online dating service

Free Dating Site    

REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES
Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest 100% free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  > Global Warming's New 'Consensus'      Mod Threads Home login  
Page 5 of 6 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 Author Thread: Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
 Bayotle

Joined: 4/21/2008
Msg: 101
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 6/15/2008 10:05:40 PM
Reading most of the posts this would be one of the more interesting topics to get involved in but short of all the reading, special programming, Al Gore's movie and then the rebuttal movie. I don't think I'm qualified to make an opinion. Short of doing ones own analysis, both can't be right so who do you actually trust? My expertise isn't global warming so I’m far from being qualified to make an opinion… That being said though, even if Global warming isn’t factual isn’t it still a better path to take care of what we have, conserve for future generations and plan accordingly?
 zentral

Joined: 10/30/2005
Msg: 102
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 6/16/2008 9:37:37 AM
At this point, I really don't care about the opinions of individuals without extensive scientific training and expertise in this area. They're entitled to their uninformed opinions based on ignorance, wishful thinking, or whatever other justification they wish to use. I also don't care about the relatively few scientists who disagree with global warming - they may be in the employ of or funded by an energy company, their results may be biased by political influence, or they may even be sincere, legitimate skeptics.

However, the concensus of the vast majority of legitimate scientists is that global warming is real, and it's highly likely caused by human activity. Even if by chance the second part of that statement isn't completely correct, reducing human emission of greenhouse gases will help reduce the impact if there are natural mechanisms happening.

Essentially, at this point it's a no-brainer: do something to reduce greenhouse gases or suffer the consequences of global climate change. Those consequences will cost far more than the cost of taking action to reduce the amount of warming, however painful it may be to make the necessary changes.
 nefarious101

Joined: 7/25/2007
Msg: 103
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 6/16/2008 10:54:05 AM
“It is simply unacceptable for information this biased and misleading to be taught in public schools,” said Dr. Brent Blackwelder, President of Friends of the Earth, which today launched a campaign to pressure publisher Houghton Mifflin to revise the textbook. “It’s the equivalent of a history textbook saying the jury’s still out on whether there was ever a moon landing, or whether the earth is flat. Global warming is a matter of fact, not opinion, and it must be taught as such.”

http://action.foe.org/pressRelease.jsp?press_release_KEY=358&t=2007_PRESS.dwt

April 09, 2008

For Immediate Release

For more information contact:
Nick Berning, 202-222-0748

Houghton Mifflin’s ‘American Government’ downplays threat posed by global warming, misleads on science; top climatologists, environmentalists respond

WASHINGTON, D.C.—A textbook used in high school government courses across the country has come under fire from scientists and environmentalists for its misleading approach to global warming.

The textbook, “American Government,” presents basic facts as matters of debate—leaving students with the misconception that there is no scientific consensus about human contributions to global warming when in fact a strong consensus exists. The textbook also dramatically downplays the threats global warming poses.

“It is simply unacceptable for information this biased and misleading to be taught in public schools,” said Dr. Brent Blackwelder, President of Friends of the Earth, which today launched a campaign to pressure publisher Houghton Mifflin to revise the textbook. “It’s the equivalent of a history textbook saying the jury’s still out on whether there was ever a moon landing, or whether the earth is flat. Global warming is a matter of fact, not opinion, and it must be taught as such.”

The book has come under fire on a variety of fronts. After New Jersey high school student Matthew LaClair called the passages to their attention, two of the world’s most prominent climate scientists, Dr. James Hansen and Dr. Michael MacCracken, sent letters to the publisher (here and here) asking that the book’s inaccuracies be corrected. The pro-science group The Center for Inquiry has released a detailed report (here) on the book’s myriad biases, which extend beyond global warming. And Friends of the Earth has launched an e-mail campaign asking activists to contact Houghton Mifflin and demand revisions.

Among the more outrageous passages in the textbook’s most recent edition:

• "It is a foolish politician who today opposes environmentalism. And that creates a problem, because not all environmental issues are equally deserving of support. Take the case of global warming." (p. 559)
• "The earth has become warmer, but is this mostly the result of natural climate changes, or is it heavily influenced by humans putting greenhouse gases into the air?" (p.559)
• "On the one hand, a warmer globe will cause sea levels to rise, threatening coastal communities; on the other hand, greater warmth will make it easier and cheaper to grow crops and avoid high heating bills." (p. 559)
• "But many other problems are much less clear-cut. Science doesn't know how bad the green-house effect is." (p. 566)


The book was authored by a prominent conservative, James Q. Wilson, who is affiliated with the right-wing American Enterprise Institute—which has received oil industry funding, and by John DiIulio, who served as director of faith-based initiatives in the George W. Bush White House.

Friends of the Earth and the other involved groups are calling on Houghton Mifflin to immediately send a corrective addendum to schools, and ensure that the corrections are included in the next edition of the textbook when it’s published.
 ThymeKiller

Joined: 2/1/2008
Msg: 104
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 6/16/2008 2:29:03 PM
It's Politically Correct to say the observed global warming is caused by humans, although it's not a proven fact.

I don't object to controlling carbon emissions. But what I strenuously object to is people claiming that the discussion is over. That is tantamount to fasciscm.

I object to name calling, claiming someone is ignorant or stupid because they have to be convinced by facts and not models.

The statement that we experiencing the fastest rise in temperature in human history is false and can't be proven. Attempts to prove such a statement is where the science isn't mature enough to prove or dis-prove.

We may disagree but I look at the raw data behind the studies, I look at the analysis and the summaries. Not because I'm a skeptic but because I like science and I dislike politicians and activists redefining science. It's to the point where scientists are bound by what's PC and their studies are resummarised by beauracrats. That's not science that's orthodoxy.

Galileo was in the minority.
 nicebluiz

Joined: 5/23/2006
Msg: 105
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 6/23/2008 1:49:54 PM
Artful Codger, in re: msg. 12

1,006 is more scientists than utilized by the IPCC, of whom some are such things as biologists, botanists, and others to explain "impacts." According to the IPCC's February, 2007, press release accompanying the AR-4 Summary for Policymakers, the IPCC consists of about 600 scientists, 600 expert reviewers, and 1300 bureaucrats (their word, not mine). Next time somebody (like Laurie David--An Inconvenient Truth's producer) says that there's a verified document signed by 2500 scientists, you now know this person is telling (or parroting) a falsehood.
 nefarious101

Joined: 7/25/2007
Msg: 106
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 6:48:43 AM
http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm

Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

"Considerable presence" of skeptics


The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution."


The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method."


According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, "in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low."

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain's Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth's recent warming. "In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth."
 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 107
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 1:28:45 PM
IMO.....
The "global warming" myth is coming apart at the seams . From just the general public , I get the impression that more and more people are saying "the emperor has no clothes! "
As every day passes , more and more people from every walk of life are rebelling against the totalitarian nature of those who promote this socialist nonsense . The global warming agenda promotion was just way too agressive , not to mention that their theory is arcane and obscure at best.
It will be interesting to watch this thing play out .
Although , it's a shame that people could not expend their energies in a much more productive way.

Global warming advocates might want to jump off their sinking ship?
 get_mad_baby

Joined: 4/9/2005
Msg: 108
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 10:17:47 PM
Coming apart by those who keep repeating that it's a myth, and ignoring peer reviewed science. But, these same people can look at fossils and convince themselves that they're 6,000 years old.

Look, we're taking millions of barrels of oil from under the ground, burning it, and making carbon dioxide. And millions of cattle on factory farms are producing methane. Now, to think that human's can't impact the globe in a short amount of time is naive. Remember all the CFC's that put a hole in the ozone? That was us. We humans did that.
 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 109
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 10:52:02 PM

Coming apart by those who keep repeating that it's a myth, and ignoring peer reviewed science. But, these same people can look at fossils and convince themselves that they're 6,000 years old.

Look, we're taking millions of barrels of oil from under the ground, burning it, and making carbon dioxide. And millions of cattle on factory farms are producing methane. Now, to think that human's can't impact the globe in a short amount of time is naive. Remember all the CFC's that put a hole in the ozone? That was us. We humans did that.

^ IMO .....bunk .

IMO.....the ship is sinking and you are free to go down with the ship.
 CharlesEdm

Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 110
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 10:59:08 PM

As every day passes , more and more people from every walk of life are rebelling against the totalitarian nature of those who promote this socialist nonsense . The global warming agenda promotion was just way too agressive , not to mention that their theory is arcane and obscure at best.


Totalitarian is where ideology bends science, religion, and fact to its own purpose. Global climate change as described by scientists is not a "political" issue, it has become a political issue due to totalitarian elements within the Republican party, and the fascistic strain within Christianity. For further evidence on this, see Republican opposition to such widespread theories as evolution, and discussion of HIV/AIDS prevention, which reject science in favor of Dogma.
 get_mad_baby

Joined: 4/9/2005
Msg: 111
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 11:06:47 PM

IMO .....bunk

That's just your opinion. But, you're not educated enough, or not able to grasp the concept the mechanics, so the knowledge is lost on you, then all you have left is your opinion. Or what you're told to think by corporate owned mouthpieces.

Look at this, in one hand, you have mountians of evidence, collected all over the world, reviewed and studied by people who are much smarter than you and I are. And in the other hand you have heads of polluting corporations, such as oil companies, car companies, and the oil man president, who is in the back pocket of big oil, saying that all this peer reviewed science, which is not refuted in the scientific community, but only by businesses, and you're siding with the business.
 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 112
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 11:08:23 PM
Global climate change as described by scientists is not a "political" issue


^




see Republican opposition to such widespread theories as evolution

Wow , I didn't know this was a party platform and frankly I could not care less .
But , take note of your accurate word "theories" . It's significant.


That's just your opinion. But, you're not educated enough, or not able to grasp the concept the mechanics, so the knowledge is lost on you, then all you have left is your opinion. Or what you're told to think by corporate owned mouthpieces.

I'm going to educate you ....
Corporations control your government and government funds "global warming" research..
Now , with this in mind , do some thinking.


Look at this, in one hand, you have mountians of evidence, collected all over the world, reviewed and studied by people who are much smarter than you and I are.

Smart people know who is buttering their bread.
 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 113
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/18/2008 11:28:16 PM

And in the other hand you have heads of polluting corporations, such as oil companies, car companies, and the oil man president, who is in the back pocket of big oil, saying that all this peer reviewed science, which is not refuted in the scientific community, but only by businesses, and you're siding with the business.


If your scenario were true , we would never have heard of the g.w. myth.

In a not very round about way .... corporations are government.
Corporations are not opposed to the global warming agenda . Corporations are owned and run by the people who basically run the government . These people rule your world because they know how to manipulate you . It's what they do . It's why they are doing the ruling and you and I are not.
 CharlesEdm

Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 114
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/19/2008 1:09:50 AM

Wow , I didn't know this was a party platform and frankly I could not care less .
But , take note of your accurate word "theories" . It's significant.


I don't believe you. Also, maybe you should look up scientific theory before leveling that criticism.


I'm going to educate you ....
Corporations control your government and government funds "global warming" research..
Now , with this in mind , do some thinking.


Wonderful disconnect, on one hand you believe that global climate change has a socialist political bent, but on the other hand you believe that corporations are responsible for it. Which is odd, considering the history of corporations in respect to their support for socialist movements.

A lack of scientific understanding of basic terminology such a "theory" combined with conspiracy minded thinking probably makes having this sort of conversation completely pointless.

In all scientific arguments, such as Evolution, Global warming, cell theory, germ theory, ect. The statement "it's just a theory" is a good way to instantly be disqualified in terms of being taken seriously.
 MaxBialystock

Joined: 7/18/2006
Msg: 115
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/19/2008 8:39:41 AM
Looks like someone at Physics & Society will get fired, probably Jeff Marque. The "scientific paper" by Monckton, basically repeating a lot of junk science debunked ages ago, had not undergone peer review at all! If you download the July 2008 issue, you will find a comment before the "paper" by Monckton, in which it is stated:


This article has not undergone any scientific peer review. Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions.


Of course the right wing bloggers have been parotting this paper loudly since it came out, and I'm pretty sure it will keep getting referenced as all the rest of the junk science. After all, the right wingers on this site keep referencing debunked junk science.

This is very embarrassing for APS. From what I've read, it's probably the editor (Jeff Marque) who for some reason thought it was a great idea to let Monckton publish without peer-review (Monckton's junk science would never have passed peer-review). You can also almost smell Inhofe's presence in the whole thing through the statement that:


The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”


Which is kind of odd considering that the editor represents one of 39 groups in APS, and that the APS actually has stated as an entity that:


National Policy
07.1 CLIMATE CHANGE
Email | Print

(Adopted by Council on November 18, 2007)

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.
 nicebluiz

Joined: 5/23/2006
Msg: 116
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/19/2008 11:06:00 AM
Actually, Max, the disclaimer on the Monckton "paper" says that the Council of the APS disagrees with it's conclusions. What the article that referenced that paper says is that APS may be re-apraising that position on global warming. Much of what Monckton says is actually up to date and found in the peer-reviewed literature, not stuff long debunked.
 DAVE632

Joined: 6/17/2006
Msg: 117
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 11:36:54 AM
W/O reading each and every post .... the Earth has had at least SEVEN Ice Ages. Between ice ages, ferns grew in the Arctic & Antarctic and water covered most of the Great Plains - the Gulf of Mexico stretched north into Saskatchewan. Stating (as GORE does) that the last 8 years are the warmest in Earth's history is complete and utter BULL. If in the past there were NO ICE CAPS my uneducated GUESS is it was warmer than the last 8 years here, OK? Make sense? Ya. NO SUV's to blame. On the other side of gloBULL cooloing & warming during the Ice Ages places like Toronto and Berlin were under 15, 000 FEET of ICE. Those years were probably colder than when, 20 years ago, other idiots like Gore were predicting another ICE AGE!!

They came. They went. Weather cycles, I mean. NOT idiots. They're ALWAYS around. Cycles caused by what? Mostly solar activity. Possibly some by volcanic activity or even algeal blooms - who knows? The geological records are a bit murky going back that far.

Do we clean up our act on this planet. Absolutely. Do we blame the industrialized nations for something the sun is doing? Sure you do. And you set up a company that "sells" carbon credits from rich industrialized nations to poor nations. It does sweet diddly as far as emission go but hey AL's (GORE) worth $100 million today and he was worth $2M when he left politics. YOU decide which one of us is the cleverer of the two.

The KYOTO Accord is a way to divest huge sums of money away from the developed world to the 3rd world. It is a communist idea dreamed up by one of Chretien's (EX PM of Canuckistan) henchmen now living in Beijing. BTW Chretien signed the Kyoto Accord because he is part of POWER CORP (his daughter is married to the owner's son) and POWER CORP knew that North American power production would be severely curtailed by Kyoto so they invested in NON-Kyoto limited companies in China. For 14 YEARS the Liberals ignored their Kyoto "commitments". As soon as the Conservatives got in they and the media started HOWLING at the lack of commitment the Harper gov't was showing in regard to meeting CO2 cutbacks etc etc. Idiots!
 childofgodus

Joined: 4/22/2007
Msg: 118
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 11:46:01 AM
lots of big words , . look at ice and paint it black from pollutoin it will melt . simple. look at were this world dusting comes from . us .
 DAVE632

Joined: 6/17/2006
Msg: 119
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 12:30:04 PM
""look at were this world dusting comes from . us . ""

Again, sadly typical of the "Warmers". DUST comes from plowed fields, from roads and mostly from hundreds of MILLIONS of SQ kilometers of desert all over the planet. Whenever the wind blows across a desert - DUST. TONS of it gets picked up, carried and some ends up high in the atmosphere. Dust / ASH from volcanoes produce more paticulants in one eruption than most of the industrialized nations do in a year. Haven't you seen photos of approaching dust storms? Did WE do that? How many cars driving fast up a dirt road outside Witchita does it take to duplicate a Sahara dust storm that lasts days or weeks and can lay down enough dust and sand to bury cities???

Don't get me wrong. I do think the human race is THE most destructive infestation this planet has ever had the misfortune of evolving on but making dumb statements like that simply blows credibility when something more serious needs to be dealt with. For many the whole issue of gloBULL warming has been reduced to nonsense because only a little actual research shows much of what he's claiming as science is complete fabrication. Not ALL of it but enough to blow his credibility and that doesn't help the cause of cleaning up our act at all.
 printer2

Joined: 6/19/2007
Msg: 120
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 12:53:53 PM
from http://www.aps.org/


An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.




.... the Earth has had at least SEVEN Ice Ages. Between ice ages, ferns grew in the Arctic & Antarctic and water covered most of the Great Plains - the Gulf of Mexico stretched north into Saskatchewan.

Yes we had some changes in our climate over the years. The big question is how quickly has these changes taken place? Life will go on on the earth if the worst happens but a lot of what we have now will be gone.
 jack-d-ripper

Joined: 2/25/2008
Msg: 121
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 1:04:28 PM

The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming.






APS Climate Change Statement APS Position Remains Unchanged

The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:

"Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."


National Policy
07.1 CLIMATE CHANGE

(Adopted by Council on November 18, 2007)

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms. The APS also urges governments, universities, national laboratories and its membership to support policies and actions that will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.
 sanderick

Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 122
view profile
History
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/20/2008 1:21:08 PM
They have tried to call it Global Warming, but the only problem is that is not what is happening. So, the name is now changed to Global Climate change.

Apparently, when the Earth Warms, the call it Global Warming

When the earth Cools, they call it Global Warming.

So, "Global Warming" doesn't work as a definition anymore.

All the politics of fear to get you to buy more Cardon Credits from Al Gore's "Green" companies.

Apparently, "Green" to Al Gore, doesn't mean saving the earth, but lining his pockets.

Typical Fear Mongering done to shove a myth down your throat.

 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 123
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/22/2008 10:29:04 PM

The KYOTO Accord is a way to divest huge sums of money away from the developed world to the 3rd world. It is a communist idea dreamed up by one of Chretien's (EX PM of Canuckistan) henchmen now living in Beijing. BTW Chretien signed the Kyoto Accord because he is part of POWER CORP (his daughter is married to the owner's son) and POWER CORP knew that North American power production would be severely curtailed by Kyoto so they invested in NON-Kyoto limited companies in China. For 14 YEARS the Liberals ignored their Kyoto "commitments". As soon as the Conservatives got in they and the media started HOWLING at the lack of commitment the Harper gov't was showing in regard to meeting CO2 cutbacks etc etc. Idiots!


Yes , g.w. is a global socialist strategy , communism is very much alive and well and teaming with millions of useful idiots ....



http://www.rense.com/general12/gobie.htm


Gorbachev is generally thought of in a postive way. After all, didn't he end Communism and isn't he promoting democracy and the saving of the environment? Gorbachev is a very charismatic personality and has U.S. officials, along with the public, eating out of his hand. Let me share with you some of his quotes and plans for the future of the world.

The following is a quote from Gary Kah's book " The New World Religion". " Among those at the forefront of this movement( Globalization) there is one individual who stands out more than any other. Believed by many to have fallen from the political scene with the collapse of the Soviet Union, he currently wields more power and influence in shaping the future of the world than perhaps any diplomat of our generation. Yet strangely, most of us are not even aware of his influence, let alone that he has risen to the top of the one world movement. His keen sense of timing and political prowess has enabled him to forge alliances where others before him have failed. His friends include many of the world's most adept politicians, financial powerbrokers and religious leaders. The person of whom I am speaking is Mikhail Gorbachev.



In 1989 Gorbachev was quoted speaking to the Politburo saying the following " In October 1917 we parted with the old world rejecting it once and for all. We are moving toward a new world, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road." He also said "Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about glasnost and perestroika and democracy in the coming years. These are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant change within the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our aim is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep." During 1989 when the Berlin wall came down he proclaimed " I am a convinced Communist. For some this may be a fantasy but for me it is my main goal"

Gorbachev's blueprint for the future is manipulating the world's people into accepting a one world government under the pretense of saving the environment. He has created a global Foundation called Green Cross which has as it's magna carta " The Earth Charter" which he hopes will rival the Ten Commandments. He is helping to initiate a complete restructuring of our economy,our political system and also our religious views. He has also been instumental in the scaling back of our armed forces while at the same time increasing the presence of foreign troops on our soil.

Gorbachev, Maurice strong and Al Gore are referred to as "The Three Musketeers" of the environmental movement. It appears that the environmental situation is being used along with instilling the fear of biological warfare in order to further the one world agenda. Gorbachev states " The environmental crisis is the cornerstone for the New World Order" Maurice strong ( U.N. environmental leader ) was quoted as saying, " Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" James Garrison ( President of the Gorbachev Foundation ) says " we are going to end up with world government. It's inevitable... There's going to be conflict, coercion and consensus.that's all part of what will be required as we give birth to the first global civilization."
 betterguy

Joined: 7/8/2008
Msg: 124
Global Warming's New 'Consensus'
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:23:56 PM

In fact, Gorbachev's mandate for the future includes the imposition of stringent global environmental laws that would regulate every area of life. Toward this end he has been supporting the creation of an all encompassing planetary document called "The Earth Charter". Samantha Smith, a journalist who attended "The State of the World Forum" confirms these developements. "At this conference we were told that an Earth charter, A Bill of Rights for the planet, would be presented to the United Nations for ratification then hopefully adopted by the year 2000.

According to Smith, Maurice Strong, the U.N's top environmental activist, referred to the charter as a Magna Carta for earth." Gorbachev goes even further, describing the charter as a new set of rules to guide humanity. He states "My hope is that this charter will be a kind of Ten Commandments, a Sermon on the Mount, that provides a guide for human behaviour toward the environment in the next century and betond." Gorbachev and the U.N. are simply waiting for the proper moment to implement any final agreements in order to begin full enforcement of their programs. Together with other major environmental legislation already drafted, the charter if accepted, will govern life in the 21st century." Samantha continued "

Gorbachev harped on the importance of having "consensus" for the Global Governance - where nations under world government would lose sovereignty, giving way to international laws that will dictate common beliefs, values, standards and behaviour, and conform to the consensus of a chosen group of leaders. The former head of Russia's communist party has selected 100 elite "innovative thinkers" called the Global Brain Trust or The Council of the Wise, who will meet annually at the Presidio ( probably now they will meet at Northeastern ) to guide global issues during the transition into the next century."

Gorbachev spoke in Indiana in 1996 saying " We need a new paradigm of developement in which the environment will be a priority... World Civilization as we know it will soon end...we have very little time and we must act...If we can address the environmental problem we have hope,,, but it will have to be done with a new system,a new paradigm...We have to change our mindset, the way humankind views the world"

Considering the mess that Gorbachev left Russia in, including the Chernobyl disaster, we should question his true concern for the environment. Adverse events and appearances of many new diseases seem to be escalating. I feel the need is urgent to postpone some of our individual causes and join together to address the largest issue which may be the takeover of the world.
 oddsrhuge

Joined: 7/10/2007
Msg: 125
view profile
History
More fuel to the fire, as it were
Posted: 7/25/2008 12:02:57 PM

What Global Warming?
Such as it was is over


by Phil Brennan

July 22, 2008
etherzone.com

Fact: All history reveals that time after time this planet of ours has experienced periods of warming and periods of cooling. A century of slight global warming, about half a degree, ended in 1998.

Fact: In this century a global cooling has set in. In 2008 most of the northern hemisphere, except for Western Europe, is coming out of what most scientists say has been the harshest winter in decades.

Malta, Israel, China and India's New Delhi have been subjected to record low temperatures. In Afghanistan, more than 900 people and 316,000 head of cattle died as a result of bitter cold weather according to Reuters.

In a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon 13 top scientists including one Nobel Prize winner, pointed to the fact that while CO2 levels have continued to rise, global temperatures have fallen, dramatically contradicting the claim that CO2 levels cause global warming. They wrote that the UN Climate change Panel "must be called to account and cease its deceptive practices - Policies based on False science must be ended."

Meteorologist Anthony Watts says that the total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough, he says, to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years.

In a news conference held in Orlando, Florida John L. Casey, Director of the Space and Science Research Center, issued a landmark declaration on climate change.

“In an opinion echoed by many scientists around the world, the Space and Science Research Center (SSRC), today declares that the world’s climate warming of the past decades has now come to an end. A new climate era has already started that is bringing predominantly colder global temperatures for many years into the future. In some years this new climate will create dangerously cold weather with significant ill-effects world wide. Global warming is over – a new cold climate has begun.”



Fact: Lack of Sunspot activity portends the onset of global cooling. The sunspot number should stand close to 100; instead it's zero

The level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 - 30 years," said Ian Wilson, lead author of a study appearing in the June issue of PASA, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia.

The result is a strong, rapid pulse of global cooling, said Wilson. "On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World’s mean temperature has dropped by 1 - 2 C.”

"A 2 C drop would be twice as large as all the warming the earth has experienced since the start of the industrial era, and would be significant enough to impact global agriculture output."

Got it? Global warming, such as it was, is over. Done with. Kaput.

That however, had failed to dampen the enthusiasm of the global warming fear mongers. It has, instead, fueled a spate of often ludicrous claims of an impending planetary disaster due to alleged global warming. As meteorologist and Weather Channel founder John Coleman has said all the proponents of global warming can do is to lamely suggest that global warming has gone on vacation and is taking a ten-year hiatus on account of the absence of sun spots. “If this weren’t so serious it would be laughable” Coleman said.

“It is the greatest scam in history, he said. "I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global warming; it is a scam. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion (sic) of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environment whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon, they claimed to be a consensus.”

Yet the beat goes on, and gets more ludicrous with one member of Congress actually telling a bunch of kids that global warming caused Hurricane Katrina and led to the deaths of Americans in the Blackhawk Down espoused in Somalia. He forgot to mention it also causes tooth decay, body odor and underarm perspiration.

Global warming is clearly over, yet Al Gore and his acolytes keep warning us that the planet is heating up even as it continues to get colder.

One definition of insanity is the compulsion to make the same mistake over and over again all the while expecting a different and successful outcome.

If that suggests that Al Gore and his fellow global warming fantasists are nuts, well , ...

Phil Brennan is a veteran journalist who writes for NewsMax.com. He is editor & publisher of Wednesday on the Web and was Washington columnist for National Review magazine in the 1960s. He also served as a staff aide for the House Republican Policy Committee and helped handle the Washington public relations operation for the Alaska Statehood Committee which won statehood for Alaska. He is also a trustee of the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. Phil Brennan is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.


Once again, logical arguments backed by scientific facts and widely held opinions of many climatologists and scientists, as opposed to the fear-mongers and those motivated by the potential profits available from the creation of a crisis.


Peace
Page 5 of 6 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  > Global Warming's New 'Consensus'