PDA

View Full Version : The Marxist roots of the global warming scare



megimoo
06-17-2008, 01:21 PM
"No OIL For You, We're Protecting the Envoroment and undermining your industrial base !

Or — again — as the late Natalie Grant put it, "Protection of the environment may be used as a pretext to adopt a series of measures designed to undermine the industrial base of developed nations. It may also serve to introduce malaise by lowering their standard of living and implanting communist values."

Just delete the word "Soviets" and replace it with "environmental Marxists," and you get a pretty clear picture of what faces us today

The late Natalie Grant Wraga once wrote, "Protection of the environment has become the principal tool for attack against the West and all it stands for. Protection of the environment may be used as a pretext to adopt a series of measures designed to undermine the industrial base of developed nations. It may also serve to introduce malaise by lowering their standard of living and implanting communist values." And who was this person? Natalie Grant Wraga (who died in 2002 at age 101) was an internationally-recognized expert on the art of disinformation. In her Washington Post obituary, Herbert Romerstein —...
snip
The Marxists' new propaganda weapon
When she died, Natalie Grant Wraga's obituary quoted her as saying, "One must give the Soviets their due. No other country is capable as are the Soviets of manipulating public opinion in the West."

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/vernon/080616

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 01:23 PM
So the Scripps Institution of Oceanography is a Marxist organization? What a fucktard.:cool:

Teetop
06-17-2008, 03:27 PM
It's the biggest scam ever used in the world. And Al Whore is at the root of it.

From 2003 to present we are in a slight cooling period, but you wouldn't know it from our media coverage. (http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/OPINIONS02/806160324/1006/OPINIONS)

Actually, since 1998.

gator
06-17-2008, 03:46 PM
So the Scripps Institution of Oceanography is a Marxist organization? What a fucktard.:cool:

I think the word "tool" is the better description.

These scientists get on a bandwagon and don't have the common sense to get off, even when proven wrong.

You know what I mean don't you? It just seems like the cool thing to do say that Bush is destroying the earth by making everybody buy gas guzzlers. No scientist working for an organization populated by Democrat voting shitheads would ever try to go against that grain, would they? Just like in the old days no self respecting scientist would ever go against the church and say that the earth was not the center of the Universe, would they? It just wouldn't be cool, would it?

There is no credible proof that the any part of the post glacial warming of the earth has been significantly affected by humans.

Why this has become a left v right issue is a testimony to the stupidity of the Left Wingers. Algore has a great scam going here and his minions eat it up.

Teetop
06-17-2008, 03:51 PM
So the Scripps Institution of Oceanography is a Marxist organization? What a fucktard.:cool:

Enlighten yourself. (http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1)

wilbur
06-17-2008, 04:00 PM
I think the word "tool" is the better description.

These scientists get on a bandwagon and don't have the common sense to get off, even when proven wrong.

You know what I mean don't you? It just seems like the cool thing to do say that Bush is destroying the earth by making everybody buy gas guzzlers. No scientist working for an organization populated by Democrat voting shitheads would ever try to go against that grain, would they? Just like in the old days no self respecting scientist would ever go against the church and say that the earth was not the center of the Universe, would they? It just wouldn't be cool, would it?

There is no credible proof that the any part of the post glacial warming of the earth has been significantly affected by humans.

Why this has become a left v right issue is a testimony to the stupidity of the Left Wingers. Algore has a great scam going here and his minions eat it up.

What should be an open and interesting scientific question has been polluted to no end by polemics and politicians on both sides of the debate.

I don't deny that the left uses the issue dishonestly to further their agenda, but for gods sake, many on the right are just as guilty. People like Rush are scientifically incompetent, yet it doesn't stop them from making all kinds of ridiculous and uneducated claims about global warming (and other scientific issues).

Scientific consensus among climatologists certainly points to anthropogenic global warming as real... but its important to remember, the proper political course of action that we must take is not necessarily dictated by this consensus, but simply should be informed by it.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 04:04 PM
Enlighten yourself. (http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1)

Hmmmm…..many axes to grind there. Did I miss the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in there somewhere? After all - the world’s oceans, you know - the engine that drive’s the planet’s weather, are their single focus.

Teetop
06-17-2008, 04:09 PM
Hmmmm…..many axes to grind there. Did I miss the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in there somewhere? After all - the world’s oceans, you know - the engine that drive’s the planet’s weather, are their single focus.

WRONG! The engine that drives the temp. on earth is the Sun.

Afterall, we are talking about the global warming scam.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 04:22 PM
Oooooookaaaaay.:rolleyes:

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/13463/1066/

Teetop
06-17-2008, 04:35 PM
Oooooookaaaaay.:rolleyes:

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/13463/1066/


by kenzrwA May 2006 SCIENCE Magazine article says the sun's radiance INcreased from 1990 to 2005. Who's right? From Dimming to Brightening: Decadal Changes in Solar…

Do you even look at all of what you post? The very first comment disputes what you posted.

The earth warms and it cools. It always hasa, and always will. Except now, Al Whore and da few others are trying to scam everyone.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 04:51 PM
[QUOTE=Teetop;9445The earth warms and it cools. It always hasa, and always will. Except now, Al Whore and da few others are trying to scam everyone.[/QUOTE]

Yep - it always hasa. ;)

Which isn’t the point of the global warming science, don’t you know - it’s the possibility of AN ACCELLERATED RATE, that may be caused by man’s actions.

Molon Labe
06-17-2008, 04:54 PM
I've got a link somewhere to that kid who turned all the numbers for the global warming community upside down last year. Basically his little "adjustment" resulted in the top 5 most recent years not being so hot as was originally believed. Some years in the early part of the 20th century were jockeying for top postiions.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 05:01 PM
Volcanoes contribute to global warming too. If we could use them to produce electrical energy by uncorking the lava, would it be acceptable to do so - because of our piss-poor-planning? There are 800 million cars on the planet presently. By 2050 it’s projected there will be three times as many. Somewhere there’s a tipping point where we won’t be able to clean up our own shit.

gator
06-17-2008, 05:54 PM
Yep - it always hasa. ;)

Which isn’t the point of the global warming science, don’t you know - it’s the possibility of AN ACCELLERATED RATE, that may be caused by man’s actions.


The problem is that we don't really know enough to measure the rate and then attribute the rate to man made causes. The data for historical climate change going back more than about 50 years ago is sketchy as best. Hardly good enough to separate out the factors that may or not have been made by Man.

Global climate is a very complex system. We don't how to model or even measure properly.

For instance, in 2004 there was a major study that indicated the earth was getting warmer. Come to find out that 50% of the measurements were taken at universities and weather centers in the US, which is only 6% of the surface area. At the same time only a few measurements were taken in Siberia that was undergoing a significant cooling spell. Many scientists signed their name to that bogus report. It is even in the credits of Algore's movie.

There have been significant climate changes since the end of the dinosaur era, leading to the evolution of Man. During Man’s time on earth there has been significant climate change and we have adapted. We will adapt in the future regardless of the reasons for the climate change.

If some stupid Left Winger thinks that we can somehow keep the earth in some perfect weather system by recycling more or driving smaller vehicles or whatever then he/she is a first rate dumbass.

gator
06-17-2008, 05:55 PM
Volcanoes contribute to global warming too. If we could use them to produce electrical energy by uncorking the lava, would it be acceptable to do so - because of our piss-poor-planning?

You want to take a stab at trying to engineer that? How about power distribution?

Don't say stupid things.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 06:02 PM
You want to take a stab at trying to engineer that? How about power distribution?

Don't say stupid things.

Well shit - you won’t tell us how to build smaller - more environmentally friendly nuclear power plants!:D

Vepr
06-17-2008, 06:27 PM
Hah! Our collective softeness and lust for comfort and ease of use will trump any environmental concerns that would effect our standard of living. Even our tree huggers are wasteful and slovenly when it comes to the environment.

LogansPapa
06-17-2008, 06:51 PM
Hah! Our collective softeness and lust for comfort and ease of use will trump any environmental concerns that would effect our standard of living. Even our tree huggers are wasteful and slovenly when it comes to the environment.

So again, that begs the question - with more global consumers of these things we covet so much coming on line, does that mean a finite amount of resources draws our standard of living down from the point we enjoy presently?

:confused:

Vepr
06-17-2008, 08:23 PM
So again, that begs the question - with more global consumers of these things we covet so much coming on line, does that mean a finite amount of resources draws our standard of living down from the point we enjoy presently?

:confused:

Resources becoming scarce could very well cause a drop in standard of living down. I was pointing out that we will talk a good game about saving the environment but we won't let that stand in our way of comfort while there are still resources out there to be used up hand over fist. Support the environment unless it means I can't get my daily double frapachino thingy and then I want rain forrests leveled! ;)

LogansPapa
06-18-2008, 09:55 AM
Support the environment unless it means I can't get my daily double frapachino thingy and then I want rain forrests leveled! ;)

Bingo. ;)