Global Warming, Bought & Paid For

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]unbending wrote:
That’s it?

Nothing else from Headhunter?

Not even along the lines of:
-Environmentalists are all tree hugging hippies.
-Real men like the smell of exhaust fumes in the morning.
-Environmentalism is eroding the foundation of society.
-Global Warming is a terrorist funded fear tactic. It hurts America.

Nothing?[/quote]

I state facts and ideas. You can respond with 100 spins, usually quoted from leftists ‘scientists’ on gov’t or Soros’ payroll. Enjoy doing that.

You are allowing your benevolent concern for the environment to be used by evil people out to weaken this country. You vote for politicians who pass measure after measure to drive industry from our shores. You vote for those who continually spend more than they have earned, then express indignation at how irrational those in Congress really are.

You give them a blank check on reality. When they cash that check, you then give them low approval ratings. Congressman are evil, crazy, or both? Are they? Are they really?

Or do they reflect your inner hatred for all that is good, for production, for achievement? You, who would starve to death in hopeless ineptitude without the likes of Exxon, DuPont, and Walmart, vote for those who harass those companies and pass reg after reg. Congressmen are evil, crazy, or both? Are they?

They are doing exactly what you want. What is that, btw?

62

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
unbending wrote:
That’s it?

Nothing else from Headhunter?

Not even along the lines of:
-Environmentalists are all tree hugging hippies.
-Real men like the smell of exhaust fumes in the morning.
-Environmentalism is eroding the foundation of society.
-Global Warming is a terrorist funded fear tactic. It hurts America.

Nothing?

I state facts and ideas. You can respond with 100 spins, usually quoted from leftists ‘scientists’ on gov’t or Soros’ payroll. Enjoy doing that.

You are allowing your benevolent concern for the environment to be used by evil people out to weaken this country. You vote for politicians who pass measure after measure to drive industry from our shores. You vote for those who continually spend more than they have earned, then express indignation at how irrational those in Congress really are.

You give them a blank check on reality. When they cash that check, you then give them low approval ratings. Congressman are evil, crazy, or both? Are they? Are they really?

Or do they reflect your inner hatred for all that is good, for production, for achievement? You, who would starve to death in hopeless ineptitude without the likes of Exxon, DuPont, and Walmart, vote for those who harass those companies and pass reg after reg. Congressmen are evil, crazy, or both? Are they?

They are doing exactly what you want. What is that, btw?

[/quote]
Uhhh…
You started a thread claiming Hansen received $720,000 dollars from Soros when in fact he didn’t.

So since that wasn’t a fact, was it just an idea?
Were you just spitballin some untruths that would really make your blood boil?

I mean what in the hell are you teaching our childrens anyway?

63

[quote]100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
unbending wrote:
That’s it?

Nothing else from Headhunter?

Not even along the lines of:
-Environmentalists are all tree hugging hippies.
-Real men like the smell of exhaust fumes in the morning.
-Environmentalism is eroding the foundation of society.
-Global Warming is a terrorist funded fear tactic. It hurts America.

Nothing?

I state facts and ideas. You can respond with 100 spins, usually quoted from leftists ‘scientists’ on gov’t or Soros’ payroll. Enjoy doing that.

You are allowing your benevolent concern for the environment to be used by evil people out to weaken this country. You vote for politicians who pass measure after measure to drive industry from our shores. You vote for those who continually spend more than they have earned, then express indignation at how irrational those in Congress really are.

You give them a blank check on reality. When they cash that check, you then give them low approval ratings. Congressman are evil, crazy, or both? Are they? Are they really?

Or do they reflect your inner hatred for all that is good, for production, for achievement? You, who would starve to death in hopeless ineptitude without the likes of Exxon, DuPont, and Walmart, vote for those who harass those companies and pass reg after reg. Congressmen are evil, crazy, or both? Are they?

They are doing exactly what you want. What is that, btw?

Uhhh…
You started a thread claiming Hansen received $720,000 dollars from Soros when in fact he didn’t.

So since that wasn’t a fact, was it just an idea?
Were you just spitballin some untruths that would really make your blood boil?

I mean what in the hell are you teaching our childrens anyway?
[/quote]

You showed someone’s blog claiming that Hansen was innocent. Gee, how many lefty bloggers do we need to ignore the truth?

You do fathom at least a little teeny tiny bit of what I wrote in my previous post? Just a bit? Do you understand the connection between Congress and yourself? Congress is a mirror — if not, those there are fired.

I’m not asking anyone to look at any particular issue, but rather at their philosophy. Your philosophy created the world in which we live. You vote for people who reflect your (insane) philosophy, and are then shocked when they do what you hired them for. You, through the environmental movement, want to give control over industries which you don’t understand, to bureaucrats and congressmen.

What could possibly be the goal of doing such a thing? Destruction? Death? Is liberalism some sort of death-wish?

64

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
unbending wrote:
That’s it?

Nothing else from Headhunter?

Not even along the lines of:
-Environmentalists are all tree hugging hippies.
-Real men like the smell of exhaust fumes in the morning.
-Environmentalism is eroding the foundation of society.
-Global Warming is a terrorist funded fear tactic. It hurts America.

Nothing?

I state facts and ideas. You can respond with 100 spins, usually quoted from leftists ‘scientists’ on gov’t or Soros’ payroll. Enjoy doing that.

You are allowing your benevolent concern for the environment to be used by evil people out to weaken this country. You vote for politicians who pass measure after measure to drive industry from our shores. You vote for those who continually spend more than they have earned, then express indignation at how irrational those in Congress really are.

You give them a blank check on reality. When they cash that check, you then give them low approval ratings. Congressman are evil, crazy, or both? Are they? Are they really?

Or do they reflect your inner hatred for all that is good, for production, for achievement? You, who would starve to death in hopeless ineptitude without the likes of Exxon, DuPont, and Walmart, vote for those who harass those companies and pass reg after reg. Congressmen are evil, crazy, or both? Are they?

They are doing exactly what you want. What is that, btw?

Uhhh…
You started a thread claiming Hansen received $720,000 dollars from Soros when in fact he didn’t.

So since that wasn’t a fact, was it just an idea?
Were you just spitballin some untruths that would really make your blood boil?

I mean what in the hell are you teaching our childrens anyway?

You showed someone’s blog claiming that Hansen was innocent. Gee, how many lefty bloggers do we need to ignore the truth?

You do fathom at least a little teeny tiny bit of what I wrote in my previous post? Just a bit? Do you understand the connection between Congress and yourself? Congress is a mirror — if not, those there are fired.

I’m not asking anyone to look at any particular issue, but rather at their philosophy. Your philosophy created the world in which we live. You vote for people who reflect your (insane) philosophy, and are then shocked when they do what you hired them for. You, through the environmental movement, want to give control over industries which you don’t understand, to bureaucrats and congressmen.

What could possibly be the goal of doing such a thing? Destruction? Death? Is liberalism some sort of death-wish?

[/quote]

Your post was an OP/ED!

And no I don’t fathom what you’re saying at all, although it sounds alot like wingnut jibberish. I’m pretty sure you don’t know what you’re talking about either, however last I checked liberalism had nothing to do with death and destruction.

And while you prefer industries to regulate you, I prefer it the other way around (assuming congress is a mirror). It sounds like your unsure how the world works, and that there are a wide range of regulations benefiting your life on a daily basis, but you do listen to Rush and he does do his job quite well.

65

[quote]100meters wrote:
Your post was an OP/ED!

And no I don’t fathom what you’re saying at all, although it sounds alot like wingnut jibberish. I’m pretty sure you don’t know what you’re talking about either, however last I checked liberalism had nothing to do with death and destruction. And while you prefer industries to regulate you, I prefer it the other way around (assuming congress is a mirror). It sounds like your unsure how the world works, and that there are a wide range of regulations benefiting your life on a daily basis, but you do listen to Rush and he does do his job quite well.[/quote]

Rush? You think this is from him? LOL!!

I’m telling you that your philosophy is what’s at fault for what’s happening in the world and you refuse to believe it. You think that brilliant people who run multi-national corporations will take orders from you and your environmental ‘representatives’. You think they’ll happily follow directives issued by Al Gore or those who think like him. You are then shocked when they resent having to take your orders.

When you tell one of these people that they can’t build a factory in that swamp (excuse me, wetland) after they drain it, they simply move along and build in China. You then call them unpatriotic. You tell another factory owner to install millions of dollars of equipment and pay employees at a certain rate — “Nah, they’ll not resent that! They’ll take orders! Hee, hee, hee!” The owner ships the factory to China.

There’s the shabby secret behind environmentalism: the desire to give orders; the desire to control men who are smarter and more talented.

Someday, when your money is worthless, unemployment is skyrocketing, and American hegemony is a historical footnote, look in the mirror for whom to blame. “But hey, at least the rivers will be clean and elk will roam around in Central Park again! How cool is that?!?”

66

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
"This from Investor’s Business Daily, "How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely “NASA whistleblower” standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute , which gave him “legal and media advice”?

That’s right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship “philanthropy,” by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI’s “politicization of science” program.
That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly “censored” spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.

Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen’s OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different."

Looks like George got his money’s worth.

James Hansen also acted as a consultant to Al Gore’s slide-show presentations on global warming, he endorsed John Kerry for president, and received a $250,000 grant from the foundation headed by Teresa Heinz Kerry.

Looks like this “global warming science” has been bought and paid for.

The Global warming scam is simply a way for America to be brought to its knees, by communists-turned-environmentalists. They knew Americans would never buy into communism, but might buy this environmentalist crap.
[/quote]

Good post.

67

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Your post was an OP/ED!

And no I don’t fathom what you’re saying at all, although it sounds alot like wingnut jibberish. I’m pretty sure you don’t know what you’re talking about either, however last I checked liberalism had nothing to do with death and destruction. And while you prefer industries to regulate you, I prefer it the other way around (assuming congress is a mirror). It sounds like your unsure how the world works, and that there are a wide range of regulations benefiting your life on a daily basis, but you do listen to Rush and he does do his job quite well.

Rush? You think this is from him? LOL!!

I’m telling you that your philosophy is what’s at fault for what’s happening in the world and you refuse to believe it. You think that brilliant people who run multi-national corporations will take orders from you and your environmental ‘representatives’. You think they’ll happily follow directives issued by Al Gore or those who think like him. You are then shocked when they resent having to take your orders.

When you tell one of these people that they can’t build a factory in that swamp (excuse me, wetland) after they drain it, they simply move along and build in China. You then call them unpatriotic. You tell another factory owner to install millions of dollars of equipment and pay employees at a certain rate — “Nah, they’ll not resent that! They’ll take orders! Hee, hee, hee!” The owner ships the factory to China.

There’s the shabby secret behind environmentalism: the desire to give orders; the desire to control men who are smarter and more talented.

Someday, when your money is worthless, unemployment is skyrocketing, and American hegemony is a historical footnote, look in the mirror for whom to blame. “But hey, at least the rivers will be clean and elk will roam around in Central Park again! How cool is that?!?”
[/quote]

you hit the envirnmentalist wacko right on the head

68

I live in ny and im using my ac right now and its october. I think global warming is REEEEAL. rah.

69

Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)

70

[quote]The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)
[/quote]

A big problem with having a government of elected officials determine our futures is that these people MUST be short-term thinkers. They need to produce results in a couple of years or they are fired.

Imagine a politician saying: “Suffer a little bit now so we can solve the Social Security disaster.” The other party would demagogue that all to hell and the people would kick his ass out quickly. Remember Bush’s Social Security proposals?

Now look at the graph JLesk posted. Imagine how that can be used to garner votes.

71

[quote]The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)
[/quote]

Clearly, Katrina not being used as evidence/not needed as evidence of global warming by the scientific community.
You understand, that right now, almost all agree, that it is more than 90% likely that we are are one of the main causes, and that this consensus is based on shitloads of data, constantly being updated, and doesn’t hinge on any one piece of evidence?

It’s just so silly of you to marginalize the science you don’t understand and aren’t even trying to understand with comments like “some are trying to say…”

72

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)

A big problem with having a government of elected officials determine our futures is that these people MUST be short-term thinkers. They need to produce results in a couple of years or they are fired.

Imagine a politician saying: “Suffer a little bit now so we can solve the Social Security disaster.” The other party would demagogue that all to hell and the people would kick his ass out quickly. Remember Bush’s Social Security proposals?

Now look at the graph JLesk posted. Imagine how that can be used to garner votes.

[/quote]
Social Security Disaster?
So global warming no big deal, but social security is a disaster?

And hilariously Bush’s environmental “policies” base on short-term thinking.

My God Man! You are real nut!
Think before you post.

73

[quote]100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)

A big problem with having a government of elected officials determine our futures is that these people MUST be short-term thinkers. They need to produce results in a couple of years or they are fired.

Imagine a politician saying: “Suffer a little bit now so we can solve the Social Security disaster.” The other party would demagogue that all to hell and the people would kick his ass out quickly. Remember Bush’s Social Security proposals?

Now look at the graph JLesk posted. Imagine how that can be used to garner votes.

Social Security Disaster?
So global warming no big deal, but social security is a disaster?

And hilariously Bush’s environmental “policies” base on short-term thinking.

My God Man! You are real nut!
Think before you post.

[/quote]

Analogies are just not your strong point, I guess.

Okay, let’s try to connect dots. You want a government to regulate industries, to protect the environment. This government is the one that built the levees in NOLA, that setup and runs Medicare and Social Security, that went into Iraq with far too few troops (to make the soccer moms happy), on and on and on. You would then be shocked if they couldn’t do it.

Then, somehow, you think “If only someone like Kerry or Edwards or Hillary was in Charge!! They’d do it RIGHT!!”

And I’M a real nut?

Why do you think that Jefferson wrote: “The government that governs least governs best.”? Was he just bullshitting around? Or is 100 meters smarter than Jefferson?

All hail the mighty 100meters!!! ROFLMAO!!

74

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)

A big problem with having a government of elected officials determine our futures is that these people MUST be short-term thinkers. They need to produce results in a couple of years or they are fired.

Imagine a politician saying: “Suffer a little bit now so we can solve the Social Security disaster.” The other party would demagogue that all to hell and the people would kick his ass out quickly. Remember Bush’s Social Security proposals?

Now look at the graph JLesk posted. Imagine how that can be used to garner votes.

Social Security Disaster?
So global warming no big deal, but social security is a disaster?

And hilariously Bush’s environmental “policies” base on short-term thinking.

My God Man! You are real nut!
Think before you post.

Analogies are just not your strong point, I guess.

Okay, let’s try to connect dots. You want a government to regulate industries, to protect the environment. This government is the one that built the levees in NOLA, that setup and runs Medicare and Social Security, that went into Iraq with far too few troops (to make the soccer moms happy), on and on and on. You would then be shocked if they couldn’t do it.

Then, somehow, you think “If only someone like Kerry or Edwards or Hillary was in Charge!! They’d do it RIGHT!!”

And I’M a real nut?

Why do you think that Jefferson wrote: “The government that governs least governs best.”? Was he just bullshitting around? Or is 100 meters smarter than Jefferson?

All hail the mighty 100meters!!! ROFLMAO!!

[/quote]
Your examples make no sense, but yes I am for the continuing regulation of business by the government.

75

[quote]100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Mage wrote:
Yaaa fo yuuu. Yuu tink hard.

Sorry couldn’t help myself.

You know, I remember a very hot Halloween when I was a kid in the 70’s. Everyone I knew was sweating like crazy outside. (Back when people actually Trick or Treated.) In fact the 80’s and 90’s were a hell of a lot colder for Halloween then the 70’s as far as I remember. (Memories are so faulty.)

The Earth has warmed, that is not debatable. If humans caused it, or part of it, how much of it, and if its a bad thing or not is truly what is being debated.

We also cannot base a belief for or against global warming on short term weather. Some are trying to say one hurricane (Katrina) is somehow proof that global warming is real, as if there never was a hurricane in the past. That would mean that since there were no hurricanes the following year, that meant global warming was over. (Interestingly many people use the exact same “logic” for all their political posts.)

A big problem with having a government of elected officials determine our futures is that these people MUST be short-term thinkers. They need to produce results in a couple of years or they are fired.

Imagine a politician saying: “Suffer a little bit now so we can solve the Social Security disaster.” The other party would demagogue that all to hell and the people would kick his ass out quickly. Remember Bush’s Social Security proposals?

Now look at the graph JLesk posted. Imagine how that can be used to garner votes.

Social Security Disaster?
So global warming no big deal, but social security is a disaster?

And hilariously Bush’s environmental “policies” base on short-term thinking.

My God Man! You are real nut!
Think before you post.

Analogies are just not your strong point, I guess.

Okay, let’s try to connect dots. You want a government to regulate industries, to protect the environment. This government is the one that built the levees in NOLA, that setup and runs Medicare and Social Security, that went into Iraq with far too few troops (to make the soccer moms happy), on and on and on. You would then be shocked if they couldn’t do it.

Then, somehow, you think “If only someone like Kerry or Edwards or Hillary was in Charge!! They’d do it RIGHT!!”

And I’M a real nut?

Why do you think that Jefferson wrote: “The government that governs least governs best.”? Was he just bullshitting around? Or is 100 meters smarter than Jefferson?

All hail the mighty 100meters!!! ROFLMAO!!

Your examples make no sense, but yes I am for the continuing regulation of business by the government.

[/quote]

I’m sure they’ll do that as well as you expect. And our business community will take their orders and lead us to a golden age of prosperity, a peaceful industrial society, with plenty for all…at the point of a gun. Yup.

Anyhoo, I’ve explained this numerous times. I guess what makes you believe this statement of yours prevents you from understanding what I wrote. The liberals who taught you did their job well.