A Very Interesting Take on the "Green" Movement

[westwall]

I came across this transcript of a interview with a BBC commentator and it was very enlightening. I found this section particularly interesting, in that is truly shows that the environment is the furthest thing from their minds, they are interested in controlling people and they will use any methods possible to get that control.

"TOWNSEND: I was making a speech to nearly 200
really hard core, deep environmentalists and I played
a little thought game on them. I said imagine I am the
carbon fairy and I wave a magic wand. We can get rid
of all the carbon in the atmosphere, take it down to
two hundred fifty parts per million and I will ensure
with my little magic wand that we do not go above
two degrees of global warming. However, by waving
my magic wand I will be interfering with the laws of
physics not with people – they will be as selfish, they
will be as desiring of status. The cars will get bigger,
the houses will get bigger, the planes will fly all over
the place but there will be no climate change. And I
asked them, would you ask the fairy to wave its
magic wand? And about 2 people of the 200 raised
their hands.

ROWLATT: That is quite shocking. I bet you were
shocked, weren’t you?

TOWNSEND: I was angry. I wasn’t shocked. I was
angry because it really showed that they wanted
more. They didn’t just want to prevent climate
change. They wanted to somehow change people, or
at very least for people to know that they had to
change."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/analysis/transcripts/25_01_10.txt

 

[Mini 14]

Supports what I've said all along:

AGW is a political and religious movement, and not science.

 

[Old Rocks]

Sure, dingleberries. Politics and religion making the arctic sea ice, the greenland ice cap, and the anarctic ice cap melt, along with almost all of the alpine glaciers. I would have to say what ever new religion that is, it sure is getting more results than any of the old ones.

 

[westwall]

Sure, dingleberries. Politics and religion making the arctic sea ice, the greenland ice cap, and the anarctic ice cap melt, along with almost all of the alpine glaciers. I would have to say what ever new religion that is, it sure is getting more results than any of the old ones.

No, those are natural processes that have been going on since time began on this planet. But that would be science and as we all know you detest science.

 

[Old Rocks]

Sure, Walleyes, sure. Same as the American Geophysical Union and Royal Society detest science. And every other Scientific Society. But our faux geologist just knows more than all these scientists put together.

 

[westwall]

Sure, Walleyes, sure. Same as the American Geophysical Union and Royal Society detest science. And every other Scientific Society. But our faux geologist just knows more than all these scientists put together.

No, but I am ethical and please it is the leadership of those organizations not the body of the membership that agrees with the nonsense. The leadership is heavily invested in GW as a means for grants and academic advancement, not scientific endeavor. There's a huge difference between science and political advocacy, and that's what your boys do now...political advocacy...not science.

That's why you're losing the battle.

 

[JBeukema]

Roses are red, but not 'green'

 

[Trakar]

...No, but I am ethical and please it is the leadership of those organizations not the body of the membership that agrees with the nonsense. The leadership is heavily invested in GW as a means for grants and academic advancement, not scientific endeavor. There's a huge difference between science and political advocacy, and that's what your boys do now...political advocacy...not science.

That's why you're losing the battle.

A curious conspiracy theory you present, I suppose you have some compelling objective evidence to support this rather outrageous claim?

 

[westwall]

...No, but I am ethical and please it is the leadership of those organizations not the body of the membership that agrees with the nonsense. The leadership is heavily invested in GW as a means for grants and academic advancement, not scientific endeavor. There's a huge difference between science and political advocacy, and that's what your boys do now...political advocacy...not science.

That's why you're losing the battle.

A curious conspiracy theory you present, I suppose you have some compelling objective evidence to support this rather outrageous claim?

Sure, here's a recent article showing how the use of bad science allowed the insurance companies to rake in a few billion dollars by overstating the possible damages that might possibly be caused by GW, all with zero evidence to back it up.

Enjoy!

Unscientific hype about the flooding risks from climate change will cost us all dear - Telegraph

 

[Toronado3800]

Lets say you have two fish tanks. One is filled with a "normal" atmospheric mixture. The other has a higher percentage of greenhouse gasses. Which one will be warmer?

Now onto the conspiracy. I heard one the other day about oil companies that want us to keep using oil. Another about the NFL fooling with laws which regulate beer sales on Sunday.

Point is we all have conspiracy theories. I propose this belongs in that forum unless we are here to debate if CO2 helps hold heat.

 

[Trakar]

...No, but I am ethical and please it is the leadership of those organizations not the body of the membership that agrees with the nonsense. The leadership is heavily invested in GW as a means for grants and academic advancement, not scientific endeavor. There's a huge difference between science and political advocacy, and that's what your boys do now...political advocacy...not science.

That's why you're losing the battle.

A curious conspiracy theory you present, I suppose you have some compelling objective evidence to support this rather outrageous claim?

Sure, here's a recent article showing how the use of bad science allowed the insurance companies to rake in a few billion dollars by overstating the possible damages that might possibly be caused by GW, all with zero evidence to back it up.

Enjoy!

Unscientific hype about the flooding risks from climate change will cost us all dear - Telegraph

An Op-Ed piece in a British tabloid hardly qualifies as "compelling objective evidence."

 

[skookerasbil]

Sure, dingleberries. Politics and religion making the arctic sea ice, the greenland ice cap, and the anarctic ice cap melt, along with almost all of the alpine glaciers. I would have to say what ever new religion that is, it sure is getting more results than any of the old ones.

at breakfast......... they serve healthy portions of naive out there in Bumfook, Oregon.

 

[westwall]

A curious conspiracy theory you present, I suppose you have some compelling objective evidence to support this rather outrageous claim?

Sure, here's a recent article showing how the use of bad science allowed the insurance companies to rake in a few billion dollars by overstating the possible damages that might possibly be caused by GW, all with zero evidence to back it up.

Enjoy!

Unscientific hype about the flooding risks from climate change will cost us all dear - Telegraph

An Op-Ed piece in a British tabloid hardly qualifies as "compelling objective evidence."

Typical alarmist response. The sources are there for you to look at. The fact that you damn the medium of information release merely shows you to be the partisan hack you are. Thank you for making that very plain. I see you too know Oregon very well, you must be yet another relative of olfraud

 

[Trakar]

..Typical alarmist response. The sources are there for you to look at. The fact that you damn the medium of information release merely shows you to be the partisan hack you are. Thank you for making that very plain.

So I'm considered unreasonable and partisan for asking you to support your assessments of science with legitimate scientific sources of information? When you come up with any legitimate supporting information for any of your assertions I will be glad to examine and discuss the issues you have.

 

[westwall]

..Typical alarmist response. The sources are there for you to look at. The fact that you damn the medium of information release merely shows you to be the partisan hack you are. Thank you for making that very plain.

So I'm considered unreasonable and partisan for asking you to support your assessments of science with legitimate scientific sources of information? When you come up with any legitimate supporting information for any of your assertions I will be glad to examine and discuss the issues you have.

You should just retreat back into your sock puppet drawer olfraud lite.

 

[Oddball]

 

[IanC]

...No, but I am ethical and please it is the leadership of those organizations not the body of the membership that agrees with the nonsense. The leadership is heavily invested in GW as a means for grants and academic advancement, not scientific endeavor. There's a huge difference between science and political advocacy, and that's what your boys do now...political advocacy...not science.

That's why you're losing the battle.

A curious conspiracy theory you present, I suppose you have some compelling objective evidence to support this rather outrageous claim?

AGU Release No. 10–39
15 November 2010
For Immediate Release

WASHINGTON—The American Geophysical Union’s board of directors has approved two new members who will bring expertise in science policy and communication: policy advisor Floyd DesChamps and author Chris Mooney. Their selection reflects AGU’s commitment to applying the results of scientific research to challenges faced by the global community, many of which are based in the geosciences.

Floyd DesChamps served as senior advisor on climate change to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee from 1997 to 2009, and was a co-author of the landmark climate bill, the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (also called the McCain-Lieberman Climate Change Bill). He is currently a senior vice-president for the Alliance to Save Energy, where he develops the Alliance’s policy initiatives.

DesChamps has degrees in mechanical engineering and engineering management, and previously worked for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Chris Mooney is a journalist and author of Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future (co-authored by Sheril Kirshenbaum) and “Do Scientists Understand the Public?” a report of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He co-writes a blog with Kirshenbaum called “The Intersection” at Discover magazine which covers science’s interactions with politics and other realms.

Mooney was a Knight Science Journalism Fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology from 2009-2010 and a Templeton-Cambridge Fellow in Science and Religion in 2010.

AGU bylaws authorize appointment of up to two members of the Board in addition to those elected by the membership. President Michael J. McPhaden exercised that option in bringing DesChamps and Mooney to the Board for approval.

AGU president uses his personal option to add a non scientist, environmental political activist to the Board of Directors!

 

[xsited1]

...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/analysis/transcripts/25_01_10.txt

I wouldn't put too much stock in it. Most of the 200 people in attendance were probably smoking crack at the time and didn't hear the question. The 2 that did raise their hands probably thought he was asking them if they wanted a bong hit.

 

[Old Rocks]

This kind of garbage is all that Walleyes has.

 

[westwall]

This kind of garbage is all that Walleyes has.

At least I don't make up fictious people to help my arguments there trakar!