Marc Morano of Climate Depot — a proud cosponsor of our Seventh International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago May 21- 23 — shared with us today his observations on the mainstream media’s double standard for tolerating provocative communication strategies when it comes to the climate.
Marc’s views are his own — and, as always with him, an invigorating read. Those who are subject to easily getting the vapors over such things should probably not heed the advice “click to continue” below. For the rest, here is the full-and-raw Marc Morano, who called out — and answered — some egregious examples of global warming alarmists using “provocative communications” about skeptics that the MSM seems to have missed:
“This is so silly. Every day now, skeptics are compared to Holocaust deniers and the media yawns. But Heartland does an edgy billboard accurately reflecting the views of those featured in it and the media acts as though they are offended?
“Here are a very few examples of this week’s Holocaust denier comparisons and other nasty stuff by warmists – just this week! Please show some balance!”
Warmist Holocaust survivor Prof. Tomkiewicz: ‘I am using the term ‘denier’ to make a point…Hitler was clear about what he wanted to do in Mein Kampf –why did people not pay attention?’
Tomkiewicz: ‘These [Hitler] ‘deniers’ might as well have been called skeptics in their day…I could not and would not ‘cheapen’ a genocide that killed most of my family and deprived me of my childhood’
It’s actually so desperate appearing that it is funny! The Right shoot themselves in the foot a lot that way. Their self-rightousness gets in their way of successfully using intelligence, irony, and of course humor. Love it. Plus spending a lot of Heartlands money on this onlly adds to the glee. Not that they will ever be in fear of running out of money… although one can dream, I guess.
This is just ridiculous. Skeptics are constantly compared to holocaust deniers, and Nazis, and whatnot, but put up a few billboards that show what some really bad and disgusting people actually do think about global warming and the Left flips a mammary gland. So I guess it’s ok for warmists to lie and make things up about “deniers”, but it’s not ok for skeptics to point out something that is factual.
Hi Climate enthusiasts.
I have made a shrine to Al Gore, since he may be the man who has saved the Earth from certain doom!
I’d love it if you checked out my page at
Shrine to Al Gore
and left a comment.
I love the Heartland! Give ’em a piece of their own medicine (oh, and btw, TedK DOES still believe!) lol
I am not a “WARMIST”, I wonder what sort of quack some of these poor people would go to, if they had a heart condition. Would they believe specialists with 97% certainty about a particular course of behaviours, to help the condition, or go to, WHO? A crack-pot of course.
So you’re saying that 97% of the scientists re: global warming opinion are NOT “warmists”…? Not clear, because I believe it’s the other way around.
Alice, Hi! I have a sister named Alice. If I am reading your post right, I think you are talking about skeptics. Is that who you meant by “these poor people”? I think you are using an analogy comparing skeptics who disagree with the “consensus” that anthropogenic global warming is endangering the mother Earth to someone that develops a heart condition that would reject the consensus among heart specialists on what a proper course of treatment should be, in favor of a physician that rejects the consensus among heart specialists on what a proper course of treatment should be. Is this a fair assessment of your post?
If it is, there are a few things you should know.
1. There is no consensus on AGW. It was manufactured by the IPCC. Don’t believe me, read what a co-ordinating lead author to the IPCC’s third assessment report’s chapter on ‘climate scenario development’ has to say:
“The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony.”
2. Just because most people believe something does not make it a fact. This is true with any group including climate scientists. Besides, science is not about consensus. It is about testing theories and hypotheses through rigorous experimentation, and re-examination. At one point in the past the consensus was that the world was stationary, and the Sun, Moon, and stars revolved around it.
3. There are a lot of scientists who do not agree with the IPCC on AGW. I happen to agree with a lot of them because I have done a lot of research into AGW. I didn’t just wake up one day and say “hey, I think global warming is BS now…. for some reason.” So I disagree with your point of view that people who do not subscribe to your point of view have such little reasoning ability as to forgoe proper medical treatment.
I’m with RNH on this as I think your post is unclear. First you claim to be not a warmist, but then you seem to denegrate people that do not go along with the aleged concensus view of warmists, which would indicate that you agree with warmists. And this would make you, by default, a warmist. Your wording is a bit confusing.
Only some have “flipped a mammary gland” (wtf?!). Others, like me, as stated above find humor in it. Ironic humor, but humor nonetheless.
Why would you think I was talking about you? That’s a bit presumptive. It’s not all about you, ya know.
Ahh the old, “I know you are but what am I” routine. Neil, above I clearly stated “I” and others like me, not just I. What is it about the English language that you find so mysterious?
Don’t you have anything that’s original? I used that line about three, or four months ago.
Oh my bad! (uh oh, that’s been used too, dang it!!) You mean originality like “flipped a mammary”? Like that? I’ll try harder to please the weird master. Or not.
I got that from my Neice, but she says “flipped a ti*”. Which I think is funny, though my sister fails to see any humor from that coming out of her 15 year old’s mouth. So you have a point. Nothing is original anyway, but I did feel like you were copying me. Even though I copied it from the perv Pee Wee Herman. So I will take back that last bit. Sorry.
Only some skeptics have “flipped a mammary gland” (wtf?!). Others, like me, as stated above find humor in it. Ironic humor, but humor nonetheless.
While I disagree with the hyperbole that is attached to some issues, such as global warming, there is a Logical aspect to comparing the potential negative results to human beings to the Holocaust. (That said, I think using such comparisons as analogy are usually not a good idea PR-wise). Anyway, they are using what could be the devastating results re: humans, i.e. starvation and death- that’s plain and simple really (thus logical). Now, you can disagree with the whole idea of climate change, and you do, that’s fine, but to flip a mammary (!?) over the backlash to the billboard ads is ignoring the actual logic behind it. Plastering the faces of evil people on billboards to discredit anyone is really poor PR and even illogical. Why is it illogical? I’m glad you asked. It’s what is referred as anecdotal, thus meaningless, thus illogical. How is it anecdotal? Again- another good question. Because, a group of wealthy climate change believers could dredge up as many evil faces on the other side to plaster along the roadways… a few weirdos can be found to align with anything… thus meaningless. Now if they were to conduct an actual emperical study, and determined using honest statistical analysis that weirdos and creeps make up most of the “believer” demographic, then you’d have something to really advertise. I hope this basic lesson in logic and rational thinking is helpful. (oy, I know it won’t be…)
RNH, aren’t you paying attention? “Because, a group of wealthy climate change believers could dredge up as many evil faces on the other side to plaster along the roadways… a few weirdos can be found to align with anything… thus meaningless.” Do you not understand that this is a response to that very type of thing? Although not on billboards, it does say right in the story above, “here is the full-and-raw Marc Morano, who called out — and answered — some egregious examples of global warming alarmists using “provocative communications” about skeptics that the MSM seems to have missed:” So the billboard campaign was a response to provocative things said about “deniers”. This was not out of the blue. So then, by your logic, the provocative things said by advocates of global warming are equally meaningless. Right?
Oh, and you also said, “Now, you can disagree with the whole idea of climate change, and you do.” You know for a fact that I have never disagreed with the idea of climate change, in fact I have maintained that climate change is a fact. The climate constantly changes, as it has done so since there became a climate. And it will continue to do so, as long as there is a climate on mother Earth. That is further evidence that you are not paying attention. I don’t believe in AGW.
I meant to say AGW. My bad. And I don’t know what you are arguing with me about. I made my post very clear or so I thought. Here for more illimination: I AGREED THAT USING CERTAIN TYPES OF HYPERBOLE IS WRONG, BAD PR, BACKFIRES, ETC.- AND THAT SOME OF WHAT THE “WARMERS” HAVE USED IS IN THAT CATEGORY (regardless that it is the more logical use). Is that clear now? Please let’s argue some more in a circular nonsensical way shall we?
And by “more logical” of course I mean what I stated about the holocaust reference (which I’m sure Neil will vehemently disagree with regardless of my perfectly acceptable statement above). I don’t know about, nor was I referring to, anything else such as using the label “Nazi”. The term Nazi should only be used when it’s most appropriate, otherwise it’s a very dumb thing to being up, by Anyone.
Whaa?! You “don’t believe in AGW”???!!!
Wow! If backpedalling could save the world, You just did!
Nope- reiterated exactly what I stated if fewer words- both plain old english. But whatever makes you feel better, Neil. You rule.
Oh, I feel just fine. Thanks for caring.
You live in fantasyland.
I guess I need to point out that when I said “holocaust” above, that is what I meant and was referring to (specifically, you know, as a deadly event for some people). When I then differentiated and mentioned “Nazi” I was referring to THAT, as a separate thing. Now, I don’t know why that is difficult to understand, especially for the anal-leaning among us, but well ,it is what it is, as they say.
And yes, Neil, I know Nazi’s were involved with the holocaust…
I’d say they were a little bit more than involved.
Wow- don’t know sarcasm? Gotta argue every leeetle thing? Are you this way in “real” life too? Please don’t answer these- rhetorical (i.e. done to continue to make me feel superior to you). Maybe I’m a holocaust denier…! You can be a denier, so I can’t is that it? (more rhetorical b.s.)
I’m just saying that saying the Nazis were involved in the holocaust is a bit of an understatement is all. Why are you getting defensive? Don’t flip a *it!
And I’m just saying it was obvious sarcasm, knowing you’d likely have to dissect it in one way or another, which you have done, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum, as usual. You are a stunted and small minded individual. But you are just one of a valued (or under-valued) army of programmed robotic reactionary populace wittiingly and unwitteningly protecting the elite’s interests. I’m sorry if I may have flipped a *it (whatever the hell that means), and I know what word it’s supposed to be- it’s just very odd, and juvenile.
Hey, I am doing my utmost to keep it non personal. I would appreciate it if you could as well.
As usual- hypocritical, self-rightous, and innocent… So, sorry, but as you well know, it slips out occasionally. Even happens to upstanding citizens like you, let alone riff-raff the likes of me… You should expect such abuse from an athiest commie such as myself. Then again maybe you do. If so, I’m glad I could oblige.
I really did not see where you were being sarcastic. I thought it was supposed to be a lesson in rational thinking and logic. (Your words.) And that was after you said you disagree with using hyperbole, but then said, “Anyway, they are using what could be the devastating results re: humans, i.e. starvation and death-.” Which is complete and utter hyperbole. So where is the starvation and death caused by AGW? Where are the holocaust like conditions brought about by AGW? And then you insult me on a personal level saying I am a stunted, and small minded individual? I think you need some quiet introspection…… at best.
Umm, Neil. Really? The death and starvation are the Projected results of AGW. As you well know. Do you also know what “projected” means? Apparently you do not. Have any of the Projected results of AGW occurred yet? Depends on who you ask- but the more dire ones HAVE NOT- YET, obviously. You pick the silliest and most inane arguments. And you really didn’t know “they were a little bit more than involved” in that instance WAS NOT sarcasm?
Well, due to the track record of projections from the IPCC, Hansen, Schmidt, Mann, et al, there is no reason to ever give those dire predictions any credence whatsoever. And none of the projected results of AGW have occured anywhere. List one. It does not depend on who you ask, it depends on who you believe. And when the side that lies also has the same political ideals that you have, I guess it isn’t so hard a choice then. Allign with the side that believes the end justifies the means, no matter what those means are. Lie after lie after lie. That’s the side you are on.
“The bottom line implication of the Som et al. work is that what kept the young Earth from turning into a permanent snowball was not CO2 or other GHGs, the atmosphere just was not dense enough for the greenhouse effect to do the job. This is even with broadening of the infrared absorption bands of those gases due to higher atmospheric pressure as high as twice modern levels. So, despite the uncertainties involved, the science behind interpreting fossil raindrop data reinforces two things: the power the Sun has over Earth’s climate and the ineffectual nature of greenhouse gases. If solar output varies significantly, all the CO2 generated by humans and other members of the planetary biota acts only at the margins to change climate.
The other lesson here is that people are constantly bombarded by “science” reports that are used by one side or the other in the climate change debate. Even if the reports are based on actual science—not computer model hand waving—the public remains unaware of the abstract and often tortuous methodology behind the pronouncements. The actual work is reported by the investigators, interpreted by other scientists and journalists and eventually so dumbed down that neither the voracity nor the importance of any single statement can be ascertained. Add to that questionable chain of evidence the fact that, in these hyper-charged political times, everyone seems to have an agenda, from the investigators to the media talking heads.
So should we care about the implications of measuring fossil raindrops from several billion years ago? Certainly, this is a fascinating paper that highlights the lengths to which scientists go in trying to discover Earth’s past climate. True, the results are highly uncertain and open to differing interpretations, but that is true of all climate science today. Good science with interesting results often does not rise to the level of a clarion call for action.
Still, those whose reputations and livelihood depend on government money aimed at “fighting global warming” will become ever more strident in their warnings as we near the release of yet another IPCC report next year. Should you be worried about human CO2 emissions ruining Earth’s fragile climate? Let me put it this way—I just bought a new SUV.”
To intrepid Neilio re: two para. above. To wit: Just because I pose something, predicted by someone else, of which in your gentle and humble opinion are lies, does not make me in fact a liar. And taking me to task on every half sentence is beyond “bull dog” tenaciousness, especially when you take into account my sentence above this one. It is, as I have proposed on occasion, a deep psychological issue/s that may benefit from some professional treatment. And, irregardless of my political views, I have stated over and over I am basically undecided on the AGW issue, and am mostly playing “devil’s advocate” (for which this entire site is set up). Although, I do lean towards the majority view (scientific) as you so cleverly have deduced.
I don’t believe that you are undecided about AGW. How can you say that with a straight face? You claim that to portray yourself as open minded, aloof, and ambivalent, but it is a good example of precisely what I’m talking about. Lie after lie. You believe it because you’ve told yourself this often enough. But to anyone objectively reading your posts it is an obvious prevarication. You’re only fooling yourself when you make such claims.
O.D.D. (Oppositional Defiance Disorder). Something to get the ball rolling with a mental health professional.
And- I didn’t say it with a “straight face” (sorry couldn’t help myself- besides for all you know I might be gay so doing that would REALLY be impossible).
Yes, Neil-io everyone you disagree with are chronic congenital liars. We riff-raff Leftys live and breathe lies… you finally figured it out. It’s not complicated at all, why would it be? It’s so very simple, and easy to pigeon-hole. No need to really discuss or debate anything. Why should you? I lie, and you are either A. omnisicient, or B. on those rare occasions that A fails you, you are able to scrounge up spot-on impeccable documentation, i.e. facts that support you.
If your above post is for real and not tongue in cheek, ironic, or otherwise meant for entertainment value, stating you cannot accept my “leaning” one way admission is hilariously absurd, not to mention a little bit paranoid (another subject for therapy). So thanks, for making this site entertaining, cuz without you it would be a snooze-fest.
All one need do is go back and read your posts. The “oh I’m just playing devil’s-advocate” line is such BS. Why would you do that? I can see being devil’s advocate for a breif period, in a process to come to a better understanding, or to even a conclusion. But you’ve been here for how many years “playing” devil’s-advocate?!?!?!?! I don’t buy it.
Actually, I take that back. You only occasionally play devil’s-advocate. The rest of the time you are posting socialist propaganda. And when you do so you are not “playing”.
See, now you are using logic and rational thinking for a change! Re: AGW- devil’s advocate (all the time). Re: other/political/econimic, etc.- totally serious about getting info out there for people to process and think about, logically and rationally of course. Perhaps there is hope for you yet grasshopper.
P.S. can I help it if, after any amount of time, you and this site have not convinced me re: AGW’s falseness? If you answer this, please remember to use your logical mind and not your reactionary one.
Then why are you here?
Well, uh, because this is not YOUR site and others are welcome to join in and try to convince retards like me the error of our ways. (you forgot to use your wise mind again) Plus I get to disseminate truth and reality to all who care to partake. I never said it wasn’t pathetic and sad.
One man’s “Socialist propaganda” is another man’s truth to reality. Don’t be such a hater brother, be groovy and let love flow…
Plus, my “propaganda” has the ability to be substantiated as truth via objective and non-reactionary scrutiny. Can’t say the same for most of the mainstream and all of the right-wing propaganda. But that is a challenge to all those who aren’t already reactionary and irrational. Some people prefer to live life in a mental strait-jacket.
Bah! Who’s truth?
Bah! Reality’s truth! (I believe I mentioned that- plus the fact that ANYONE can see it for him or herself- but only those with eyes to see). But as I’ve discovered, or rather unfirtunately confirmed during my tenure here that there is a certain mentality that cannot and will not do so. There is some, but not much, scientific explanation for this. But is has ever been so. We can only try to get along as well as possible, and continue to educate those in the middle area. Or not even try to get along which is the extreme Right’s official strategy.
I have never had to deal with anyone as delusional as you seem to be. Your tenure? Iv’e never seen anyone so wrong about everything so convinced that they’re right. It is trly remarkable. You say that no one has been able to convince you that AGW is a scam. Even though there is ample evidence. Scientific evidence like the absorption band limits of CO2 and their diminnishing returns of infra red absorption, for example, and there are other things too, but they have not swayed you in the least, and you have not given them a moment of consideration. In fact, usually when there is something posted of that sort you immediately write, (or copy and paste), a post on how the rich are screwing everyone over, and the elites are using us for their own gain and blah blah blah. You are a liar. But you’re the worst kind of liar, you are the kind that believes what he’s saying. God help us all.
Oh and you don’t believe what you are saying? Not only does that make you whatever you say it makes me but it also makes you a hypocrite. We’ve had this discussion before, many times in fact. You know, the one about how hypocrisy negates everything you try to convey to anyone ever?? Yeah that one. You are the worst kind of ignorant person- the willfully ignorant. And as I’ve stated to you- I also think you are wrong about basically everything, and a good chunk of the population would agree with me on that. Granted you have your inexplicable followers, we all know that, the extreme Right which makes up no more than a scary 1/3 of the population now, probably more around a fourth actually. So given that- you and I each have roughly a 1/2 chance of being correct, about everything we espouse. That should or could give you pause at least slightly from your self-rightousness. I question myself daily about many things, but that’s the way the Liberal mind works. I, sir Neil of Io, am not a liar, nor will I lower myself to call you the same. You are merely ignorant and seemingly, and alarmingly, very happy and content to be so.
I have followers? I know there are a few here that are would call like minded, but followers? Come on! And what is this “1/2 a chance” of being correct? There is no chance involved in being correct. You either are, or you’re not. What a mind game to play on yourself. That’s delusional.
“you either are or you’re not” Your humorous words: that would be what odds then? 50/50? Just askin’.
“followers” -sorry, a simile/euphemism (whatever!) for “like-minded souls”… like that better Word Cop? So sorry to go off-the-reservation and go-rogue with the english language like that! I can’t imagine you knew what I meant…!!!???
This is fun though, like playing with an intelligent chimp.
It is self explainatory. If you don’t understand it, it is because you delude yourself with shades of grey.
The ultra-conservative Heartland Institute admitted it was in financial crisis on Wednesday, with the flight of corporate donors making it difficult to pay staff or cover the costs of its annual conference aimed at debunking climate science.
In a speech at the close of this year’s climate conference, Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast, acknowledged that a provocative ad campaign comparing believers in human-made climate change to psychopaths had exacted a heavy cost.
A post having to do with the actual article being discussed? I am impressed. But weren’t you recently complaining about how much money the Heartland institute pays for the “deniers” propaganda and paying off scientists, and such? This pretty much puts that to rest. Doesn’t it? I mean geesh, they’re down $875,000 and it’s put them in a financial crisis? I would think with their trillion dollars from the Koch brothers, they’d be doing a bit better. Right?
Their hurt is fairly recent, as the english language aboe suggests. And there’s still time for the Koch’s to rescuse it. They created it, and it is theirs to do what they will with it. Since it’s been publically tainted they may let it die on the vine and simply start a newer and differently named vehicle with which to pollute democracy and the environment. Right?
What about my other post? No comment? Ok, nothing new there, when cornered.
You assign more power to the Heartland Institute than they weild. And Koch only gave them $25,000 in 2011 and according to everything I have read on it, that is the only donation they’ve given them in over ten years. A pittence. Man you have no facts. None.
Of course, you know the real deal. You always do. And, I did not assign any power to Heartland that they don’t possess, IMO, of course, which last time I checked was still a right. So you know of no way any rich and powerful person/s could secretly funnel money into anything their heart desires? Really? That would actually be infantile thinking. And what exactly does someone that you don’t respect, like Al Gore for example, do to help create and maintain a GLOBAL warming/climate-change/AGW hoax/consirpacy for his own evil and likely monetary gain? And still no other comments re: anything other than the normal hit-and-run support of the right-wing wealthy? That’s ok, it’s your right not to.
Yeah, shure. They did it in secret! That’s got to be the truth. Right? They’d want to hide that because…… because……. um, why would they want to hide that?
You still don’t have any facts. With you your conjecture is truth, your theory is reality. You think it, therefore it is. No evidence, no factual data, but truth nonetheless. The reason we can’t have a conversation is because you approach everything with the attitude that your positions are unassailable, your truth is undeniable, and that there is no way in hell that you could possibly be wrong about anything. And when anything that you believe is questioned, or challenged you either attack or change the subject. Take for example this assertion of yours that the Koch brothers created Heartland. I personally don’t care if they did, and frankly can not fathom why they would want to hide it if they did. But you assert this to be incontrovertable reality that they did, yet you have no evidence, nor do you have any facts to support the assertion. But you defend it as though it is the truth, it is the reality, and thinking that there might be another reality to it is infantile thinking. Why can’t you just admit that you’re wrong and move on? Or at least admit that there exists a possiblity that you might be wrong, and move on? I don’t believe you can. I believe you are incapable of doing so.
That a very odd statement Neil. I have admitted I could be wrong, something you never have nor will. Gosh now what do you have to blather about?!
“And what exactly does someone that you don’t respect, like Al Gore for example, do to help create and maintain a GLOBAL warming/climate-change/AGW hoax/consirpacy for his own evil and likely monetary gain?” -RNH
Are you kidding? Ok. How about his TV channel? His movie, An Inconvenient Truth? Congressional testimony? Speaking tours? Talk show appearances? Media ad campaigns? Come on, I don’t like you that much but you’re not that stupid. Are you?
“his own monetary gain” : key aspect of my statement. Other than the already discredited carbon swapping, which admittedly could continue to be a coveted scheme, but which at this point seems very unlikley. Unlikely and remote, as an understatment. So other than that, Neil, please tell me what he has to gain- he’s already very rich. And already very famous with VP-of-USA credentials. What does this maniac want Neil?? Please enlighten us oh wise logical sage? Really- a real question that demands your response otherwise you are deemed a complete windbag full of nothing.
“…………Former Vice President Al Gore has been one of the most prominent and staunch advocates for global-warming based public policy, but is his motivation purely altruistic? Perhaps not, according to the New York Times, who reported that Silver Spring Networks, a company that Mr. Gore’s venture capital firm had heavily invested, is due to receive up to $560 million of the $3.4 billion given by the government via smart grid grants. Mr. Gore and his investment firm are set to compound their investments, due in no small part to the global warming alarmism that Mr. Gore has been espousing.
While Mr. Gore is raising concerns and creating a market for “green” technologies, Silver Spring Networks is matching these concerns with a steady stream of profitable products, thanks to government subsidies. There is no greater form of rent-seeking than creating a market and obtaining government funding to maintain market share. And it appears that this is precisely what Mr. Gore is doing when he declares our imminent doom in the face of supposed catastrophic climate change. If the U.S. government can be pressed into further action, there are few who are in a position to profit more than Mr. Gore. Indeed, the New York Times holds that Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire.” …………”
Does that satisfy the “key aspect” of your question/statement? It’s a scam, and Eyeore is one of the top scammers.
Investing!? Smart Grids!? OMG!!!! The man’s Satan!!!
Some people are never satisfied with what they have. Megalomaniacs crave power – power over others. Money is power. Like most rich leftists, what they’re after is keeping us common peasants in our place. They want to keep their air travel, SUVs and limos and consign us to the trains, bikes and buses so we stay out of their world.
People like Gore desire an old-world aristocracy. I believe they despise the American notion of equality and mixing of the classes. They want two classes. The rulers and the ruled. The middle class making it’s own way is abhorrent to them. If we are economically independent, they have less control over us.
The middle class can occasionally afford to save up and live large for a week or a weekend and we tromp unwashed into their elite destinations and amenities. They don’t like that.
Gore will never give up his jets or automobiles, but I bet he’d like there to be a lot fewer cars on the road and passengers in the sky for his own travel comfort.
Which, IMO, is why they are also on the overpopulation bandwagon. It is also my opinion that the two, Global Warming and Overpopulation Fears, are connected on many levels. In fact AGW is one of the things that people worried about overpopulation point to that they say can be alleviated through drastic reductions in the world population. Those people scare me more than AGW’ers.
Wow Dan it seems you are describing not only the wealthy elite as a whole (how could you not- is it logical to single out only “leftists”? Nope). This elite grouping includes mostly right-leaning people, although I am mature enough to admit it could logically include left-leaners too. For you (all) to focus only on the Left is biased, illogical, irrational, and even infantile. So it goes. And what should scaredy cats like Neil is that wrath of cause and effect, not some shadowy, un-named, bogeymen who supposedly have been plotting criminal-minded population reduction for decades now. No- the stupidity and gullibility of the average person and the rampant greed of the elite will take care of that thank you very much.
Overpopulation fear is a whole other subject apart from AGW. I have not explored it here because, unlike some people, I like to stay within the main topic of the site which is AGW. But trust me, (though I know you won’t), there is nothing supposed about population reduction plans. Google it.
The Right’s paranoid obession with a handful of wealthy Liberals, especially the ones who are in the public limelight in one form or another is ludicrously absurd, and sometimes even sad. It sheds a harsh spotlight on your extremely limited and narrow point-of-view and even the possibility of limited intellect, at least the common-sense kind that assists in logic and reasoning.
Did you google it? You are being absurd, and insulting to no point at all. We must have hit a nerve. Oh, I think I know what it is! You are one of them.
So you believe everything you can Google? And I’m a wealthy Liberal? Who’s absurd?
No not a wealthy Liberal, you are “one of them” with overpopulation fears. And Google can be biased, that’s true, but there are other search engines. When saying “google it” it does not necessarily mean you have to use Google, it just means to do some freaking research.
The US is the world’s biggest and richest arms merchant, and if we didn’t somehow help arm both sides of conflicts, including the ones we’re involved in, means one side would always win, the side we armed, because we help limit the amount the other side gets.
And if the other sides didn’t have any weapons in the first place, we’d soon be out of business, our MIC would be broken, we’d run out of countries to make war with.
So in order to maintain a state of perpetual war, we have to maintain a delicate balance, arming our enemies just enough to make it interesting, without letting them completely defeat US. And, of course, when they do (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan), we always have the option of declaring victory and leaving, which is the big advantage of fighting in foreign lands.
That’s the business of the US, and business is our raison d’etre.
And this has what to do with global warming? You are going off the deep end again. We all know you hate America, and love communism. Can you keep your comments limited to AGW and related topics? Is it so hard to do?
This bug up your but about the MIC is understandable. Of course you knock it because it is one of the greatest obstacles to Socialism in the world. I for one am glad it’s around. Without it America would fall faster than CNN’s ratings.
Now you see Neilio why I don’t post any longer. Tyranical rants from Hood that have no bearing on the lie about global warming. Have better things to attend to such as family and then work to feed my dear family.
Why do you let that stop you? You do realize that is why RNH is here, to stop you/us from talking about AGW. Don’t you know that when he reads what you just wrote he’s going to do a victory dance? Don’t stop. When he changes the subject, change it back to AGW, or better yet ignore him. Don’t stop speaking your mind because of one jacka**.
Yeah, Joe- I just stopped dancing cuz I hate America and blah blah blah. Did you know…(no I didn’t think so) that the MIC is one of the biggest greenhouse gas producing entities there is? Ayup. But of course it’s the only “obstacle” to commu, er socialism… (hey since when did that become a right-wing talking point?? I mean communism only died back in Reagan’s time… took you long enough to switch from that to… SOCIALISM as your newest bestest bogeyman. Slow and plodding and unstoppable the ignorant are.
“Did you know that the MIC is one of the biggest greenhouse gas producing entities there is? -RNH
Shure, now you mention that. I seriously doubt that GHG production is at the heart of your disdain for the MIC. But hey, if you want to talk about the MIC GHG production you go right ahead. That is topical. Although I suspect that you won’t get past a paragraph before you start really railing on them, and telling us what buzzflash and the smirking chimp thinks about it.
Oh, and I don’t think there is a spit’s worth of difference between communism and socialism.
Just back from holiday. Dan is correct. Stayed at a “place” with a hilo pad, aeroport, “airport” to you Americans and all the elites there were socialist DEMS! By the way they were bitching about global warming and how to catch that “bad gas in the airrrrr,” as they wore the fine sandals, sunglasses and their “special” water. I love to earn and keep my money I have earned but to listen to them and their socialistic statements made my blood boil as they ate their brie cheese and sipped their fine wine looking down at the lower class called Republicans/Independents! How do I know? I confronted them. You don’t wish to know what happened thereafter, nor will my wife ever tell due to being embarrassed. Thank God I still have my passport intact. They call me “Gran Torino” at work and at home. Have a nice day Hood! Like to meet you someday. Cheers!
Holiday? If you don’t mind, is it alright if I ask you what country you are from? I’m just curious because “holiday” is what my German friends called vacation. But then you say “cheers” which sounds U.K. to me. I always assumed you were from the U.S. but now you’ve got me curious.
Yeeeessss, sounds a bit elitist to me… hmmmm. Perhaps for your next “holiday”, you should find a nice Red State to spend your time and hard earned money.
Oh- and awsome job at being the cliched “ugly American”. Did us proud…sheesh
You should stick to serious comments. I’m afraid that the only person that thinks your comments are cool, funny, awesome, or entertaining is you.
Neilio, He, Hood, entertains me immensely. Reaffirms why you, I and others know that “Global warming” k/n/a “Climate change” is the largest scam ever put upon Earth and mankind and all for a euro/pound/dollar, et al. By the way Neilio I have been in Ireland, Scotland, England, Netherlands France et al on holiday.
Finally if you travel as I, I would suggest you entertain Ireland. Pub food is number one bar none in the world however, minimum petrol cost is 1.65 euro per litre, $6.60-$7.00 per gallon American. Ask your guy Chu, your head man in your President’s cabinet that wants petro the same cost as we pay for petro in Europe/UK? What an idiot! Never mind, Obama will be brown bread and stuck in Irish stew come November. The EU as well as your country cannot wait any longer. Cheers and have a good evening.
You too, are talented at portraying the ugly American. Whodathunk it?
Taking holiday is an “Ugly American?” I assume people take a holiday and why do you believe I’m an American? I quess in your occupation it must be a full time job seaching the net for something to say or a point to challenge? In Europe, specifically Germany, workers can take 30 days off, usually in August. What about you in Americana? Cheers.
Workers in the US are not allowed that much time off- we only wish. European socialism is what makes that possible- so your point is what now???
And if you aren’t an American Joe, why all the hysterics over Obama and our politcs, etc.? So who’s the internet stalker? Oh, me, that’s right.
Hood guy, or whomever you may be,
I note that you have bantered about since May 16th where you asked a person called “Alice” that posted a comment to address a certain question. Since then you simply engage with another partiy with constant banter back and forth non-stop with no substance simply filler never once asking Alice to respond. Dead air to anyone viewing this site. Like a constant recording on the tele.
As to your President? Suggest you simply read your dailies in the international news section. His stock is down in Europe but your media in your country will not show/report that will they? We always wonder why and you are the republic we are to look up to for moral guidance? Show us with action and not simple childish words.
Talk, they say is cheap and actions speak. Prove us wrong or quit complaining! Don’t tell us how to clean our house when your house is as dirty as ours.