General discussion


Global Warming - The zealots are getting desperate

By maxwell edison ·
Have you noticed the new onslaught of global warming warnings?

Did you see the picture of the Polar Bears "stranded" on that iceberg? (Stranded, by butt! They either swam out to it -- something Polar Bears naturally do because they're, well, because they're Polar Bears -- or the right half of that picture was deliberately cut off so it only gave such an appearance.) The picture and accompanying headline was, nonetheless, both leading and misleading.

France is advocating "taxing" the USA by imposing a "carbon tax" on imports to Europe. (Who still maintains this isn't to extort money from the USA?) Up yours, France, is what I'd say. You go ahead and raise my hand a Euro; I'll call that Euro and raise you another Dollar! (A little poker lingo, there.)

Did you see where some loony tunes actually advocated charging people (like me) who denied the notion of man-caused global warming with crimes against humanity in a "world court"? (Who says it's not about "control?)

Have you seen any of the reports showing how many global warming dissenters in the climate-science community were being silenced? (Of course not; the "main-stream media" is advancing the notion. Why would they "report" anything to the contrary?)

Have you noticed how when a global warming skeptic does present compelling arguments against the notion, he/she is summarily dismissed as being paid by big oil or some other nonsense? And have you noticed at how the global warming zealot's source of funding is never questioned and/or is never cause to dismiss THEIR arguments?

Did you see where Al Gore was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in global warming awareness? What does this have to do with world peace? But we all know that the Nobel Committee has been taken over by the world's extreme left-wing. Why else would they give such an award to the communist Nelson Mandella (and considering he supported his murderous wife at the time)? Or Jimmy Carter, the person who, almost single-handedly, allowed the middle-east to be taken over by radical terrorists? Or one of the biggest terrorist the world has ever see, Yasser Arafat? Or Kofi Annan, the corrupt and criminal mastermind of the oil-for-food scam, whose greedy and criminal behavior probably caused the death of thousands, and whose incompetence at the helm of the UN caused millions of more deaths in Africa. The last legitimate "peace" winner was probably the Dalai Lama!

Have you noticed how the reversal of the "extreme" weather that was predicted because of "global warming" is now either being ignored -- OR the new doom-and-gloom of the day is being called "climate change"? What happened to the terrible 2006 hurricane season they predicted because of the rising ocean temperatures? Did the temperatures drop, or were they wrong to begin with? Why is it that when these people are so blatantly WRONG, they aren't discounted as kooks?

Have you noticed at how many "new reports" or "new books" that advance the notion of man-caused global warming are being dumped onto the gullible public? And have you noticed how books that dispute the claim are not being reported on or touted? Of course, it's hard to "notice" something they aren't doing, but it doesn't mean the books aren't being published! But there are! For example, "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years, by physicist Fred Singer" and "The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder" Why aren't these new releases mentioned by the New York Times? (Do an Internet search for reviews on these books, or better yet, buy them. The latter book is due out in March. The former has been out for two months.)

Have you noticed (no, of course not -- for the same reasons!) the lack of reporting on the studies of sun cycles -- ones that suggest any global warming that might be happening is caused by increased and measurable sun activity?

Have you noticed how people who question and dissent aren't given equal time? (no, of course not -- for the same reasons!) See:

Did you hear about the meteorologist who doesn't know another single meteorologist who believes in the notion of man-caused global warming? (no, of course not -- for the same reasons!)

The zealots are getting desperate, folks. And they're getting loonier than ever!

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Hum, yes...

by Orefa In reply to Global Warming - The zeal ...

...the zealots are sounding desperate based on the tone of your message. Except that it's not those you oppose who are sounding a bit loony. I've only read a few of your posts but I admit that I have found them entertaining.

I am not a climate expert. I do notice that the vast majority of climatologists subscribe to the notion of man-made warming, therefore we hear about it. A minority disagrees, so we don't hear them as much. It's normal. If their arguments were more sound than the opposite point of view I would expect them to become the dominant opinion in this field, but it's not the case.

In other parts you have other so-called scientists who scream politics as they vehemently dispute global warming. Of course, even though some of them really are scientists, most are not climate experts. Those who dispute something that is not even within their field of expertise just like to be heard. They hope to be taken seriously.

Finally, I have to wonder why the world experts in climate would cook the books. You have to come up with far-fetched conspiracy theories to explain why they would purposely try to curb the well-being and economic interests of every nation on the planet. On the other hand, the motivations of the naysayers are painfully clear: don't mess with my lifestyle, don't touch my SUV!

Having said all that, I still like to read different opinions about anything so of course keep dissenting away. I know you don't need my blessing.

Collapse -


by maxwell edison In reply to Hum, yes...
Collapse -

Don't pick on this.

by Orefa In reply to Okay

Your post contains plenty of groundless assumptions from the state of a polar bear to the motives of various countries to exaggerations about silenced scientists to other unsupported opinions. Pick on that first.

Collapse -

Okay, I won't

by maxwell edison In reply to Don't pick on this.

(Edited to remove my "picking on it)

Collapse -

There. . . . .

by maxwell edison In reply to Don't pick on this.

.....are you happy now?

Collapse -

The assumption that polar bears deliberately swim to isolated ice.

by deepsand In reply to There. . . . .

You either know little of the feeding habits of polar bears, or you chose to ignore such.

What a sophist you are.

Collapse -

Polar Bears in History

by macumazahn In reply to The assumption that polar ...

There are accounts of ships sighting and capturing 'the great white bears", for the Coliseum in Rome, they were noted for their ferocity and size and entertainment value to the games, many had drifted on flows within reach of the Roman ships, but maybe the Romans were causing global warming too.

Collapse -


by deepsand In reply to Polar Bears in History
Collapse -


by planemech In reply to The assumption that polar ...

I think the only false argument here is the one you make. Projecting your own traits, labels, and accusing the other party of engaging in false debate tactics, is an old trick the Liberal Left which they use when they are out of valid ammunition in the form of facts, bankrupt of original ideas, and can no longer effectively contribute to the debate.

When your position is in doubt, punt. Then resort to calling names

Collapse -

Non sequitur

by deepsand In reply to Sophistry?

Related Discussions

Related Forums