Is the AGWCult a "Reality Denier!!!"?

[jc456]

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

again,

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

Wait, I thought Einhofer was a nobody expressing his personal opinion, now you're telling us in an interview about the IPCC he was talking about some other organization?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

again,

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

Crick is a pathological lair. I don't know what else makes sense here

Moderation Note: I'm flagging posts today -- rather than deleting them, so that everyone will have examples of Zone2 violations. Especially those posts that are all flame -- no content. It's not working just to delete them. We NEED to have this forum under "relevant content" rules to give it the respect it deserves.. CrusaderFrank

FlaCalTenn

 

[Crick]

Wait, I thought Einhofer was a nobody expressing his personal opinion, now you're telling us in an interview about the IPCC he was talking about some other organization?

I'm really getting tired of your shit Frank. What YOU said Edenhofer said is only a few posts back. Anyone who wants to go back and discover what a lying scuzzbag you actually are, will not have far to go. I'm done with you Frank.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wait, I thought Edenhofer was a nobody expressing his personal opinion, now you're telling us in an interview about the IPCC he was talking about some other organization?

I'm really getting tired of your shit Frank. What YOU said Edenhofer said is only a few posts back. Anyone who wants to go back and discover what a lying scuzzbag you actually are, will not have far to go. I'm done with you Frank.

What Edenhofer said is in quotes for all to read. Your "interpretation" of it is laughable

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy

 

[Billy_Bob]

Wait, I thought Einhofer was a nobody expressing his personal opinion, now you're telling us in an interview about the IPCC he was talking about some other organization?

I'm really getting tired of your shit Frank. What YOU said Edenhoffer said is only a few posts back. Anyone who wants to go back and discover what a lying scuzzbag you actually are, will not have far to go. I'm done with you Frank.

After reading the NZZ article, those who did the interview, it is not in question what the IPCC and UN want. They have stated it for years. Edenhoffer simply restated what is already factually known. You for some reason think that by lying or misdirecting that it will change what he said.

SO are you ignorant by choice?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What Edenhofer said, "But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy"

Crick explains:

1. first explanation, he's a low level economist at IPCC
2. second explanation, he's expressing his personal opinion
3. third explanation, Frank's lying

 

[Billy_Bob]

What Edenhofer said, "But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy"

Crick explains:

1. first explanation, he's a low level economist at IPCC
2. second explanation, he's expressing his personal opinion
3. third explanation, Frank's lying

Isn't PROJECTION and MISDIRECTION grand.??

 

[mamooth]

What else has Dread Lord Ottmar forced you deniers to do, aside from mandating that you become socialists?

Claiming that a guy named Ottmar has implemented world socialism is totally bonkers. If you didn't understand that before, I just broke it to you.

 

[skookerasbil]

"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy."

- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation





The Green Agenda[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html'][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world."

- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

 

[skookerasbil]

"It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true."

- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

"We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public's imagination...
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."


- Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

 

[skookerasbil]

"The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

- Club of Rome,
premier environmental think-tank,
consultants to the United Nations



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/tokyo-4-festival-p-072_3.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

Like I say...........a cottage industry!!

 

[skookerasbil]

The Intellectual Appreciation of Poop Humor PoopReport.com Your 1 source for 2.

A site to report you poop.................

Moderation Note: I'm flagging posts today -- rather than deleting them, so that everyone will have examples of Zone2 violations. Especially those posts that are all flame -- no content. It's not working just to delete them. We NEED to have this forum under "relevant content" rules to give it the respect it deserves..

FlaCalTenn skookerasbil

 

[Billy_Bob]

"We've got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy."

- Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation





The Green Agenda

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world."

- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

"We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public's imagination...
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."


- Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports

Its amazing to quote these people who confirm exactly what Otomar Edenhoffer stated and so many sources which believe lying to gain their control of humanity trumps truth... AHhhh the appeal to authority is exposed as just one more lie from these bastards..

 

[mamooth]

Skook, Billy, was it your Dread Lord Ottmar who told you to spam all the nonsense that nobody cares about?

What other heinous deeds has your new evil master commanded of you? How much power does he hold over you? Is there any order from Dread Lord Ottmar that you would refuse to carry out?

If Dark Lord Soros and Dread Lord Ottmar fought, who would win?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole"

Crick blocks out those pesky facts... because they show him a disingenuous fool and his cult beliefs exposed!

First: Even in this expanded quote, Edenhofer does not mention the IPCC and does not mention climate science. Thus on that point alone, Frank's interpretation is still FALSE.
Second: The IPCC has no authority to set anyone's policy, concerning transfers of wealth or on any other matter. They can't even set their own; they work under the auspices of the WMO and the UNEP who created them and wrote and maintain their charter.
Third: The UN itself does not have the power to redistribute one penny of anyone's wealth.
Fourth: The term "international climate policy" refers to the climate policies of the world's nations, not the policies of the IPCC

Edenhofer is addressing the fact that a great deal of the world's wealth is tied up or associated with fossil fuels and fossil fuel produced energy. Moving away from that situation will have an effect on the generation and ownership of that wealth. People whose wealth is based on the consumption of fossil fuels will find their assets affected.

And you accuse US of scare mongering.

You people are tiresome.

again,

I'm the one with the fucking quote marks asshole. The quotes show quite clearly that Edenhofer DID NOT say what Frank has now twice said he did. Unless Frank (or his buddy, Billy Boy) has another quote to show us, FRANK NEEDS TO WITHDRAW HIS CLAIM.

I stand by my claim that you have changed your story on Edenhofers quote.

But apparently do NOT stand behind the claim to which all my comments have been addressed for the last five or six exchanges:

One of the lead authors of IPCC 4 told us flat out the the AGWCult has nothing in common with science but is a ruse to redistribute wealth.

This statement has been demonstrated a falsehood, Frank. Withdraw it.

First you tell us he's a nobody expressing his personal opinion

Show us a quote of me saying such a thing Frank. And he was expressing his personal opinion. The IPCC has a written charter Frank. No where in their controlling documentation is there ANYTHING supporting your ridiculous charges. Edenhofer was expressing his opinion as an economist on how global warming will be stopped by the policies of the governments of the world. Get a goddamned education, Frank. Isn't English your native language? I have to tell you, your frequent failures to understand it make the answer to that question dubious.

and now you tell us in an interview in his capacity as lead author of IPCC 4 he was not describing the IPCC.

In the statement I quoted, he was not describing the IPCC and you're an idiot to think he was.

They must pay you handsomely to change your stories and damage your already diminished credibility

Pack it up your ass and jump, Frank. The quote tells us you're a lying piece of shit. You could have saved yourself a great deal of embarrassment if you'd only accepted that when it first came out. This long attempt at deflection has made you look as unprincipled as unprincipled could be.

crick, so you highligte that Edenhofer stated that "global warming will be stopped by the policies of the government of the world" And Frank posted what the man stated here:

""But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole" - Ottmar Edenhofer"

So please explain how he, Frank, is wrong?

Crick is a pathological lair. I don't know what else makes sense here

Moderation Note: I'm flagging posts today -- rather than deleting them, so that everyone will have examples of Zone2 violations. Especially those posts that are all flame -- no content. It's not working just to delete them. We NEED to have this forum under "relevant content" rules to give it the respect it deserves.. CrusaderFrank

FlaCalTenn

Crick is allowed to lie, I just can't call him on it.

OK, thanks for clearing that up