This presentation/video helps clarify our situation, I give this guy props for taking the time to put this together. You'll probably want to view the larger version (easier to see the data/slides).
While I agree with the ideal of this, I do not think it has ever proven out in history. Humans are way too self centered.
rose, the UN/League of Nations is the upper management for WB, IMF, UNEP, IPCC, etc. They're all related. Don't take my word, please do a search and see for yourself. The corruption in the UN and all of its programs is there for all to see.
look at the US, especially in the early years and you'll see where this bears out.
If you think handing over the largest transfer of (your and your children's) wealth in history to the likes of the UN, the IMF and the World Bank, putting Goldman Sachs/JP Morgan, etc., in charge of Carbon Trading Derivatives scheme, you've lost your marbles, or you simply have not thought this through. These are arguably the biggest conmen/crooks on the planet. (don't take my word, please grab a cup of coffee and do a little research)
The UN does not belong in that list. They're not great, but they're not the same as the other finance-based groups you've mentioned.
miamizsun wrote:
This is why using force, or the threat of force/brutality doesn't inspire real creative thought or true motivation.
Forcing/enslaving people to pay for empire/war/killing/murder and bailing out the likes of crony capitalists/corporatists (too big to fail) isn't smart (or moral) and historically these types of governments always fail.
I do not know what you're referring to here. Force/brutality is a separate issue from the more surreptitious overtaking of power that is occurring via capitalism/corporatists. We could get rid of brutality, and still have corporate rule.. and vice versa. Both are wrong, but in very different ways.
miamizsun wrote:
When people have the (personal/individual) freedom to pursue moral issues, good things happen.
People will always do more (and better work) out of love of family/friends/others and self interest, than laboring under the tyrannical iron fist of corrupt, abusive and wasteful government.
While I agree with the ideal of this, I do not think it has ever proven out in history. Humans are way too self centered.
I say, show me any western society in which your statements are true.
You would have to go to tribal nations for examples. And amongst modern countries that are the most peaceful and productive, they are Democratic Socialist... and their whole culture is geared toward the better good of the whole. And that requires extreme government intervention and a somewhat forced sacrificing of personal freedom (and the citizens are generally not unhappy about that sacrifice.)
I think America is on the teetering point of deciding whether or not to be a nation of corrupt government. I think thinkers like us are loosing the battle. And it could be... after what I've seen about what so easily happened with the likes of Haliburton... that America has made it's choice, and the culture has been established.
Working hard over here, busy, busy, busy, but I wanted to post a couple of quick thoughts for my fellow RPeeps....
We know we're always warming and cooling, have been for billions of years.
We can wax on this for eons.
Want to encourage people to reduce pollution, carbon output, etc.?
Want to see the best and brightest people on the planet focus their attention and resources on this area?
From a Government standpoint, get out of the way and give them an incentive, make it worth their time and trouble.
Want to see real efficiency and "green" jobs?
Release them from the Government confiscation of their wealth (taxation) if they meet a certain criteria and see what happens.
When people have the (personal/individual) freedom to pursue moral issues, good things happen.
This is why using force, or the threat of force/brutality doesn't inspire real creative thought or true motivation.
People will always do more (and better work) out of love of family/friends/others and self interest, than laboring under the tyrannical iron fist of corrupt, abusive and wasteful government.
Forcing/enslaving people to pay for empire/war/killing/murder and bailing out the likes of crony capitalists/corporatists (too big to fail) isn't smart (or moral) and historically these types of governments always fail.
Look at the concern/issue (global warming/cooling, pollution, etc.) and look at the proposed Government action/solution.
If you think handing over the largest transfer of (your and your children's) wealth in history to the likes of the UN, the IMF and the World Bank, putting Goldman Sachs/JP Morgan, etc., in charge of Carbon Trading Derivatives scheme, you've lost your marbles, or you simply have not thought this through. These are arguably the biggest conmen/crooks on the planet. (don't take my word, please grab a cup of coffee and do a little research)
This should be a giant red flag, an obvious ruse.
Clearly this solution is about money, power and control.
We've got to be smarter than this if we want real results.
WASHINGTON — An academic board of inquiry has largely cleared a noted Pennsylvania State University climatologist of scientific misconduct, but a second panel will convene to determine whether his behavior undermined public faith in the science of climate change, the university said Wednesday.
The scientist, Dr. Michael E. Mann, has been at the center of a dispute arising from the unauthorized release of more than 1,000 e-mail messages from the servers of the University of East Anglia in England, home to one of the world’s premier climate research units.
While the Pennsylvania State inquiry, conducted by three senior faculty members and administrators, absolved Dr. Mann of the most serious charges against him, it is not likely to silence the controversy over climate science. New questions about the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to which Dr. Mann was a significant contributor, have arisen since the hacked e-mail messages surfaced last November.
That faculty board did not look into the science of climate change itself, the university said in announcing its results. That, it said, is “a matter more appropriately left to the profession.”
Dr. Mann was named in 377 of the e-mail messages, including several that critics took to suggest that he had manipulated or destroyed data to strengthen his case that human activity was changing the global climate.
In the best-known message, he refers to a “trick” in a graph he produced a decade ago showing 1,000 years of essentially steady global surface temperatures followed by a sharp upward spike in the 20th century, seemingly corresponding to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The so-called hockey stick graph has become an icon for environmentalists. It was prominently displayed in a 2001 United Nations report concluding that greenhouse gases from human activities had probably caused most of the warming measured since 1950.
In some of the e-mail messages, Dr. Mann refers to his assembly of data from a number of different sources, including ancient tree rings and earth core samples, as a “trick.” Critics pounced on the term and said it was evidence that Dr. Mann and other scientists had manipulated temperature data to support their conclusions. But the Pennsylvania State inquiry board said the term “trick” was used by scientists and mathematicians to refer to an insight that solves a problem. “The so-called trick was nothing more than a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion by a technique that has been reviewed by a broad array of peers in the field,” the panel said.
The e-mail messages also contained suggestions that Dr. Mann had hidden or destroyed e-mail messages and other information relating to a United Nations climate change report to prevent other scientists from reviewing them. Dr. Mann produced the material in question, and the Pennsylvania State board cleared him of the charge.
There were also questions about whether Dr. Mann misused confidential data and engaged in a conspiracy with like-minded scientists to withhold information from competing scholars. The board found nothing to support the charge.
Location: its wet, windy and chilly....take a guess Gender:
Posted:
Feb 3, 2010 - 4:48pm
black321 wrote:
Economic growth 'cannot continue'
Continuing global economic growth "is not possible" if nations are to tackle climate change, a report by an environmental think-tank has warned.
The New Economics Foundation (Nef) said "unprecedented and probably impossible" carbon reductions would be needed to hold temperature rises below 2C (3.6F).
Nowhere in that article does it mention the increase in growth provided by a broadening green energy market. Power (Energy*time) is money. The low-carbon and carbon neutral ways of producing storing and using energy will provide a new growth area, as well as streamlining businesses into low carbon-cost or low-energy methods. This was rather telling though:
"Magic bullets - such as carbon capture and storage, nuclear or even geo-engineering - are potentially dangerous distractions from more human-scale solutions," said co-author Victoria Johnson, Nef's lead researcher for the climate change and energy programme.
She added that there was growing support for community-scale projects, such as decentralised energy systems, but support from governments was needed.
"At the moment, magic bullets... are getting much of the funding and political attention, but are missing the targets," Dr Johnson said.
VERY INTERESTING AND WELL WORTH VIEWING. It's presented by a weather expert, John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel. Believable—-and no politicians involved. http://www.kusi.com/home/78477082.html?video=pop&t=a
"The increasingly public "skepticism" of aging weatherman John Coleman raises an interesting question: Do you have to be corrupt to be wrong about climate change?
The answer, of course, is no. Notwithstanding the money that Coleman makes as a guest speaker for oily conferences organized by long-compromised groups like the Heartland Institute, he may be sincere, even well-intentioned about his personal campaign to dismiss climate change as "the greatest scam in history."
But that doesn't absolve him of responsibility, especially as he is leveraging a high profile to interfere in a debate about which he is clearly ill-informed."
Coleman may be sincere. He may be well-intentioned. He may be a charming dupe. But he should be ashamed of himself for not taking more care in what he reads and who he befriends.
And the rest of us should ignore him more enthusiastically than the good people of San Diego ignore his weather forecasts."
VERY INTERESTING AND WELL WORTH VIEWING. It's presented by a weather expert, John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel. Believable—-and no politicians involved. http://www.kusi.com/home/78477082.html?video=pop&t=a
John Coleman apparently receives funding from polluting industries through the likes of the Heartland Institute, a lobbying firm for the tobacco industry and various big carbon producers. I think I'll get my understanding of the climate change issue from the vast majority of scientists who have said that global warming is probably human-caused, not from a TV weatherman who is the paid shill of polluters.
VERY INTERESTING AND WELL WORTH VIEWING. It's presented by a weather expert, John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel. Believable—-and no politicians involved. http://www.kusi.com/home/78477082.html?video=pop&t=a
Your State of the Union speech last week laudably referenced clean tech and renewable energy several times. We ask that you follow your words with action, by leading the transition to a post-carbon economy and a healthier world.
You also spoke of our need to face hard truths.
Hard truth: Our continued, willful reliance on fossil fuels is making our planet uninhabitable. We are evicting ourselves from the only paradise we’ve ever known.
Hard truth: No combination of current and anticipated renewable sources can maintain our profligate energy usage as the global supply of fossil fuels heads for terminal decline.
For the recently released Searching for a Miracle, Post Carbon Institute Senior Fellow Richard Heinberg conducted a “net energy” analysis of 18 different energy sources (including nuclear and “clean coal”). He concluded that the amount of energy available after accounting for the energy used in extraction and production of those sources is—at our current and anticipated rates of consumption—insufficient to get us “over the hump” to a post-carbon world.
Our 29 Post Carbon Institute Fellows—experts in the leading economic, energy, and environmental issues of the day—all agree that this "net energy" deficit is just one of many interrelated crises shaping the 21st century. Each crisis alone creates formidable challenges; in combination, their complexity admits no simple solution. But given their direness, inaction risks tragedy.
Mr. President, we respect you and your advisors and appreciate the enormity of the dilemmas you and all of us confront. When a great leader frames a great challenge, a resilient will people rise to meet the opportunity. And so we ask, Mr. President, that you tell the American people that we must:
1. Face reality. In a carbon-constrained world, true prosperity comes not from heedless growth, but from shared security, community, and liberty.
2. Prepare for the future. Conservation, with an emphasis on building a green economy and revitalizing struggling communities, offers cost-effective “found” energy, and the most immediate and long-term return on investment.
3. Lead the way. A substantial investment in renewable energy, with an emphasis on distributed solar and wind, offers the best hope for moving to a sustainable economy and environment.
Mr. President, lead us in creating a future worth inheriting. Post Carbon Institute and our Fellows will support you and your team in whatever capacity we can. We believe that the American people, and the world’s people, will support you as well.
If I was a 3rd world country... how would I defend myself from being overrun by the excesses of the Western World? How do poor peoples protect themselves from having their very identity destroyed by the tidal wave of consumerism and westernness?
I'm not pro terrorism. I'm certainly not pro Al Quida But the bully cultures need to look what position they put other cultures in. When an huge elephant corners a snake, the snake will strike out and bite the elephant to protect itself. It may not be able to win, but it can hurt the elephant. And if the elephant is a conscious being, should it destroy the snake, just because it bites?
Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden reportedly issued a new audiotape Friday, calling for an international boycott of American goods and the U.S. dollar as a way to combat climate change. In the new tape, a voice said to be bin Laden's rambles about the dangers of global warming before predictably segueing into his broader argument - that the only way to stop worldwide catastrophe is to bring "the wheels of the American economy" to a standstill. (Maybe no one has told bin Laden that China is actually now the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions?) The tape's authenticity has yet to be confirmed, but it wouldn't be the first time bin Laden has mentioned climate change, just his first tape that's dedicated entirely to the subject. The tape blames Western nations for floods, desertification and other environmental ills around the world, and demands "drastic action" rather than "solutions that partially reduce the effect." Bin Laden also released another tape last week in which he took credit for a Nigerian student's failed Christmas Day airplane bombing attempt, and many terrorism experts say these tapes seem to be desperate attempts by bin Laden to regain his relevance on the world stage. (Sources: Associated Press, BBC News)
I consider this gentleman a respected friend. I have and do trust (to an extent) the material he puts out. I think to the best of his knowledge he produces videos that are educational and informative. In light of new material, I'm looking forward to his updates. (His "Made Easy" series are a hit, especially on evolution.) He also touches on the hacked emails, and it has caused me to rethink some of the "cherry picked" (his words, not mine) quotes we see. I had posted this some time back when there were only four videos, now there are seven. He defends anthropogenic warming to a degree (some pun intended). Considering the lag time between discovery and production, his work is one of the best arguments I've seen.
I consider this gentleman a respected friend. I have and do trust (to an extent) the material he puts out. I think to the best of his knowledge he produces videos that are educational and informative. In light of new material, I'm looking forward to his updates. (His "Made Easy" series are a hit, especially on evolution.) He also touches on the hacked emails, and it has caused me to rethink some of the "cherry picked" (his words, not mine) quotes we see. I had posted this some time back when there were only four videos, now there are seven. He defends anthropogenic warming to a degree (some pun intended). Considering the lag time between discovery and production, his work is one of the best arguments I've seen.
Continuing global economic growth "is not possible" if nations are to tackle climate change, a report by an environmental think-tank has warned.
The New Economics Foundation (Nef) said "unprecedented and probably impossible" carbon reductions would be needed to hold temperature rises below 2C (3.6F).
No, it's more about "turning our children into Orwellian eco-spies"...
Tuesday 15 December 2009
Frank Furedi
Turning children into Orwellian eco-spies Frank Furedi recalls being educated through fear in Stalinist Hungary, and is disturbed that the same tactics are now used by environmentalists.
There is a long and sordid tradition of trying to socialise children by scaring them. The aim of such socialisation-through-fear is twofold: firstly, to get children to conform to the scaremongers' values; secondly, to use children to influence, or at least to contain, their parents' behaviour.
When I was a schoolchild in Stalinist Hungary, we were frequently warned about the numerous threats facing our glorious regime. I also recall that we were encouraged to lecture our errant parents about the new wonderful values being promoted by our brave, wise leaders. The Big Brothers of the 1940s saw children as tools of moral blackmail and social control. Today, in the twenty-first century, scaremongers see children in much the same way, exploiting their natural concern with the wonders of life to promote a message of shrill climate alarmism.
If you want to know how it works, watch the official opening video of the Copenhagen summit on climate change (see below). Titled ‘Please Help The World', the four-minute film opens with happy children laughing and playing on swings. A sudden outburst of rain forces them all to rush for cover. The message is clear: the climate threatens our way of life. It then cuts to a young girl who is anxiously watching one TV news broadcaster after another reporting on impending environmental catastrophes. Then we see the young girl tucked into bed, sweetly asleep as she embraces her toy polar bear... but suddenly we're drawn into her nightmare. She's on a parched and eerie landscape; she looks frightened and desolate; suddenly the dry earth cracks and she runs in terror towards the shelter of a distant solitary tree. She drops her toy polar bear in a newly formed chasm and yells and screams as she holds on to the tree for dear life. The video ends with groups of children pleading with us: ‘Please help the world.' You get the picture.
excellent. Stolen & posted on FB.
