jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 141,601
- 30,070
- 2,180
Edenhofer said:""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"
BillyBoy said: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.
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: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:
CRUSADER FRANK said: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.
""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?
again,Edenhofer said:""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"
BillyBoy said: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.
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: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:
CRUSADER FRANK said: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.
""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?