The sea level is rising due to the very large ships carrying all that oil. The up and down part is from the loading and unloading of the ships. It's
as simple as that.Cypress - 9-1-2009 at 01:54 PM
TW, Do you think Albert Gore(Jr?) would be willing to debate you on that?gnukid - 9-2-2009 at 12:48 AM
"Here's a presentation Peter did at the Conspiracy Camp, Secret Garden Party, 24th of July 2009 where he talks about the bogus computer models used to
support Global Warming. He tells how Al Gore has created HIS OWN BANK called 'Generation Investment Management' with former Goldman Sachs staff to
benefit from the Carbon Tax legislation he's helped push through Congress. This maniac will destroy not only the beauty of this planet FOR PROFIT but
he will ENSLAVE THE PUBLIC for profit."
MrBile, have you ever stopped to consider why a lot of these low GDP countries (that you deem expendable) are low GDP countries in the first place? In
most cases it's because high GDP countries and entities like the world bank have supported despots who have raped them for their natural resources to
little benefit of the "bottom of the food chain" people who live there. As for your"diaper headed Islamists in Iraq, before we came in and killed a
couple of hundred thousand of them, making a total disaster of the place and spending a couple of trillion in the process, they were a secular society
and a good hedge against the Iranian domination of the region. Next time you decide to spew your racist garbage maybe you need to ask yourself if it
makes any sense.
Sea level
wessongroup - 9-2-2009 at 07:20 AM
"Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over."
An old one, but still true....
Just saw this and thought it would add some degree of validity to the issue as these folks are taking action against the impending sea.. check on
Holland, they too are moving in the same direction... mitigation of the rise, and if anyone would know about keeping the sea out, the Dutch
should.
[Edited on 9-6-2009 by wessongroup]Cypress - 9-2-2009 at 07:23 AM
And this topic went from climate change to racism. Talk about being obsessed.
Weather
wessongroup - 9-2-2009 at 07:47 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Cypress
And this topic went from climate change to racism. Talk about being obsessed.
Thanks Cypress... it does move around a bit, when you start talking about the weather
Skewing the Argument
MrBillM - 9-2-2009 at 09:03 AM
It is, apparently, to the advantage of Gnu and Loco to divert the Climate Change argument into an attack discussion filled with accusations of Racism,
Eugenics and Third-World Rape.
It is none of those from my viewpoint. I put forth what I believe to be a rational economical approach to dealing with whatever problems that Climate
Change "Might" present in the future. Given that there is still serious disagreement over Mankind's Ability to affect change over
the Global Climate, it is unreasonable to spend precious resources in a growingly-challenged financial environment. As an alternative, I proposed
what I believe would have more success.
IF adverse effects of Climate Change appear, DEAL with those as we have dealt with Nature's challenges before. Fill, Build Levees, do whatever
engineering necessary to solve OUR problems. EACH nation can do the same. Some will be more successful than others. Those that are unsuccessful
"might" not survive. This will improve OUR position relative to the rest of the world.
It will be a result of THEIR capabilities whether they survive or not as it will be a result of OURS. Period. No suggestion that we should influence
anybody else's future in the World Market. No KILLING. No SUBJUGATION. Everybody's on their own and the chips will fall where they will.
While it is correct to say that NONE of us KNOW how it will affect us personally, I feel confident that the relative wealth of the United States and
the Technological prowess will be more LIKELY to serve us well.
It's been noted before that the Left love to throw the "Fuhrer" stuff aimed at anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint and this is no exception,
but the closet thing we have right now to that regime is in the White House.
I'm not advocating conquering other countries, subjugating or eliminating their people's or any other Purity or Eugenics methods and it is dishonest
(no surprise) to say so.
Let's simply be Americans First and Foremost and do whatever necessary for OUR Best chances of survival and progress. The others can sort it out for
themselves. Live or Die. Prosper or Fail.gnukid - 9-2-2009 at 10:57 AM
Interesting how quickly and easily many people rationalize their promotion of eugenics, from (egads yes Hitler) to Kissinger, to John Holdren to Mr Bill even bragging about it. Then half heartily backtracking, then pressing forward.
While on the other hand the basic supposition is that all humans are created equal and have equal rights to survival, independence and freedom is inherent. In fact I believe it is the law of the land, yet
this basic tenant is so easily fudged.
While MrBill's comments are sadly illustrative, he does offer a teaching point that was illustrated in the Stanford Prison Study and the Milgram Experiment. "Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible
destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions
incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority."
It's interesting how many people are programmed to have a knee jerk reaction, that a discussion of "Climate Change" propaganda has nothing to do with
eugenics and certainly nothing to do with Hitler, who wrote:
"The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses' attention to certain facts,
processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. ...
All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to.
Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for
sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be
extended in this direction. ...
The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these
facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands
what you want him to understand by your slogan....
The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which
it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the
masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly." —Hitler, Mein Kampf, Chapter VI
Many authors and speakers address these issues regarding the use of climate change propaganda for race based eugenics over the last century, for
example even the LaRouche society agrees that climate change propaganda and cap and trade is a call for mass murder, known as eugenics.
Obama has openly anointed John Holdren as our Science czar who openly promotes polices which can only be described as plans and policies for genocide, yet the general public has only knee jerk denial while still supporting this horrific plan, Climate Change
propaganda is the basis for racism based mass murder. Even MrBill, openly calls for these policies with non-chalance (while denying he is doing so),
"I'm not advocating Killing off anyone. Well, other than the Islamists and that's just self-defense. For the rest, I really don't give a rip, but I am
saying that we should not spend our money to save them. There's no payback." And "Those at the bottom of the Food-Chain will suffer most. A Win-Win
situation."
So here we are, facing the enemy from within, who will stand up to mass murder? Who will stand up to authority's predictions of climate change as a
basis for mass murder, who would stand up to Hitler, certainly we can not expect authorities to do so nor can we can expect much of humanity nor
MrBill, so it is apparently the increasing small minority who sees humans as equally deserving the inherent right to live, and sees climate change as
a non-sequitur to genocidal policies, to stand for human rights and against climate change eugenics policies as complete and utterly unethical,
unscientific, illogical and immoral criminal behavior.
-----
Here's a History Channel documentary about HAARP, a US policy to affect weather.
[Edited on 9-4-2009 by gnukid]Cypress - 9-2-2009 at 11:10 AM
Gosh! Should I be worried? With all these other threats such as genocide, mass murder of undesirables., etc., maybe climate change isn't such a bad
thing after all. Hey! Matter of fact, I get a change of climate every
winter. monoloco - 9-2-2009 at 03:26 PM
Although I don't subscribe to Al Gore's imminent doom global warming scenario I do think that it our responsibility to future generations to conserve
the planets resources and strive for efficiency. I just don't understand how someone can base a society's right to exist on their GDP. The fact is
that the most egregious emitters on the planet are high GDP countries, with the U.S. leading the way in per capita carbon emissions. So why then
should those at the " bottom of the food chain" not surviving be a " win/win situation" ? This sounds to me like a blame the victim mentality. It
seems to me like those who are responsible for the degradation of the environment should be responsible for mitigating the damage they have caused.
