[OT] Copenhagen / climate change
Matt C
Choice of three.
1. It's not actually happening.
2. We're not responsible.
3. We're responsible
So:
1. No sense worrying about it then.
2. Better get some plans in place to live with it then.
3. Y'know what? Fuck it. We're NEVER gonna change, and you know all those
other places, like China and India? They want the same things we've already
got, like TVs, central heating, air conditioning, cars, PCs, low infant
mortality etc. We're not gonna give them up, who the fuck gave us the right
to say they can't have them? And the population keeps going up, in every
country. And they all want a decent standard of living. So.
Get used to the idea. Work out how to live with the results. And you know
those middle-of-the-pacific countries? FUCK THEM. I don't fucking live
there, why the fuck should I pay for them?
Use the money to fix our countries, to get ready for the effects of global
warming ourselves - secure fuel, food and water and deal with fucked up
weather, rising tides and blah blah blah.
Assholes in government are latching on to this idea that we should all give
two shits about the environment. Which is great - we all do. As long as :
1. We don't have to pay anything towards it
2. We ignore the fact (like we do) that no-one else gives a fuck
3. Nothing changes.
When my dad was a kid, he ate seasonal fruit and veg, i.e. he'd only eat
cabbage 3 months a year cos that's all that grew. There was a tradition of
getting an orange or a tangerine in your Christmas stocking cos they were
luxury goods - your parents could only afford to buy them once a fucking
year.
FUCK THAT RIGHT IN THE ASS.
Next: the Conservative Party: actively campaigning to take away your
rights.
smcdaniel1
"Matt C" <no...@noway.jose> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE6B647463...@69.16.176.253...
> Yes, I am drunk. Don't remember asking.
>
> Choice of three.
> 1. It's not actually happening.
> 2. We're not responsible.
> 3. We're responsible
>
<snippage>
Not sure where this comes into BH's Escalation League, but I'll play along:
Fact: Most Global Warming "Scientists" have been using Anglia's data as
benchmark
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Global Warming "Research Grants" make up a great deal of a lot of
Universities budgets
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Anglia destroyed the original data
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Russia Secretly kept it
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Anglia used data (that it modified through computer models* to achieve
the desired results)
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Russia found through it's studies of the data, that Anglia destroyed,
that 40% of Russia was not taken into account
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Anglia's chief climate researcher has stepped down in the wake of the
"Climategate" scandal
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Anglia favored temperature research stations that had been recently
moved
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: These stations were mostly moved from rural to urban areas which
naturally would be warmer
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Humans have caused some warming when the effects of clearing trees for
farms and building cities are taken into effect
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: That means that the actual climate raise in temperature (on land) is
about 1/2 of what the Global Warming Neanderthals have
been telling you
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: This data is only from the last 150 years or so
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: The global temperature has been steady for a decade
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: The Global Warming Neanderthals have been claiming for 20 (Not ten)
years that sea levels would be "Fifteen feet higher if we don't act NOW!"
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact Sea levels have not risen globally
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Most of these Global Warming "Scientists" used Anglia's modified,
computer modeled data
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: It's all a lie to make people rich off of Co2
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Co2 is what plants need as nutrition
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: Plants then create Oxygen out of the ingested Co2
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: That oxygen then mixes with the hydrogen in our atmosphere to give us
air
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: That palmy smarmy fag that the brits call a "Prince" is a poofter
("I've listened to the wisdom of aboriginal peoples...")#
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: The response from the Global Warming Buffoons: "There's record cold
temperatures around the world because of... (stay with me...) GLOBAL
WARMING! You just don't understand the science."
FOLLOW THE BRAINLESS HORDE
Fact: Secretary of State for the US response: "Have a hundred billion
dollars a year"
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fact: US president flies into Dulles airport during record snowfall after
leaving Global Warming Conference where China refused to send any higher
dignitary than the vice foreign minister. Though later they did send to
Obama's demands: "Three low level delegates" To which the leader of the
nation that is now trillions of dollars in debt to China replied: "It would
be nice to negotiate with somebody who can make political decisions."
FOLLOW THE IDIOT
Reported (Not known to be fact): Obama then threw himself on the floor and
rolled around back and forth screaming "BUT I AM GOD!!!! DON'T YOU KNOW
THAT???? Chris Mathews gets tingly in his nether regions when he hears me
speak!! I AM GOD!!! I had a temple built for me!"
*Skewed by human programmers to report what their bosses wanted reported
# Shut the fuck up and wipe your own ears off you layabout piece of shit.
Get a job.
Need more? Or are you just going to go read Salon magazine or the New york
Times and cry in your beer?
FOLLOW THE MONEY
--
Sir Scott "Save me a shot of 151... " McDaniel
Phil Bowles
> "Matt C" <n...@noway.jose> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9CE6B647463...@69.16.176.253...> Yes, I am drunk. Don't remember asking.
>
> > Choice of three.
> > 1. It's not actually happening.
> > 2. We're not responsible.
> > 3. We're responsible
>
> <snippage>
>
> Not sure where this comes into BH's Escalation League, but I'll play along:
>
> Fact: Most Global Warming "Scientists" have been using Anglia's data as
> benchmark
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
> Fact: Global Warming "Research Grants" make up a great deal of a lot of
> Universities budgets
Always loved this logic - think of all the profit the universities
must be making spending all that research money on completely
unnecessary equipment and research overheads!
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
> Fact: It's all a lie to make people rich off of Co2
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
> Fact: Co2 is what plants need as nutrition
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
> Fact: Plants then create Oxygen out of the ingested Co2
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
> Fact: That oxygen then mixes with the hydrogen in our atmosphere to give us
> air
Hehe. I wonder how many of the people being lampooned here will
actually get this. Should we just sit around waiting for them to drown
in air?
Phil
Blackheart
> Need more? Or are you just going to go read Salon magazine or the New york
> Times and cry in your beer?
> FOLLOW THE MONEY
I think it's more like...
Fact: We don't really know what is or is not affecting the long term
climate.
Fact: We do know that humans pollute terrible.
Fact: There's a swirling mass of Garbage in the pacific ocean that
makes some former members of this NG look pleasant by comparison.
Fact: China doesn't care about it's own people, much less anyone
elses.
Possible: Maybe we should change some things?
smcdaniel1
"Blackheart" <blackhear...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e616975c-401f-4e14...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 19, 3:26 pm, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Need more? Or are you just going to go read Salon magazine or the New
>> york
>> Times and cry in your beer?
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>I think it's more like...
>Fact: We don't really know what is or is not affecting the long term
>climate.
Stipulated (See my previous post)
>Fact: We do know that humans pollute terrible.
Presumptive. But perhaps if we give Al Gore money it will go away
FOLLOW THE MONEY
>Fact: There's a swirling mass of Garbage in the pacific ocean that
>makes some former members of this NG look pleasant by comparison.
No money in it: Non-sequitor
>Fact: China doesn't care about it's own people, much less anyone
>elses.
They care a great deal about the trillions of dollars the USA owes them. A
great deal. Oh, did I mention?
FOLLOW THE MONEY
>Possible: Maybe we should change some things?
By paying someone money? By having exorbitant taxes levied?
FOLLOW THE FUCKING MONEY!!!
smcdaniel1
"Phil Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4472f2e3-f283-4f9a...@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On 19 Dec, 20:26, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
>> "Matt C" <n...@noway.jose> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Xns9CE6B647463...@69.16.176.253...> Yes, I am drunk.
>> Don't remember asking.
>>
>> > Choice of three.
>> > 1. It's not actually happening.
>> > 2. We're not responsible.
>> > 3. We're responsible
>>
>> <snippage>
>>
>> Not sure where this comes into BH's Escalation League, but I'll play
>> along:
>>
>> Fact: Most Global Warming "Scientists" have been using Anglia's data as
>> benchmark
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: Global Warming "Research Grants" make up a great deal of a lot of
>> Universities budgets
>
> Always loved this logic - think of all the profit the universities
> must be making spending all that research money on completely
> unnecessary equipment and research overheads!
You can't fund a ballet class on what it would generate in revenues. But you
can sure fund one on the overheads from a "Global Warming" grant!
>
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: It's all a lie to make people rich off of Co2
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: Co2 is what plants need as nutrition
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: Plants then create Oxygen out of the ingested Co2
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: That oxygen then mixes with the hydrogen in our atmosphere to give
>> us
>> air
>
> Hehe. I wonder how many of the people being lampooned here will
> actually get this. Should we just sit around waiting for them to drown
> in air?
>
Lulz.
--
Sir Scott "Jealous... " McDaniel
Playa
Hey,
On Dec 19, 12:55 pm, Matt C <n...@noway.jose> wrote:
> I am drunk
Cheers!
> Choice of three
No fair! I want at least one ...
> 1. It's not actually happening.
> 2. We're not responsible.
> 3. We're responsible
4. We haven't learned from all the previous Chicken Littles of
academe.
Flash back a few years:
Little children and small puppies might be melted into goo by "acid
rain"!
Then, Mt St Helens spewed a million TONS of SO2 in one day, and ... no
goo.
Before that, scholarly statistical projections PROVED that global
famine was imminent.
Before that, a humanity-threatening Ice Age was as inevitable as grant
money running out.
These Chickens may all have been innocent of malicious intent, but
that doesn't matter.
What matters is who is harmed - if only financially - by their fear-
mongering hysteria.
American energy producers spent BILLIONS on SO2 scrubbers "for the
children".
And, presumably, the puppies.
Climategate exists because the IPCC Chickens were busted cooking the
books.
I think Mr. McDaniel may have suggested following the money on
this ...
ALL of the IPCC results are now suspect - a criminal waste of funds.
The punchline?
Turns out SO2 is Nature's way of slowing trends toward greenhouse gas
accumulation:
"In recent studies, we found that decreasing the sulfur dioxide
emissions led to significant
regional warming in North America, Europe and Asia", said Michael
Schlesinger,
professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Illinois.
"Thus it appears that mitigation of the acid-rain problem by future
reductions in sulfur dioxide
emissions exacerbates the greenhouse-warming problem by enhancing the
warming in and
near the regions where the sulfur dioxide emissions are reduced", he
said.
Punchline x2: Schlesinger bases his opinion on IPCC data . . .
Pla - following the money in a dizzying circle - ya
smcdaniel1
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13b9f9d2-bbaa-4899...@g7g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Hey,
On Dec 19, 12:55 pm, Matt C <n...@noway.jose> wrote:
>> I am drunk
>Cheers!
Wish I was... But choke one down for me.
>> Choice of three
>No fair! I want at least one ...
>> 1. It's not actually happening.
>> 2. We're not responsible.
.> 3. We're responsible
>4. We haven't learned from all the previous Chicken Littles of
>academe.
>Flash back a few years:
>Little children and small puppies might be melted into goo by "acid
>rain"!
>Then, Mt St Helens spewed a million TONS of SO2 in one day, and ... no
>goo.
>Before that, scholarly statistical projections PROVED that global
>famine was imminent.
Acid rain...My dear, dear friend I had completely forgotten about you. But
let's not forget the SEA LEVELS!!!!
And my private jets.
>Before that, a humanity-threatening Ice Age was as inevitable as grant
>money running out.
Non-sequitor. Grant money lasts for infinity.
>These Chickens may all have been innocent of malicious intent, but
>that doesn't matter.
>What matters is who is harmed - if only financially - by their fear-
>mongering hysteria.
"He played on our fears!"
>American energy producers spent BILLIONS on SO2 scrubbers "for the
>children".
>And, presumably, the puppies.
I still drink straight malathion...when I can find it.
>Climategate exists because the IPCC Chickens were busted cooking the
>books.
>I think Mr. McDaniel may have suggested following the money on
>this ...
Was I too subtle?
>ALL of the IPCC results are now suspect - a criminal waste of funds.
>The punchline?
>Turns out SO2 is Nature's way of slowing trends toward greenhouse gas
>accumulation:
>"In recent studies, we found that decreasing the sulfur dioxide
>emissions led to significant
>regional warming in North America, Europe and Asia", said Michael
>Schlesinger,
>professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Illinois.
>"Thus it appears that mitigation of the acid-rain problem by future
>reductions in sulfur dioxide
>emissions exacerbates the greenhouse-warming problem by enhancing the
>warming in and
>near the regions where the sulfur dioxide emissions are reduced", he
>said.
>Punchline x2: Schlesinger bases his opinion on IPCC data . . .
I left in the rest of the post so that the few dismayed readers may wake up
and smell the fucking napalm.
It is my contention that by following a financial traverse we may find that
this was somewhat of a "Black Eye" on our little corner of academe. Pish
Posh. Won't happen again.
Until the next time a bunch of stupid idiots think that the evening news
has truth
(Pssst. Ever heard of Imelt, GE, faulty wind turbines, hundreds of BILLIONS
of $ from the "Stimulus"?)
Don't get me started.
--
Sir Scott "Gullible fuck fucking fuck fucks... " McDaniel
Doctor Rock
"Matt C" <no...@noway.jose> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE6B647463...@69.16.176.253...
> Yes, I am drunk. Don't remember asking.
>
> Choice of three.
> 1. It's not actually happening.
> 2. We're not responsible.
> 3. We're responsible
>
> So:
> 1. No sense worrying about it then.
> 2. Better get some plans in place to live with it then.
> 3. Y'know what? Fuck it. We're NEVER gonna change, and you know all those
> other places, like China and India? They want the same things we've
> already
> got, like TVs, central heating, air conditioning, cars, PCs, low infant
> mortality etc. We're not gonna give them up, who the fuck gave us the
> right
> to say they can't have them?
i think the point you've missed is that there are BETTER ways of getting
said things, and maybe we ought to be looking into those instead of
expecting the human world to somehow run on dead dinosaurs forever.
> Get used to the idea. Work out how to live with the results. And you know
> those middle-of-the-pacific countries? FUCK THEM. I don't fucking live
> there, why the fuck should I pay for them?
too late for that, i'm afraid. rhetorically, i concur... but you know Real
Life(TM)? that whole global economy thing we're all symbiotic with now?
yeah: not so simple anymore. the fact that we even have the choice you
allude to-- HOW we're going to spend our money, both individually and as
states-- is to a large extent dependent on our economic dynamics with
precisely the kind of countries you're referring to. we can't AFFORD to let
them collapse, whether we give a shit about their human inhabitants or not.
> Assholes in government are latching on to this idea that we should all
> give
> two shits about the environment.
assholes in government are doing what assholes in government have always
done: trying to ensure that it will remain easy to be an asshole in
government for the foreseeable future. they've simply woken up to the fact
that unless they address the consequences of climate change ASAP, their
asshole government institutions probably won't SURVIVE the fallout.
Doctor Rock
"Phil Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4472f2e3-f283-4f9a...@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>> "Matt C" <n...@noway.jose> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Xns9CE6B647463...@69.16.176.253...> Yes, I am drunk.
>> Don't remember asking.
>>
>> > Choice of three.
>> > 1. It's not actually happening.
>> > 2. We're not responsible.
>> > 3. We're responsible
>>
>> <snippage>
>>
>> Not sure where this comes into BH's Escalation League, but I'll play
>> along:
>>
>> Fact: Most Global Warming "Scientists" have been using Anglia's data as
>> benchmark
>> FOLLOW THE MONEY
>> Fact: Global Warming "Research Grants" make up a great deal of a lot of
>> Universities budgets
>
> Always loved this logic - think of all the profit the universities
> must be making spending all that research money on completely
> unnecessary equipment and research overheads!
yeah, it's predicated on the idea that research grants somehow settle in
someone's bank account, which i find pretty amusing. as if somewhere
there's an ivorytowerful of professors rubbing their hands together in
usurious glee and cackling "wowee zowee, look at all this money we've been
given to upgrade the computers (again this year) and sponsor a bunch more
grad students! WE SURE HIT THE BIG TIME HERE FELLAS"
smcdaniel1
--
Sir Scott " " McDaniel
"Doctor Rock" <mal...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ZVkXm.87300$2u1....@newsfe16.ams2...
Funny that you would address that ironically. Where does THE MONEY go?
Wake up motherfuckers, wake up. They lie in the truth. X2
How do you think universities pay for "Humanities" . Hugo Chavez would be
proud of you.
FOLLOW THE MONEY. MONEY. MONEY.
Fucking wake up.
Blackheart
> "Blackheart" <blackheart666_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
come on McD... you know me better than that. You should know that next
step should be: "The systematic elimination of 75% of the worlds
population. Starting with Ohio, Florida and France..."
and no.. I can't follow the money.. I have to work for a living...
Matt C
>
> come on McD... you know me better than that. You should know that next
> step should be: "The systematic elimination of 75% of the worlds
> population. Starting with Ohio, Florida and France..."
>
> and no.. I can't follow the money.. I have to work for a living...
>
By my calculations (which I made up) we only need to shed around a third of
the world's population, preferably by nuclear means, in the developing
world, far enough away from Europe that the fall out won't affect us to a
serious extent.
That's why I'm engineering trouble between China and India.
smcdaniel1
"Matt C" <no...@noway.jose> wrote in message
news:Xns9CE8E80E739...@69.16.176.253...
> >snip<
>
>>
>> come on McD... you know me better than that. You should know that next
>> step should be: "The systematic elimination of 75% of the worlds
>> population. Starting with Ohio, Florida and France..."
>>
>> and no.. I can't follow the money.. I have to work for a living...
>>
>
Too bad. Now your money is gone. John Holdren thanks you for the 1/9th of
the tank in his personal jet you filled up with your taxes. Haven't heard of
Holdren? Look him up
> By my calculations (which I made up) we only need to shed around a third
> of
> the world's population, preferably by nuclear means, in the developing
> world, far enough away from Europe that the fall out won't affect us to a
> serious extent.
Speaking of Holdren... Oh, didn't you hear?
He works for that fascist Obama. Enjoy your slavery... OR ELSE!
>
> That's why I'm engineering trouble between China and India.
>
It'll be India and Pakistan. I'll take that bet.
--
Sir Scott "Just...fuck... " McDaniel
Doctor Rock
"Matt C" <no...@noway.jose> wrote in message
i'll tell you what DOES piss me off--
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8425720.stm
yes, Miliband is a bloviating shitcricket who has a lot of fucking nerve
mouthing off after having proven HIMSELF such an unmitigated waste of space,
but apart from that:
'The aim, she said, was "to shirk responsibilities that should be assumed
towards developing countries, and to provoke discord among developing
countries".'
bitch, please. now it's OUR responsiblity that one of the most
efficiently-centralised governments on the planet can't get its own shit
together WRT its excess population and execrable pollution record?? at
least the Americans got the feeble excuse that their government has no
effective authority.
Matt C
>
>>
>> That's why I'm engineering trouble between China and India.
>>
>
> It'll be India and Pakistan. I'll take that bet.
>
China.
Bigger population, more nukes. The fallout from India will deal with
Pakistan.
Blackheart
> "Matt C" <n...@noway.jose> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9CE8E80E739...@69.16.176.253...
>
> > >snip<
>
> >> come on McD... you know me better than that. You should know that next
> >> step should be: "The systematic elimination of 75% of the worlds
> >> population. Starting with Ohio, Florida and France..."
>
> >> and no.. I can't follow the money.. I have to work for a living...
>
> Too bad. Now your money is gone. John Holdren thanks you for the 1/9th of
> the tank in his personal jet you filled up with your taxes. Haven't heard of
> Holdren? Look him up
>
my money was gone because of my ex-wife....
> > By my calculations (which I made up) we only need to shed around a third
> > of
> > the world's population, preferably by nuclear means, in the developing
> > world, far enough away from Europe that the fall out won't affect us to a
> > serious extent.
>
> Speaking of Holdren... Oh, didn't you hear?
> He works for that fascist Obama. Enjoy your slavery... OR ELSE!
>
Obama is a lot of things... But he's not a fascist... or black...
smcdaniel1
--
Sir Scott " " McDaniel
"Doctor Rock" <mal...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:GO_Xm.87915$iW.6...@newsfe30.ams2...
Testify, Brother Al...Testify. The problem over here is that (1) they are
ignoring the fact that they don't have the authority and (2) they are
ignorant of the fact that they don't have the authority. Both paths end in
the same conclusion.
End of Line.
Playa
Hey,
On Dec 22, 2:28 pm, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
> End of Line.
Flashback to April 1992, the beginning - we are told - of the End
Times.
Scientists worldwide issue the Heidelberg Appeal:
"We ... forewarn the authorities in charge of our planet's destiny
against decisions which are supported by pseudo-scientific argument or
false and non-relevant data."
Since then, 4,000 scientists and 72 Nobel Prize winners have signed
on.
+++
Fave Hopenhagen shakedown maneuver so far:
Zenawi [of Ethiopia] said [Africa] would accept $30 billion in the
short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020.
Any prior U.S. diplomat would have laughed in this con artist's face.
Instead, Team Obama is already ponying-up.
Runner-up:
U.S. AgSec Vilsack pledged $1 billion to developing countries who
preserve their forests.
Yes, $12 trillion in debt and facing a second straight $1.4 trillion
deficit, the U.S. will now borrow another $1 billion from China to
send to Brazil if they will just promise to stop cutting down their
own trees.
Pla - VRWC - ya
smcdaniel1
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:abc13ab6-aba1-4aa6...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Hey,
On Dec 22, 2:28 pm, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
> End of Line.
>Flashback to April 1992, the beginning - we are told - of the End
>Times.
>Scientists worldwide issue the Heidelberg Appeal:
>"We ... forewarn the authorities in charge of our planet's destiny
>against decisions which are supported by pseudo-scientific argument or
>false and non-relevant data."
>Since then, 4,000 scientists and 72 Nobel Prize winners have signed
>on.
+++
>Fave Hopenhagen shakedown maneuver so far:
>Zenawi [of Ethiopia] said [Africa] would accept $30 billion in the
>short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020.
>Any prior U.S. diplomat would have laughed in this con artist's face.
>Instead, Team Obama is already ponying-up.
$100 billion a year. That's $100 billion. BILLION. Are you getting it yet?
Follow that money, fools.
>Runner-up:
>U.S. AgSec Vilsack pledged $1 billion to developing countries who
>preserve their forests.
>Yes, $12 trillion in debt and facing a second straight $1.4 trillion
>deficit, the U.S. will now borrow another $1 billion from China to
>send to Brazil if they will just promise to stop cutting down their
>own trees.
And there are some who say "Who cares what the chinese think?" Not knowing
who OWNS THEM!
Voted: Best post EVAH!
End of line (Truly)...
Matt C
>
>>Fave Hopenhagen shakedown maneuver so far:
>
>>Zenawi [of Ethiopia] said [Africa] would accept $30 billion in the
>>short term, rising to $100 billion by 2020.
>>Any prior U.S. diplomat would have laughed in this con artist's face.
>>Instead, Team Obama is already ponying-up.
>
> $100 billion a year. That's $100 billion. BILLION. Are you getting it
> yet? Follow that money, fools.
>
>>Runner-up:
>
>>U.S. AgSec Vilsack pledged $1 billion to developing countries who
>>preserve their forests.
>>Yes, $12 trillion in debt and facing a second straight $1.4 trillion
>>deficit, the U.S. will now borrow another $1 billion from China to
>>send to Brazil if they will just promise to stop cutting down their
>>own trees.
>
> And there are some who say "Who cares what the chinese think?" Not
> knowing who OWNS THEM!
>
> Voted: Best post EVAH!
>
> End of line (Truly)...
>
>
>
Hey, I didn't get a Christmas tree this year cos I'm too skint.
Saved a tree right there. How much do I get ?
Yes: turn your telly off instead of leaving it on standby.
Yes: Lower your heating by 5 degrees
Yes: get decent insulation on your house
You will not save the planet, but you will save yourself a few quid.
What are we paying Ethiopia for?
NOT to develop?
So.... what are they gonna spend all that money on?
And what exactly are we gonna do if they spend a chunk of it on coal
fired power stations?
you know the next time some natural disaster hits the USA - hurricane,
drought, freeze, whatever.
How much would $30 billion help that?
Maybe have prevented it?
How about if it doesn't, but we in the UK get to suffer anyway cos the
USA has $30 billion less to invest?
We're already suffering cutbacks cos the banking fuckup drained a bunch
of money out of our economy, and it's gonna get worse.
Like I said at the start: we should look after ourselves first.
Charity begins at home.
Always taken as a good thing, but what it actually means is: if you have
nothing for yourself, you have nothing to give to others. When you have
enough for yourself and yours, you should help others. But when you
don't...
At some point, the human population will reach the limit that the planet
as a whole can support. That number goes up every year, as we develop
better fertilisers, weedkillers, genetically better more productive
strains.
But there's still a top limit, and one day we're gonna pass it like a
rocket.
On that day, don't you hope your cupboards are full ?
Blackheart
> On that day, don't you hope your cupboards are full ?
water will be an issue before food.
luckily Asia and Africa will solve multiple problems at that point in
time by doing what those people do best...
kill each other.
Doctor Rock
"Matt C" <no...@noway.jose> wrote in message
> >big snip<
>>
> What are we paying Ethiopia for?
> NOT to develop?
well, to develop how we tell them to, basically
> So.... what are they gonna spend all that money on?
> And what exactly are we gonna do if they spend a chunk of it on coal
> fired power stations?
this is why ALL "international aid" checks for any "cause" need to be
accompanied by auditors and subject to a one-strike rule. this is the same
reason why i won't give money to Oxfam: 90%+ of it winds up in the pockets
of provincial warlords, either via "operating expenses" (i.e. bribes) from
the charities themselves, or afterwards via "contributions" (i.e. extortion)
from the people who're supposed to be using it to sink wells or whatever.
> you know the next time some natural disaster hits the USA - hurricane,
> drought, freeze, whatever.
> How much would $30 billion help that?
> Maybe have prevented it?
well, the point isn't that the USA is short of the odd $30 billion (and you
can't PREVENT natural disasters anyways, only mitigate the consequences).
the point is whether that $30 billion in aid to Africa is actually serving
the interests of US taxpayers, on the long run, by reducing emissions from
African countries. we get fuck all guarantee or even qualification of that
under the current system, because once the money is handed over we have no
control over where it gets spent.
> At some point, the human population will reach the limit that the planet
> as a whole can support. That number goes up every year, as we develop
> better fertilisers, weedkillers, genetically better more productive
> strains.
> But there's still a top limit, and one day we're gonna pass it like a
> rocket.
>
> On that day, don't you hope your cupboards are full ?
feh, the shit will hit the fan in terms of social breakdown LONG before
population levels get anywhere near some theoretical biomass-limit. what
geographers call the 'lands of first choice' are already overcrowded far
beyond the point of sustainability; have been since the mid-19th century in
most cases. America is certainly the only western nation left where that
isn't yet the case (Australia has very little margin for expanded land-based
sufficiency due to the relative scarcity of agricultural land in comparison
with urban development--as with everywhere else, the latter continues to
increase far more rapidly than the productivity of the former, no matter how
many new weedkillers or GM crops you throw at it).
Richard Busby
> What are we paying Ethiopia for?
> NOT to develop?
> So.... what are they gonna spend all that money on?
My guess would be AK-47s, RPGs and Claymores. But that's just a guess.
They might buy Hummers. You know, the 4 wheeled kind.
> And what exactly are we gonna do if they spend a chunk of it on coal
> fired power stations?
Eat my hat. They won't get that far.
> How about if it doesn't, but we in the UK get to suffer anyway cos the
> USA has $30 billion less to invest?
Ding-ding-ding-ding... we have a winner. Just replace "World" with "UK".
> We're already suffering cutbacks cos the greedy banking tychoons drained a bunch
> of money out of the world economy, and it's gonna get worse.
There... fixed it for you.
> Always taken as a good thing, but what it actually means is: if you have
> nothing for yourself, you have nothing to give to others. When you have
> enough for yourself and yours, you should help others. But when you
> don't...
Hey we are only 12 TRILLION in debt. We got lots of paper and can print
all we need. What, me worry?!?
> At some point, the human population will reach the limit that the planet
> as a whole can support. That number goes up every year, as we develop
> better fertilisers, weedkillers, genetically better more productive
> strains.
Don't forget cracker making technology.
> But there's still a top limit, and one day we're gonna pass it like a
> rocket.
>
> On that day, don't you hope your cupboards are full ?
Tw