysterical hype, or the great AGW minds who are tell me I do not need
a winter coat anymore when I have bought 3 since the first IPCC
report? Maybe if I was a climate change activist jet setting to Bali
to 'save the earth' I might need less winter wear, but that's not my
reality most winters.
There is no proof of either god or global warming. Both are faith
based notions. Forcing AGW dogma on society is just as bad as forcing
religion on them. Without the tangible proof, leave people to insulate
their own homes, install solar panels, change to the horrible CFC
bulbs and drive hybrids if THEY CHOSE TO DO THIS. This should be a
personal choice.
Anyways a western family saving money on energy is fallacy as they
will just spend the money they saved on something else which uses
energy. So the whole concept of saving energy at the micro level is
pointless and it is in reality just transferring energy usage from
your own home to something else. This is not science. This is not
energy conservation. This is not even common sense. It's a feel-good
"eco-confessional" which superficially cleanses the carbon sins.
It's the creepy control-freak nature of the Global Warmers which
pisses me off. I saw the same mentality among the catholic church big-
wigs in this country up until the 1980s. It's the same bullshit and
it's the same folk who are drawn to this notion of using AGW to
control society in the same way the catholic bishops did in the past.
Oh and like the catholic bishops, double-standards and hypocracy
appears to be a concept completely lost on the AGW crusaders. (see jet
setting to Bali in order to tell the rest of us not to fly)
To be honest, I am looking forward to a world were the weather will be
more of less what it has been for hundreds of years with normal
fluctuations and cycles. Because that's what we are getting regardless
of human or divine intervention.
Thomas
> I wonder. When they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start
> to massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they get
> and how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will some
> drink the koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
Are you kidding. It'll implode in a maelstrom of psychotic, meglomanic
and hysterical sureality. Look at how mental that climate scientist
was sobbing in hysterics on the stage (sorry altar) during the Bali
summit. Can you imagine how these crackpots will react when the game
is finally up for them.
There have alreasy been cases of New Age 'Back to Nature' 'Crustie'
groups here in Ireland and the UK, were uncooparative members of the
groups have been murdered. Also a lot of these New Age eco-cults are
used by on the run criminals who change their names to 'Thor' or
'Merlin' and take part in the bullying group dynamic of these sub-
cultures.
Because it is more highly organised and funded, I suspect the AGW
construct will disintergrate in the same way some postal workers in
the USA solve their personal human resources issues with AK 47s.
"going eco" will be come a common phase for some enviormentalist nuts
final act.
Thomas
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
>
> <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> >> Global warming is science.
>
> > So was eugenics.
>
> Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
entire scientific world in its day. It was the "concensus" at the
time, and lo and behold there is a movement within AGW called the
Optimum Population Trust composed of scientists who are demanding that
humans be prevented from breeding accroding to their potential carbon
footprint. The comparision with eugenics is 100% valid.
That's not any different that the old Eurgenics scientists demanding
that genentic defects be removed from the bloodines in order to serve
the common good.
Different brand of science, same fuckwit meglomanic scientists out of
control. AGW in time will prove itself to be the biggest own goal for
science since Eurgenics. .
Mark K. Bilbo
63b13097-61d3-434c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com, Thomas
<kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 7:09 pm, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder. When they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start to
>> massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they get and
>> how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will some drink the
>> koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
>
> Are you kidding. It'll implode in a maelstrom of psychotic, meglomanic
> and hysterical sureality. Look at how mental that climate scientist was
> sobbing in hysterics on the stage (sorry altar) during the Bali summit.
> Can you imagine how these crackpots will react when the game is finally
> up for them.
Ignoring, of course, that ice melts are happening twice as fast as
expected...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"You know what my favorite thing in the world is?
I'll tell you.
Each week, millions and millions of upper middle class American
citizens put on expensive dress clothes, load themselves into
suv's and drive past homeless shelters, orphanages, prisons,
missions and halfway houses on their way to a very expensive
and nice church, where someone tells them to be more like Jesus.
That is fucking awesome, let me tell you."
Mark K. Bilbo
5fe58c6d-abd0-42ab...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com, Thomas
<kfuz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 1:08 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
>> 490ceb2a-c91e-43fb-bbe0-bfc816569...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com,
>> Thomas
>>
>> <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
>> > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>
>> >> Global warming is science.
>>
>> > So was eugenics.
>>
>> Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
>
> Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
> entire scientific world in its day.
I call bullshit.
> It was the "concensus" at the time,
See above.
> and lo and behold there is a movement within AGW called the Optimum
> Population Trust composed of scientists who are demanding that humans be
> prevented from breeding accroding to their potential carbon footprint.
> The comparision with eugenics is 100% valid.
Oh yes, let's use extremists as examples of entire groups, movements, and
what not. This means US Christians are *all* Fred Phelps, all atheists
are Stalin, and all Arabs are bin Laden.
> That's not any different that the old Eurgenics scientists demanding
> that genentic defects be removed from the bloodines in order to serve
> the common good.
>
> Different brand of science, same fuckwit meglomanic scientists out of
> control. AGW in time will prove itself to be the biggest own goal for
> science since Eurgenics. .
"...same fuckwit meglomanic scientists out of control."
Well, for fuck's sake, don't use that computer crap nor get anywhere near
that Interweb thing, it's all by fuckwit megalomaniac out-of-control
scientists.
So are antibiotics!
It's only ignorant twits that can't separate out the science from the
hangers on.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
Let me get this straight: You believe that a cosmic Jewish
zombie who was his own father will let you live forever
if you pretend to eat his flesh, drink his blood, and
telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master,
so he can remove an evil force from your soul that he put
there a long time ago as punishment for all humanity because
a rib-woman made from a dust-man was convinced by a talking
snake to eat fruit from a magical tree.
- Unknown
Tunderbar
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:41:25 -0800 in
>
> <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 7:09 pm, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I wonder. When they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start to
> >> massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they get and
> >> how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will some drink the
> >> koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
>
> > Are you kidding. It'll implode in a maelstrom of psychotic, meglomanic
> > and hysterical sureality. Look at how mental that climate scientist was
> > sobbing in hysterics on the stage (sorry altar) during the Bali summit.
> > Can you imagine how these crackpots will react when the game is finally
> > up for them.
>
> Ignoring, of course, that ice melts are happening twice as fast as
> expected...
Ice melts happen every summer. I don't recall any credible evidence
that that isn't normal. Nor that any observations of accelerated
melting isn't part of the long term cycle. Just because a few nutbars
get shrill over a little ice melt, does not prove anything except that
they are shrill nutbars.
Mann is a fraud. So is Hansen. Al Gore is a court-proven liar. And the
IPCC has been shown to be a bunch of left wing activists with agendas.
The IPCC could only find 215 "scientists" to sign a letter at Bali.
How is that a consensus?
Rich
> Rich said the following on 1/29/2008 9:40 PM:
>> DanielSan wrote:
>>> Thomas said the following on 1/29/2008 4:25 PM:
>>>> On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Global warming is science.
>>>>
>>>> So was eugenics.
>>>
>>> Computers are also science.
>>
>
> So is eugenics.
How so?
>>> Let's get rid of them.
>>
>> You first.
>
> No way! I love my computer.
It was your idea.
Cheers,
Rich
Tunderbar
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:48:34 -0800 in
>
> - Show quoted text -
You realize that you are doing exactly what you claim he is.
"Oh yes, let's use extremists as examples of entire groups, movements,
and what not."
You are putting up extreme strawman arguments to counter his
reasonable points. You lose.
Peter Barber
> On Jan 30, 12:34 pm, Peter Barber <peterbarbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do you or the OP really think this vision of the future is so horrific?-
>
> Not me. I live in Ireland I would love some mild winters and even warm
> summers. Problem is we have been promised "balmy Irish winters" by the
> AGW brigade for about 5 year now and we just got through our coldest,
> most frosty and snowy winter in the years. Seems to be happening in
> most other countries as well this winter.
>
> So who is taking the piss? People like me who say the AGW stuff is
> hysterical hype, or the great AGW minds who are tell me I do not need
> a winter coat anymore when I have bought 3 since the first IPCC
> report? Maybe if I was a climate change activist jet setting to Bali
> to 'save the earth' I might need less winter wear, but that's not my
> reality most winters.
Thanks for replying, and civilly too. I have to admit I wasn't
expecting that - my usenet experience makes me cynical!
I'm sure you've read many replies that are similar to mine - if so, my
apologies for the repetition. You'll just have to be more offensive
next time and I'll leave you alone.
Regarding warm winters: this is why "global warming" is a misleading
term, and "climate change" or even "climate destabilisation" would be
a better term. The climatologists do say that global mean annual
temperature is increasing and will continue to do so over the next
century on current trends. But more heat energy in the atmosphere as a
whole as a result of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) means increase
in extreme weather systems, in general leading to hotter drier summers
and colder wetter winters.
And as for Ireland, remember that for all the cold and rain, it is
several degrees warmer than it should be for its latitude, as a result
of the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation (or "Gulf Stream").
There is good evidence for previous shutdowns of the THC, and the
effects that had on climate in NW Europe. Although you will be
sceptical of this, it is reasonably probable that it will shut down
again in a few hundred years' time as a result of decreased salinity
in Arctic seawater from increased meltwater run-off. Your descendants
will be buying *very* thick coats if that happens!
And as for your recent experience of cold winters, the local
temperature data will have been incorporated into global temperature
datasets, and yet there is still a robust upward trend in global mean
annual temperature. That shouldn't be controversial - if the weather
was so regular and predictable that you could extrapolate local
experience to global means,
there would be no need for weather forecasts. And weather != climate,
as others would say.
> There is no proof of either god or global warming. Both are faith
> based notions. Forcing AGW dogma on society is just as bad as forcing
> religion on them. Without the tangible proof, leave people to insulate
> their own homes, install solar panels, change to the horrible CFC
> bulbs and drive hybrids if THEY CHOSE TO DO THIS. This should be a
> personal choice.
In principle I agree that forcing a radical change on society is bad:
a change in societal behaviour cannot be sustained if the society
feels it is only doing it because it is being told to. But don't you
think governments are more to blame here? Yes, we are being told to
insulate our houses, don't fly, drive smaller and less, buy local, and
install solar panels - but we mainly hear this by politicians who
won't fund energy-efficiency schemes properly, fly and drive
everywhere, set up trade deals with China so we can import all our
clothes, toys and consumer electronics from nearly half-way round the
world while shafting local jobs, and throw our cash at invading a
country that happens to have shit-loads of oil, but not the WMDs they
insisted were there.
But that is not the fault of the scientific community. And I am
mystified that you can say there is no evidence. What fills the
climatology, geology, biology and ecology journals? How come climate
models only work properly when climate sensitivity to CO2 matches
measurements? How come such a large proportion of the experts agree?
And if they've all got it wrong, why should I believe you've got it
right?
> Anyways a western family saving money on energy is fallacy as they
> will just spend the money they saved on something else which uses
> energy. So the whole concept of saving energy at the micro level is
> pointless and it is in reality just transferring energy usage from
> your own home to something else. This is not science. This is not
> energy conservation. This is not even common sense. It's a feel-good
> "eco-confessional" which superficially cleanses the carbon sins.
There you have a point - the so-called "rebound" effect does lead to
people leaving lights on for longer because they're CFL not
incandescents or driving more now that they've bought a Prius.
But just because energy efficiency isn't sufficient, it doesn't follow
that it isn't necessary. Again, the problem is not with the science.
It is with a social and economic system which needs continuous growth
in production and consumption to service the debt which is constantly
created by banks. Works well to stimulate innovation in a system with
infinite resources, but even without climate change to slam the brakes
on production, there is only so much oil, copper or agricultural land
available on this planet.
What the rebound effect demonstrates, simply and effectively, is that
technological fixes do not work in the long term. They are useful (the
carbon intensity of most industrialised economies has indeed decreased
in recent decades), but not the solution (overall CO2 emissions are
still rising despite this). What is needed is a behavioural change,
and a fairly radical change in our economic system so that we do not
have to consume ever-greater amounts of natural resources to be
regarded as useful members of society. And that's a whole other story.
> It's the creepy control-freak nature of the Global Warmers which
> pisses me off. I saw the same mentality among the catholic church big-
> wigs in this country up until the 1980s. It's the same bullshit and
> it's the same folk who are drawn to this notion of using AGW to
> control society in the same way the catholic bishops did in the past.
>
> Oh and like the catholic bishops, double-standards and hypocracy
> appears to be a concept completely lost on the AGW crusaders. (see jet
> setting to Bali in order to tell the rest of us not to fly)
OK, I don't understand why COP-13 was held in Bali, given the perilous
situation of such islands if ACC is happening. It is bad PR. But like
everything else, there is a hell of a lot of inertia in human
behaviour. I suspect most politicians wouldn't have a clue how to set
up a conference call in Skype or iChat, for instance.
As for control-freakery, have a look at www.politicalcompass.org if
you haven't already been there. After seeing where you end up on the
compass (well, it's a grid really), have a look at the grids produced
for various national elections over the last decade (UK, Germany, Aus,
NZ, US). The various Green Parties are always libertarian left, nearly
always the most libertarian parties in their respective elections, and
maintain the most consistent political position over time. In other
words, dyed-in-the-wool social liberals.
I'm not denying that there are authoritarians who recognise the fear
value of climate chaos to get what they want from us, but
authoritarian Greens are few and far between. It just doesn't fit well
into the Green political philosophy of non-violence, radical
devolvement of political power to the local level.
And I sympathise with you about the Catholic Church's abuse of its
excessive power over Irish cultural life - but I fail to see the
parallel here with ACC. There is no priesthood that I'm aware of. The
orthodoxy itself becomes heterodox as science advances and
experimental methods improve. You might regard insulating one's house
or buying green energy as a ritual, but then why isn't fixing dripping
taps or cleaning one's house frequently?
> To be honest, I am looking forward to a world were the weather will be
> more of less what it has been for hundreds of years with normal
> fluctuations and cycles. Because that's what we are getting regardless
> of human or divine intervention.
Well, I've tried. Of course there are climate cycles, shorter and
longer; of course there are cold snaps. I think the climatologists are
aware of them and have already made allowances for their effects -
they'd look extremely silly if not. And sometimes scientists make
mistakes. Occasionally it's even the sceptics who point it out - as in
the case of Steve MacIntyre pointing out odd jumps in NASA data from
some North American weather stations between 1999 and 2000:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all-that/
No-one is hounding him down. NASA GISS thanked him for alerting them,
investigated the cause, and corrected the data within a week (not that
it made a difference to global trends, but it was still good he
mentioned it). If there is fraud or conspiracy, they're being very
subtle.
Anyway, I've spent far too long typing this! Must... stop... now...
Tom Gardner
"Jayaprakash" <jayap...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fb962055-32bb-44b9...@f10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
They AREN'T working to protect the environment! I've done more for the
environment than 99% of the AGW folks and I can PROVE it! Get you head out of
the sand and see the scam.
Tom Gardner
Then quit trying to grab money and power! All the AGW folks do is detract from
fighting REAL pollution and REAL energy problems. Take the "WE ARE GOING TO
COLLAPSE EVERY ECONOMY AND MAKE YOU ALL LIVE IN CAVES!" out of your rant and
people would be less antagonized.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote:Then quit trying to grab money and power! All the AGW folks do
is detract from fighting REAL pollution and REAL energy problems.
Take the "WE ARE GOING TO COLLAPSE EVERY ECONOMY AND MAKE YOU ALL
LIVE IN CAVES!" out of your rant and people would be less
antagonized."
never had it, so you are creating another straw man in expressing your
weak opinions, now you could (i emphasize could) take the bs out of
your posts if you wanted to have any sort of meaningful statement, but
then you would be posting nothing at all. So based on your actions i
don't really care what you think, and i know you have an over inflated
opinion of yourself, that's ok just turn the monitor off, stare and
the reflection and you will see the only one who holds such a high
opinion of you is yourself....
Lloyd
> On Jan 30, 1:08 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
> > 490ceb2a-c91e-43fb-bbe0-bfc816569...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
>
> > <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> > >> Global warming is science.
>
> > > So was eugenics.
>
> > Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
>
> Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
"Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of
human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention."
wikipedia
Tom Gardner
Oh, brother! Don't forget, I dismiss your arrogant, sophomoric opinions as
easily as you dismiss my insightful, benevolent wisdom.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation" <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com>
>
> - Show quoted text -
laughing, you throw (lame and weak) attempts at insults at other
people, and then you characterize your actions as benevolent, man you
are way too full of yourself as your words are laced with antagonism
and not kindness, which demonstrates your above words are hypocritical
in nature, but don't worry I would never expect you to admit it as you
have shown to be your own best supporter...
Bill Ward
>> science since Eugenics. .
>
> "...same fuckwit meglomanic scientists out of control."
>
> Well, for fuck's sake, don't use that computer crap nor get anywhere near
> that Interweb thing, it's all by fuckwit megalomaniac out-of-control
> scientists.
>
> So are antibiotics!
>
>
> It's only ignorant twits that can't separate out the science from the
> hangers on.
That's truer than you realize. Here's a reference to the eugenics
movement. There were enough followers to lead to a lot of grief in the
30's and 40's.
http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/1920s/Eugenics/default.html
I see certain similarities to believers in the current AGW movement. The
"science" behind eugenics was also thought to be settled, but not for long.
Tom Gardner
You take yourself much too seriously. Sing a few choruses of Kumbaya and you'll
feel better!
Mark K. Bilbo
32ce9fdc-c5d1-406b...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com,
Tunderbar <tdco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 8:14 am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:41:25 -0800 in
>> 63b13097-61d3-434c-9b7f-cd765261a...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com,
>> Thomas
>>
>> <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
>> > On Jan 29, 7:09 pm, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> I wonder. When they finally see their fraudulent agw construct start
>> >> to massively disintegrate before their eyes, how shrill will they
>> >> get and how far will they go to get attention and be heard. Will
>> >> some drink the koolaide to prove that their beliefs are/were "true"?
>>
>> > Are you kidding. It'll implode in a maelstrom of psychotic,
>> > meglomanic and hysterical sureality. Look at how mental that climate
>> > scientist was sobbing in hysterics on the stage (sorry altar) during
>> > the Bali summit. Can you imagine how these crackpots will react when
>> > the game is finally up for them.
>>
>> Ignoring, of course, that ice melts are happening twice as fast as
>> expected...
>
> Ice melts happen every summer. I don't recall any credible evidence that
> that isn't normal. Nor that any observations of accelerated melting
> isn't part of the long term cycle.
Isn't that nice? We'll still have the problems but we can make fun of Al
Gore. That'll help.
> Just because a few nutbars get shrill
> over a little ice melt, does not prove anything except that they are
> shrill nutbars.
>
> Mann is a fraud. So is Hansen. Al Gore is a court-proven liar. And the
> IPCC has been shown to be a bunch of left wing activists with agendas.
>
> The IPCC could only find 215 "scientists" to sign a letter at Bali. How
> is that a consensus?
"Only"
I like that.
So, tell me, what do surveys of peer reviewed journals have to say on the
matter of whether there's consensus?
You *do* know right?
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“I confess I enjoy democracy immensely.
It is incomparably idiotic, and hence incomparably amusing.”
- H. L. Mencken
Mark K. Bilbo
e94be03e-24f9-465c...@q77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
Tunderbar <tdco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You realize that you are doing exactly what you claim he is.
Lessee, how do I put this?
DUH.
(Sheesh)
> "Oh yes, let's use extremists as examples of entire groups, movements,
> and what not."
>
> You are putting up extreme strawman arguments to counter his reasonable
> points. You lose.
Oh no! I *lost*! On the Interwebs! Oh, woe! I am bereft. I am
inconsolable!
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“The alms-giver, in return for a trifling expenditure
on this earth, will be rewarded with an infinity of bliss
post-mortem. This purely selfish note is struck with
great clarity by Judaism, and only less clearly by
Christianity....religion has not really promoted charity,
but debased it.”
- H. L. Mencken
Mark K. Bilbo
pan.2008.01.30....@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com, Bill Ward
<bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
There was no science behind eugenics. The "comparison" is mere smear
tactic.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is
fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable.
What he wants above everything else is safety.”
- H. L. Mencken
Bawana
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:32:23 -0800 in
>
>
>
> <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:19:06 -0600, Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:48:34 -0800 in
Sure there was, tard.
They were on to something...
if the "knuckle-dragging-lib-turd-gene" is ever discovered, I'm all
for eugenics.
> The "comparison" is mere smear tactic.
It's an accurate comparison of consensus science, tard.
DanielSan
> DanielSan wrote:
>> Rich said the following on 1/29/2008 9:40 PM:
>>> DanielSan wrote:
>>>> Thomas said the following on 1/29/2008 4:25 PM:
>>>>> On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Global warming is science.
>>>>>
>>>>> So was eugenics.
>>>>
>>>> Computers are also science.
>>>
>>> No, they're a technology.
>>
>> So is eugenics.
>
> How so?
Well, I figured if someone can smear with eugenics, I can smear right back.
>
>>>> Let's get rid of them.
>>>
>>> You first.
>>
>> No way! I love my computer.
>
> It was your idea.
Nope. Not my idea to get rid of technology or science. It was whomever
linked eugenics to GW (and, by extension, the fight against it).
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
Cary Kittrell
> On Jan 30, 1:08=A0pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
> > 490ceb2a-c91e-43fb-bbe0-bfc816569...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
> >
> > <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> >
> > >> Global warming is science.
> >
> > > So was eugenics.
> >
> > Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
>
> Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
> entire scientific world in its day.
Still is. I don't know of anyone who is against genetic counseling
of couples who have some probability of producing kids with
genetic defects. Think Tay-Sachs.
Forced eugenics, on the other hand, is a political and
social decision, and has nothing more to do with
scientific consensus than the use of chlorine gas
in WWI implied the support of all chemists.
-- cary
Bill Ward
And that's what they'll be saying about AGW in a few years.
Mark K. Bilbo
323f43f2-0867-41e8...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com, Bawana
<mrbaw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oh go back to your sandbox.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"As a tactic for a short-run defense of the independent Christian
school movement, the appeal to religious liberty is legitimate.
Everyone who is attempting to impose a world-and-life view on
a majority (or on a ruling minority) always uses some version
of the liberty doctrine to buy himself and his movement some time,
some organizational freedom, and some power. Still, nobody
really believes in the whole idea."
-- Gary North in "Failure of the American Baptist Culture"
Mark K. Bilbo
pan.2008.01.31....@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com, Bill Ward
<bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
Except they won't.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“...The only really respectable Protestants are the
Fundamentalists. Unfortunately, they are also palpable idiots...”
- H. L. Mencken
Wexford
> On Jan 30, 1:08 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
> > 490ceb2a-c91e-43fb-bbe0-bfc816569...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
>
> > <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> > >> Global warming is science.
>
> > > So was eugenics.
>
> > Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
????????????????
> Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
> entire scientific world in its day. It was the "concensus" at the
> time, and lo and behold there is a movement within AGW called the
> Optimum Population Trust composed of scientists who are demanding that
> humans be prevented from breeding accroding to their potential carbon
> footprint. The comparision with eugenics is 100% valid.
Eugenics was a movement of crackpots. Period. It was never "accepted"
by anyone save for a clutch of racists.
> That's not any different that the old Eurgenics scientists demanding
> that genentic defects be removed from the bloodines in order to serve
> the common good.
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with Global Warming.
>
> Different brand of science, same fuckwit meglomanic scientists out of
> control. AGW in time will prove itself to be the biggest own goal for
> science since Eurgenics. .
OK, asshole, but tell us this, in what way do we suffer if we find
ways to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, preserve the earth, and
make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
available. Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
Warming is a real threat.
Tghe only maniacs I see are the fuckwits who oppose the evidence for
Global Warming because (1) Al Gore is involved, (2) It's a "Liberal"
thing, and (3) I have a right to despoil the earth if I want to.
Wexford
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:19:06 -0600, Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:48:34 -0800 in
Eugenics was the product of crackpots and racists. The crackpots and
racists of today are all on the Neo-con side, firmly opposed to
anything that would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, make our
equipment more efficient, or preserve the enviornment.
Wexford
> In article <5fe58c6d-abd0-42ab-ac99-a00db93c0...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> Thomas <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> writes:
>
> > On Jan 30, 1:08=A0pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:36 -0800 in
> > > 490ceb2a-c91e-43fb-bbe0-bfc816569...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com, Thomas
>
> > > <kfuzz...@tinet.ie> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 29, 11:57 pm, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
>
> > > >> Global warming is science.
>
> > > > So was eugenics.
>
> > > Oh my, argument by absurd smears, that's persuasive.
>
> > Eugenics was a real scientific movement completely accepted by the
> > entire scientific world in its day.
?????
> Still is. I don't know of anyone who is against genetic counseling
> of couples who have some probability of producing kids with
> genetic defects. Think Tay-Sachs.
Genetic counseling isn't Eugenics. Warning individuals about the
possibility of Tay-Sachs, or any of a hundred other potential
hereditary disorders, is simply practicing good medicine. Eugenics is
a crackpot movement that fosters improvement of the human race through
selective breeding.
>
> Forced eugenics, on the other hand, is a political and
> social decision, and has nothing more to do with
> scientific consensus than the use of chlorine gas
> in WWI implied the support of all chemists.
It's a political and social delusion. Even in its heyday, thoughtful
scientists opposed Eugenics (even in Hitler's Germany) with the
pragmatic argument that restricting the reproduction of the mentally
retarded might create more social problems than it solves. Without
people of lower intellectual ability there would be no one to do the
necessary dirty jobs that keep a city running or a farming community
viable.
Talk-n-Dog
(1)If Al Gore is involved it's likely a lie, as he and Bill Clinton are
closer than you may think.
(2)Liberals can't understand freedom. It's a mental block.
(3)I am suppose to have the freedoms and rights to do what doesn't
interfere with anyone else's freedoms and rights. (While my fist and
your face can occupy the same space.... it would be wrong to allow that
to happen at the same time.)
--
http://DOGi-pedia.Talk-n-Dog.com
********* Koom-Bay-Ya *********
Elect Hillary and she can over see another Waco.
DanielSan
Clinton Derangement Syndrome?
>
> (2)Liberals can't understand freedom. It's a mental block.
>
Err, no. Liberals understand freedom.
> (3)I am suppose to have the freedoms and rights to do what doesn't
> interfere with anyone else's freedoms and rights. (While my fist and
> your face can occupy the same space.... it would be wrong to allow that
> to happen at the same time.)
You liberal...
Bawana
Now, there's something new from the "never had an original idea in
your whole pathetic life", retard.
That's been talked about since Jimmy Carter.
All you tards do is talk and tax.
> preserve the earth, and
> make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
> available.
Now, there's something new from the "never had an original idea in
your whole pathetic life", retard.
That's been talked about since Tesla, tard.
Science hit a brick wall or are they just waiting for government funds
to make their breakthroughs?
> Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
> Warming is a real threat.
Taxing the air we breath will harm us non parasites, you left-turd
retard.
Non-productive left-turds will be unaffected.
Bawana
That would describe the current left-wing-co2agw- tards.
Bawana
> Without
> people of lower intellectual ability there would be no one to do the
> necessary dirty jobs that keep a city running or a farming community
> viable.
Or to vote demonkrap.
DanielSan
Trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability" crowd there, Bawana?
Bawana
> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 9:26 AM:
>
> > On Jan 31, 11:45 am, Wexford <wrya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Without
> >> people of lower intellectual ability there would be no one to do the
> >> necessary dirty jobs that keep a city running or a farming community
> >> viable.
>
> > Or to vote demonkrap.
>
> Trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability" crowd there, Bawana?
Nuh, I'd never vote demonkrap.
DanielSan
You're still trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability"
crowd, though, with your childishness. Do grow up and try to shed your
DDS in your future posts; it makes you look idiotic.
Kenny McCormack
Wexford <wry...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>OK, asshole, but tell us this, in what way do we suffer if we find
>ways to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, preserve the earth, and
>make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
>available. Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
>Warming is a real threat.
Well, for one thing, people who bought into oil futures in the $90s,
expecting them to go above and stay above $100. Those people will
suffer greatly if oil becomes less essential to life as we know it.
You wouldn't want that on your conscience, would you?
Wexford
wrote:
Hell of trick to get a few thousand earth scientists to agree to the
lie.
> (2)Liberals can't understand freedom. It's a mental block.
"Liberals???" It's the Neo-cons who want to tap phones, censor your
books, TV and Movies, and sniff your sheets, not Liberals. It's the
Neo-cons who want to run up the debt and put us in a position of
servicing the Chinese and Japanese with interest payments for the next
century.
> (3)I am suppose to have the freedoms and rights to do what doesn't
> interfere with anyone else's freedoms and rights. (While my fist and
> your face can occupy the same space.... it would be wrong to allow that
> to happen at the same time.)
Yeah, but if your car belches effluents that make me cough and shorten
my life, aren't you intruding on my freedom? If your laziness and
filth causes the deaths of native animals, ruins habitats and destroys
the natural enviornment, aren't you intruding my freedom to live and
enjoy the earth?
You still haven't answered the question. What harm do we derive from
lowering our dependence on foreign oil, by finding alternative methods
of producing energy, by making our machinery mroe efficient? What
harm? If the Global Warming people are right, then what't he
consequence of not taking any action?
Kenny McCormack
Wexford <wry...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>You still haven't answered the question. What harm do we derive from
>lowering our dependence on foreign oil, by finding alternative methods
>of producing energy, by making our machinery mroe efficient? What
>harm? If the Global Warming people are right, then what't he
>consequence of not taking any action?
I know I'm not the 'you' to whom you are writing, but I answered this
question ("What harm does it do...?") in a previous post.
That answer may sound facetious, but it isn't.
Wexford
>
> > OK, asshole, but tell us this, in what way do we suffer if we find
> > ways to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,
>
> Now, there's something new from the "never had an original idea in
> your whole pathetic life", retard.
> That's been talked about since Jimmy Carter.
> All you tards do is talk and tax.
Can't answer the question? By the way, CAFE standards and other
methods have made our enegy usage considerably more efficient. We
could do one hell of a lot better if the grafters in the Republican
party hadn't opposed every measure to increase mileage standards and
develop alternative energy soruces.
> > preserve the earth, and
> > make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
> > available.
>
> Now, there's something new from the "never had an original idea in
> your whole pathetic life", retard.
> That's been talked about since Tesla, tard.
> Science hit a brick wall or are they just waiting for government funds
> to make their breakthroughs?
No brick wall, just assholes like you who are so stuck in their own
excrement they don't want to move or can't move.
> > Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
> > Warming is a real threat.
>
> Taxing the air we breath will harm us non parasites, you left-turd
> retard.
> Non-productive left-turds will be unaffected.
Can't answer can you? Poor little you. Now leave the computer alone.
The kid in line behind you has homework to do.
Wexford
wrote:
> In article <204707f6-a983-43ea-9841-89678afa5...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,Wexford <wrya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> >OK, asshole, but tell us this, in what way do we suffer if we find
> >ways to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, preserve the earth, and
> >make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
> >available. Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
> >Warming is a real threat.
>
> Well, for one thing, people who bought into oil futures in the $90s,
> expecting them to go above and stay above $100. Those people will
> suffer greatly if oil becomes less essential to life as we know it.
>
> You wouldn't want that on your conscience, would you?
I don't know how I would sleep at nights. By the way, I don't know of
futures contract that goes out 17-18 years, but if there is one, I
wouldn't weep for the people who dumped money on it.
Mark K. Bilbo
vknoj.69508$N67....@bignews5.bellsouth.net, Talk-n-Dog
<@http://dogi-pedia.talk-n-dog.com@> wrote:
> (3)I am suppose to have the freedoms and rights to do what doesn't
> interfere with anyone else's freedoms and rights.
Polluting the planet that isn't yours personally *IS* interfering with
others.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
Mark K. Bilbo
Pity poor Exxon-Mobile, their profits didn't break $10 billion last time
round...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not good or real... I'm evil, and imaginary.
-- Karen Walker
Bawana
Bawana
Non sequitur, retard.
There are already emission standards.
If "a car belches effluents that make you cough and shorten your
life", tough shit, stay home.
Bawana
Just did, you pathetic "never had an original idea in your whole
pathetic life" retard.
> By the way, CAFE standards and other
> methods have made our enegy usage considerably more efficient. We
> could do one hell of a lot better if the grafters in the Republican
> party hadn't opposed every measure to increase mileage standards and
> develop alternative energy soruces.
Oh, it's the republicans...you pathetic "never had an original idea in
your whole pathetic life" retard?
> > > preserve the earth, and
> > > make energy cheaper (because of better efficiencies) and more
> > > available.
>
> > Now, there's something new from the "never had an original idea in
> > your whole pathetic life", retard.
> > That's been talked about since Tesla, tard.
> > Science hit a brick wall or are they just waiting for government funds
> > to make their breakthroughs?
>
> No brick wall, just assholes like you who are so stuck in their own
> excrement they don't want to move or can't move.
From a pathetic "never had an original idea in your whole pathetic
life" retard
> > > Tell us one thing that will harm us if we act as if Global
> > > Warming is a real threat.
>
> > Taxing the air we breath will harm us non parasites, you left-turd
> > retard.
> > Non-productive left-turds will be unaffected.
>
> Can't answer can you?
Just did, you pathetic "never had an original idea in your whole
pathetic life" retard.
Talk-n-Dog
Clinton started that one with the simultaneous million line phone Tap
system. But then FDR did worse during WWII.... There needs to be a
sunset clause on Bush or Clinton when anyone votes to pass legislation
like that.
I'm for freedom so you won't catch me defending Congress or Bush or
Clinton on this. You still don't get it do you? Actually I would like
to see a Sunset Amendment put in the bill of rights for all laws. This
would cause the law makers to spend time voting to reinstate the needed
laws and no time to pas stupid new laws.
>> books, TV and Movies, and sniff your sheets, not Liberals. It's the
>> Neo-cons who want to run up the debt and put us in a position of
>> servicing the Chinese and Japanese with interest payments for the next
>> century.
>>
>>> (3)I am suppose to have the freedoms and rights to do what doesn't
>>> interfere with anyone else's freedoms and rights. (While my fist and
>>> your face can occupy the same space.... it would be wrong to allow that
>>> to happen at the same time.)
>> Yeah, but if your car belches effluents that make me cough and shorten
>> my life, aren't you intruding on my freedom?
>
Send me your car title and I'll burn yours in the fire with mine.
> Non sequitur, retard.
> There are already emission standards.
> If "a car belches effluents that make you cough and shorten your
> life", tough shit, stay home.
--
http://DOGi-pedia.Talk-n-Dog.com
********* Koom-Bay-Ya *********
Liberals just want to control the environment like they want to control
everyones lives, through manipulation and taxes.
Bill Ward
You have a strange, content-free, way of attempting to rebut evidence.
Has it ever convinced anyone?
Bill Ward
If you read the link, you'll see eugenics was pretty much mainstream. The
science was arguably somewhat better based than the AGW hypothesis, but
the "solution" was just as inhumane.
Bill Ward
My point, exactly.
DanielSan
So, can't reply to the full text and must comment out-of-context and
must, therefore, cowardly snip out the things you can't respond to?
How unsurprising.
Bawana
> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 4:13 PM:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 31, 1:02 pm, DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 9:55 AM:
>
> >>> On Jan 31, 12:33 pm, DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 9:26 AM:
> >>>>> On Jan 31, 11:45 am, Wexford <wrya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Without
> >>>>>> people of lower intellectual ability there would be no one to do the
> >>>>>> necessary dirty jobs that keep a city running or a farming community
> >>>>>> viable.
> >>>>> Or to vote demonkrap.
> >>>> Trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability" crowd there, Bawana?
> >>> Nuh, I'd never vote demonkrap.
> >> You're still trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability"
>
> > Nuh, I'd never vote demonkrap.
>
> So, can't reply to the full text and must comment out-of-context and
> must, therefore, cowardly snip out the things you can't respond to?
I replied to your retarded retort, shit for brains.
You make no sense, tard.
DanielSan
No, you replied to PART of my retort. Your "demonkrap" childishness
doesn't fly with me. Nor does "retarded" as an insult, "shit for
brains" or "tard" (as below).
> You make no sense, tard.
Oh, do grow up. Your Democratic Derangement Syndrome is infantile and
has no place in an adult discussion.
..."demonkrap"...really. How old are you?
Bawana
> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 7:37 PM:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 31, 9:57 pm, DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 4:13 PM:
>
> >>> On Jan 31, 1:02 pm, DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 9:55 AM:
> >>>>> On Jan 31, 12:33 pm, DanielSan <danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Bawana said the following on 1/31/2008 9:26 AM:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 31, 11:45 am, Wexford <wrya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Without
> >>>>>>>> people of lower intellectual ability there would be no one to do the
> >>>>>>>> necessary dirty jobs that keep a city running or a farming community
> >>>>>>>> viable.
> >>>>>>> Or to vote demonkrap.
> >>>>>> Trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability" crowd there, Bawana?
> >>>>> Nuh, I'd never vote demonkrap.
> >>>> You're still trying to horn in on the "lower intellectual ability"
> >>> Nuh, I'd never vote demonkrap.
> >> So, can't reply to the full text and must comment out-of-context and
> >> must, therefore, cowardly snip out the things you can't respond to?
>
> > I replied to your retarded retort, shit for brains.
>
> No, you replied to PART of my retort.
I have a solution for you, little tardboy:
Go cry to yo' momma,
"Mommy, mommy, da mean man only replied to PART of my retarded
retort!"
> > You make no sense, tard.
>
> Oh, do grow up.
That won't change the fact that you make no sense, tard.
Now,go vote demonkrap with the rest of your "lower intellectual
ability" crowd.
DanielSan
Childish moron.
>
>>> You make no sense, tard.
>> Oh, do grow up.
>
> That won't change the fact that you make no sense, tard.
> Now,go vote demonkrap with the rest of your "lower intellectual
> ability" crowd.
> I'd never vote demonkrap.
>
How old are you?
Mark K. Bilbo
pan.2008.02.01....@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com, Bill Ward
<bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
I have no interest in trying to "convince" idiots. The science is in
widely available peer reviewed journals. If people are too willfully
stupid to learn, there's nothing I can do about it.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“...The only really respectable Protestants are the
Fundamentalists. Unfortunately, they are also palpable idiots...”
- H. L. Mencken
Bawana
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:40:06 -0800 in
>
>
>
> <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:49:24 -0600, Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:55:07 -0800 in
> >> <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:10:13 -0600, Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>
> >>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:32:23 -0800 in
> >>>> <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:19:06 -0600, Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:48:34 -0800 in
There is no need to "convince" idiots.
Your socialist cult demonkrap comrades are already idiots and never
need convincing...
they just need to know what is the latest party line...
any absurdity will be ingested then regurgitated.
Bawana
That won't change the fact that you make no sense, tard.
DanielSan
If you grew up, you'd understand it.
> Now,go vote demonkrap with the rest of your "lower intellectual
> ability" crowd.
> I'd never vote demonkrap.
I don't vote "demonkrap".
Bawana
I understand just fine, you left-turd-cult- malignant-never had an
original thought in your whole pathetic life- narcissist retard.
Now, bark like a dog!
I never vote demonkrap.
Dazzle us with another "child" lamer, fucktard.
I'm sure some of your peer group, the "lower intellectual ability"
crowd and assorted gorons, will giggle.
Bill Ward
First you said there was "no science" behind eugenics, then you say "the
science" is widely available. That seems to be a contradiction. It's a
good thing you're not interested in convincing anyone. Must be your AGWer
training.