Ghosts, Goblins and Global Warming

[jurgenkoppen]

Who profits from the misinformation?

OK, I confess: I am one of those silly mutts who does believe that humans not only have the power to screw over this planets biosphere royally, but are quite likely to do so, if there is not a major change of our collective MO.
Whether it gets messed up via pumping pollution into the atmosphere, or by destroying our and other species' habitat, or by humans being so keen to "protect our national interests", that we are willing to risk nuclear confrontation, is irrelevant.
To join in on your method of quoting great scientists, how about Einstein:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe"

In this forum I read about the melon environmentalists, outside green , inside red: Maybe me, eh, canuck socialist, and all the assorted clichés..

I am far from advocating communism, that experiment obviously failed, do to our human condition, namely fear= greed.
I do believe though, that our "Taker culture" (as opposed to the Leaver cultures we all but wiped out , such as made up the tribal societies before ownership became so compelling about 10000 years ago with the advent of totalitarian agriculture) is largely the reason why we are facing collapsed fisheries, overpopulation, poisoned environment etc.
Weather my kids will face serious problems due to warmer climate, or due to collapsed international fishery or due to nuclear fallout is neither here nor there.
Because the profit motive seems to be sacred in this (Taker) culture, and is a religion worshiped by way more people, than earth is by gaia freaks, (unfortunately), I think it is very good to have a counterpoint to our present way of being which tells us that it is OK to consume without any concern of the consequences.
One question I have to you is this:
Who exactly is profiting from all the alleged global warming hype. David Suzuki?

OK, getting ready fore the barrage....


What I do:

[pggg]

MORE evidence of globular warming..

[mraaaaaaaaaa]

Ghosts,Goblins, etc.

Hmmmm,

Verrrrrry interrrrrrresting,

But, I have Better things

to worry about,

Like,

How to get My "E",

to POLLUTE

To 140 MPH !!!


TC All,

& keep da POLUTTED AIR,

IN YOUR FACE

[MAXIMAN]

Jurg

I have more symathy for your stated position than that of some one like Al Gore.

If you are saying mankind simply needs to clean up his act and be more responsible toward the earth...to be conservative with natural resources...that is all well and good. If you believe man should do a better ecological job then be honest and don't use a ploy to enhance your message.

Where I totally disagree is when people use a shill like man made global warming(or any other fabricated ploy) to prod others into their way of thinking. The "wacks" have taken a half truth (natural climate change) and BENT it into a phony catastrophy in a blatant attempt to sway public opinion.

Who's profiting from this? Surely you jest!

For one politicians will do anything to get anyones vote. They fabricate problems and scream about it 24/7 until people actually believe it's true. Then claim they have the solution to the fabricated problem so...VOTE FOR ME!" If you don't believe this then just look at political slant on this global warming thing. 95% of the proponents of man made global warming are leftist. That is NOT a coincidence.

If Global warming were proven to be truly a man made problem like air pollution then a significant portion of the middle and right would be on board.

Secondly global warming is just another arrow in the shill quill of environmental groups to raise money. The only way these groups survive is via donation. The more problems they can envision them more money they can raise. Very simple.

THIRDLY - And this is the most disgusting to me as a scientist because a few of my "peers" (if that's what you could call them) are knee deep in it. That is taking grants from various organizations to do "RESEARCH" on climate change.

Of course any one with moe than sh!t for brains can see the problem with this. All one has to do is follow the money trail. The overwhelming majority of these funds are provided by people and groups that are proponents of anthropogenic global warming. Much of the "research" that is being released is tainted from the get go. The conclusions are pre-determined and the so called "scientists" are beholding to these groups to "keep the funds coming".

It's a farce and a hoax on a scale not seen in P.T. Barnum!

[MAXIMAN]

..

[oseaghdha]

Watermelons

Stole this from: Belmont Club

But what would be the fun in in minding your own business? The fun is in minding others. What all the earthly paradises promised by social re-engineering projects have in common is not that they are free from unpleasantness and want; Stalin offered a vision of barracks life, cafeteria food and compulsory day-care and people were willing to kill for it; modern environmentalists present one of five-minute showers, subsistance living and rationed toilet paper and they are willing to descend on your home in order to achieve it. They are bleak, unpleasant paradises. The attraction of these earthly utopias is not pleasance but freedom from doubt. Entry into a place where all the answers are supplied and there are no more dilemmas. What is required of that Brave New World above all is the final banishment of Hamlet's soliloquy. The attraction of Communism, a world ruled by the Greens or lashed under the chains of Sharia Law is they leave no room for doubt. They offer a place where every aspect of life will be regulated, our carbon footprints measured at intervals, our piety audited periodically and we shall be rid at last of our greatest burden -- freedom and uncertainty.

For that reason people like the "environmentalists" that Tim Blair describes derive satisifaction from forcing people into line. It is the Global Warming line in this instance, but any line would have done. Any port which will shelter them against the storm of doubt. The very same people who were yesterday's Communists are today's environmentalists and tomorrow's Muslim converts. It's really all the same religion to them. Marx was wrong when he said the whole point of history was not to understand but to change it; for the true believer the whole point of history is simply to find a way to end it.

The saddest aspect of these endeavor is that it blinds its adherents to the fecundity of creation; to the newness of each sunset; the uniqueness in its child's smile; to the potential for discovery; to the possibility that the winds of the world change not by our feeble edicts, but because Spirit bloweth. Free and ever-new.

[Wildkat]

Oh please...

putting environmentalists in line with communists and future Muslim converts?
(not that there is anything wrong with being Muslim... but it was obviously meant to be derogatory here)


So what happens when the world population outgrows the natural resources? Just curious...

[prometheus578]

So what happens when the world population outgrows the natural resources?

It dies... and I say good riddance!

[jurgenkoppen]

Scientist priests

Hey Maximan,and all who still follow this thread
Thank you for seeing my main point.

About the "who profits?":
Do you really think that environmental movements have to conjour up artificial causes???
You got to be joking yourself!!!

There are so many real threats to the ecosystem by humanities unchecked greed , or in case of the 3rd world, desperation to survive in the face of the poverty bestowed upon them all by the filthy rich psychopaths (namely CEO s of cooperations who do not have one iota of social conscience), who will gladly exploit them, to line their own pockets, and grab even more power and control over resources.
To list all the crimes committed against my only world would make a very long list, but to name a few: Irresponsible logging, overfishing, genetic engineering designed to get people hooked on hybrids,destruction of habitats, toxins in air,water, food, farm animals etc etc etc.
Of course, us environmentalists are largely left leaning. We are the have- nots, the ones who do not want to play the game of "grabbing and coming on strong". We have other values in life besides selling our soul for the mighty buck.
Finally about global warming, myth or not:
I do not blindly follow any priest, weather he wears a lab coat, a suit, a tweed jacked with leather patches, a loin cloth or a robe. I'd say:Common sense is our only hope!! I have found frequently, that when formal education is squeezed into an individual on one end, the common sense gets squeezes out on the other.(You should see some of the engineers I have met on construction sites)
So no, I am not a scientist, but I do have eyes and a pretty good brain, and I am not gullible.
Ultimately, as your average Joe, we can not possibly reproduce personally all the experiments and compare all the data which has been collected. So the "experts" are now taking the role of the priests of old. They claim to know more than is accessible to us regular folks, who may wear tennis shoes or the occasional rubber boot. The point is, we, the regular folk, look at what seems reasonable, who strikes us as responsible, and mainly: what we can observe for ourself. Based on that, knowing that man has caused deserts, destruction and untold mayhem and suffering in the past and still does so outside and inside the Land of the Freaks, I find it easy to believe that we can pollute the atmosphere sufficiently to bring about our own demise. And the demise of the other species. And that, my friend, pisses me off to an extent I just cannot express in words.

In Australia farmers who have been there for generations are committing suicide, no rain.

Yes, there have been many climatic changes in the geological history of our increasingly paved planet, but:

That fact does not exclude the possibility that people with their technology / stupidity combo are bringing on a major one them selfs, and very fast.
I do not find that notion contrived at all, and while perhaps hard to prove, it is by no means unlikely.
Cheers, Jürgen

[oseaghdha]

Re: Oh please...

Originally posted by Wildkat
putting environmentalists in line with communists and future Muslim converts?
(not that there is anything wrong with being Muslim... but it was obviously meant to be derogatory here)
:rolleyes..........................

Kat,
I believe you miss the point.
That being, that the goal is ultimately one of control, which is common to the three examples.

Can't allow the riff raff to have their way, can we now?

Funny how those who would control seldom, if ever, constrain their own behavior in a manner consistant with that which they would demand of others.

[Wildkat]

I don't think so...

I think I got the point...
Basically what I read in that is this person thinks environmentalists are out to run everybody's lives... that the greens want a totalitarian system where they control every aspect of the way people live...

The basic point of my response is... so when do we say enough is enough? Do we continue to let the corporations with the power and money control the future of our environment without accountability?

I stated earlier that I don't believe extremism on either side is a solution... but frustration and desperation of those who want a cleaner life for themselves... and future generations... will drive people to do desperate things... But on a more passive note... what's wrong with suggesting to people things they can do to help out a little more?
Political blockades from greedy politicians and corporate money-mongers are increasingly difficult to traverse... So who takes responsiblity when everything we need to survive... is gone?

I completely agree with Jürgen on this one...

[mro]

OK, getting ready fore the barrage....

Hi Jürgen,
took a look at your web page. Flat out beautiful work. Thought of myself as a "master carpenter" at one time but never reached the level of "art" in wood working you have.

One thing you might think about. The only "isum" of the human condition which allows your life style is capitalism. What other form of socity could afford your work?
In all other social structures you wind up with but two classes.
The rulers and the ruled, and the "ruled" generally lead a rather frugal life style.

Some of my ancestors are Eskimos.
Would not trade my life style for the way they were 10,000 years ago nor even a hundred years ago. The reality of life for the California coastal indians which probably had one of the easiest enviroments in the world to live in was burital at times and never was survival a sure thing. Survival of the "fitist" and ruled by the strongest is not my idea of a perfect socity but that's human nature.
How that works into our modern capitalist world has allowed more freedom and a higher standard of living for more people than any other system and allows people of the left leaning pre-swaysion the luxery of being able to afford the time and resorces to decry the social ills it has generated instead of worrying where there next meal is coming from. (not entirely a bad thing)


mro

[prometheus578]

That's not human nature.. that's the nature of things.

Survival of the "fittist" and ruled by the strongest is not my idea of a perfect society but that's human nature.

But that would only leave survival and rule to the weak and useless.
Surely that's not what you advocate.

[jurgenkoppen]

I do not like to be ruled by anybody

oseaghdha seems to think that the evil greens are just on a power trip, trying to destroy his casual joys, just for the hell of it. Come on , dude, I have no interest whatsoever to rule or regulate anything, I am just hoping to leave to my children and their children a planet they can still live on..... Is that devious, evil or sharia- like????
mro, thanks for the flowers.
I do not want to go back to the stone age either, I do enjoy computers, my XS11, and various other accomplishments of our society. I do not want to throw out the baby with the bath water. But we, as the human species, could consider to examen our behaviors, priorities, agendas, and the fallout thereof, and look perhaps at societies who lived before us for millenia without screwing their environment up, if just for some clues. No?
Are we so insecure as a society that we cannot admit that we have lost some important components of what it means to be human, namely compassion for each other, and for the species who share this place? I'd say, your Eskimo ancestors had way more respect for their world than we have for ours.
I bet that self respect also plays into it.
For some good reading on taking some cues today from indigenous peoples way of live, ( which was sustainable) check out Daniel Quinn's 'Ishmael', 'The Story of B'. So-called primitive societies never wiped each other out the way we do, they all adhered to the rule of "compete with other tribes and species, but do not anihilate each other"

Wildcat, thanks for understanding.
Isn't it funny how some folks are afraid to be ruled and regulated by anybody else but the present ruling class: Namely the ultra rich, who can and have brought on wars, depressions, and starve millions of people without hesitation, if it means a profit for them.
Sure they throw us enough crumbs to keep us from rising up and causing unrest. But man, these folks who make public policy are truly evil. Why? Because they are junkies. Power junkies, in the true sense of the word. Democracy in the US? Laughable. It is a plutocracy, the same as it was under Louis XVI, and all the other robber barons... By controlling the media they keep the people bambuselt and give them enough food, toys and games to keep them quiet, while they skim the cream of the top.
To quote Frank Zappa:
"Cause what they do in Washington,
they just take care of number one,
and number one ain't you,
you ain't even number two....
MHO as well,
Cheers, to all, Jürgen

[Poprock]

To find out which societies are the best stewards of the environment, do a survey of the USA, the former Soviet Russia, China, India, Africa, and most of Latin America. Who's air would you rather breathe and who's water would you rather drink?