The Coming Paradigm Shift on Climate

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Articles: The Coming Paradigm Shift on Climate

If/When the paradigm does shift, when will my electric rates necessarily sky rocket---downward? Abandoning this farce may well be the boon the American economy needs to overcome the disastrous last 5-10 years.

 

[Twangbanger]

In before..."regardless what causes it, we must change our lifestyle if we're to avoid eco-catastrophe," yadda yadda, & etc.

 

[MisterChester]

While there is disagreement on details of climate change, I just don't see why we shouldn't leave this planet better than how we found it. If the green crowd is wrong then I guess there's nothing to worry about, but if they are right we will eventually come to a point where it's unsustainable. Better safe than sorry if you ask me. I want to know why some people on here don't agree with keeping the planet clean and suitable for people for generations that'll come after us.

 

[printcraft]

........ I want to know why some people on here don't agree with keeping the planet clean and suitable for people for generations that'll come after us.

Good Lord.

Not buying into the bull**** that is [STRIKE]global cooling[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]global warming[/STRIKE] global climate change does not mean we are for a "dirty planet".
Get real with that progressive strawman talking point.

 

[HoughMade]

"Climate Change" promoters do not really care what causes it. They care that they can use it to control private industry through regulation....and that's not going to change any time soon.

 

[bobzilla]

Good Lord.

Not buying into the bull**** that is [STRIKE]global cooling[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]global warming[/STRIKE] global climate change does not mean we are for a "dirty planet".
Get real with that progressive strawman talking point.

Amen. I've never heard any person who has pointed out the fallacy of the argument of GW/GC/GCC said anything about NOT doing what we can to clean up our act.

 

[MisterChester]

Good Lord.

Not buying into the bull**** that is [STRIKE]global cooling[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]global warming[/STRIKE] global climate change does not mean we are for a "dirty planet".
Get real with that progressive strawman talking point.

Richard Nixon agrees.

 

[KG1]

I don't know about anyone else but I like a dirty planet.

 

[printcraft]

Richard Nixon agrees.

I don't know about anyone else but I like a dirty girl.

FTFY

 

[Dosproduction]

There first off is NO proof that humans are causing climate change. Anyone that says we are please explain the last three Ice ages and how the earth warmed up after each of those. Next just for efficiency reasons most should try to be conservative with there energy wastefulness. It is cheaper to drive a little car then big car ect.. ect... Last anyone that is for polluting there own back yard that is fine. Anyone polluting my back yard that is not fine. So while I am against government regulating anything including industry, what I am for is that industry being regulated by the enforcement of property rights. As in if they blow smoke out of there chimney and it lands on my lawn guess who should pay for that, the people who created it that is who. And if they pollute my drinking water then they should have to clean it up. Start making these CEOs get out there in the oily water and clean the ducks and stuff and see how quick pollution stops. And that is not tree hugging hippie stuff that is common sense.
If any one disagrees with people cleaning up after them selves then i will personally take a big crap on your front door step and see how you feel about it.

 

[Mark 1911]

Articles: The Coming Paradigm Shift on Climate

If/When the paradigm does shift, when will my electric rates necessarily sky rocket---downward? Abandoning this farce may well be the boon the American economy needs to overcome the disastrous last 5-10 years.

Abandon the farce? And miss out on Al Gore's next work of genius? We can only hope.

 

[Lebowski]

There first off is NO proof that humans are causing climate change. Anyone that says we are please explain the last three Ice ages and how the earth warmed up after each of those.

Because mammoths drove Hummers.


While I don't buy into the whole man made global warming stuff, I do not dismiss it entirely either. All in all, I don't think we should be dumping toxic stuff in rivers, oceans and creeks. I don't think factories should be releasing harmful pollutants into the air. I also don't want to live in places like China where air pollution is like this:

My concerns for the environment are more health related for people and animals. The earth has gone through many natural cycles of heating/cooling and many other changes well before man was around to influence it. I think the things we do nowadays impact ourselves, human and animals, more than it does the earth itself. Mother nature is a strong independent woman who don't need no man!

 

[Manatee]

No matter what we do, it will not affect climate in your lifetime.

Your grandkids may think you were insane…but you'll be dead.

 

[Leadeye]

When all the global warming stuff got really rolling I decided to do a little internet searching on the people running the carbon exchange places. Lots of european merchant bankers and investment guys, they're in it for the money, a pipeline from Americans through wall street and into plutocratic pockets. Always follow the money and the real explanation will reveal itself.

 

[churchmouse]

While there is disagreement on details of climate change, I just don't see why we shouldn't leave this planet better than how we found it. If the green crowd is wrong then I guess there's nothing to worry about, but if they are right we will eventually come to a point where it's unsustainable. Better safe than sorry if you ask me. I want to know why some people on here don't agree with keeping the planet clean and suitable for people for generations that'll come after us.

I have never seen any one say we should just trash the place. Seriously. Nobody wants dirty. No one wants contaminated.
The main issues I see are the dumping of contaminated waste and uncontrolled venting.

As to climate change.....it is the sun silly.

 

[KG1]

FTFY

Thank you. That's what I really meant.

 

[jbombelli]

I want to know why some people on here don't agree with keeping the planet clean and suitable for people for generations that'll come after us.

Because I need that **** now.

 

[Twangbanger]

When all the global warming stuff got really rolling I decided to do a little internet searching on the people running the carbon exchange places. Lots of european merchant bankers and investment guys, they're in it for the money, a pipeline from Americans through wall street and into plutocratic pockets. Always follow the money and the real explanation will reveal itself.

What you allude to here is precisely what makes me so suspicious of the GW movement. Goldman Sachs was _salivating_ at the prospect of the US Congress setting up a government-mandated Carbon Credit auctioning system in America. They were going to run it. They were going to have a monopoly over the auctioning of credits for the energy that powers our lives; they would literally have a choke-hold over the engine of the American economy, and nobody could release a molecule of CO2 without coming to the craps-table and playing their game. Nobody probably remembers it much anymore, but before the Republican takeover of the House in 2010, all the knowledgeable Capitol Hill observers were saying that a Cap'n Trade Bill was imminent. It was "not a matter of if, but when," they said. The insiders, the Wall Street types, were ALL OVER this. Just like Chelsea Clinton ended up being a Wall Street hedge fund manager at age 23...the stage was being set for someone like Sasha or Malia Obama to someday be chief of Carbon Trading at Goldman Sachs. The game was afoot.

Then...Obama overreached on Health Care, the Republicans took over the House - and the whole thing went back in the can. To await another day. And there it sits...like a dormant virus, waiting for favorable conditions to return.

What I fear, is that younger people will not have this perspective. Older folks were around when the Cold War ostensibly "ended," when Official Communism fell and suddenly there was this massive influx of Leftist-Socialists into the Global Warming movement. They hated Capitalism, and now that Official Communism was over, they saw GW as the last best chance for fighting against the worldwide spread of Open Market Economics. The Carbon Credit scheme was their master stroke. It was a way to lure the Wall Streeters into supporting and furthering the GW movement, instead of fighting against it, under the guise of a "Market-Based Solution."

...If the green crowd is wrong then I guess there's nothing to worry about...

"Exhibit A" ^^^. Kid, you don't know the half of it. There is a huge cost, in terms of your future, to them being wrong...but like a magician playing a shell game, they've so mesmerized you with the risks behind "Door #1," they have distracted your attention from the risks behind "Door #2," and you cannot make an educated choice until you know the costs and risks of both options.

Young people weren't around to see Global Warming's dubious beginning, and won't have any recollection of how this started. Like Mister Chester, they'll probably look to YouTube videos to educate themselves about the issue, where they will get a slanted message and take it to heart. They've been indoctrinated since they were in grade school about the need to "save the Earth," and so where they should be skeptical when presented with loaded scientific arguments, they will simply be non-judgemental and "receptive" to it. And that's all the opportunity the Wall Streeters need. They need the next generation to be uncritical and receptive to the idea, so that it can be passed by Congress, and the American public can be sold into energy slavery - with Goldman Sachs holding the whip.

Meanwhile - China will continue to build a new coal-fired power plant at a weekly rate, and there won't be a damn thing anybody can do about it. What? "Thomas Friedman says China will be the leader in windmills and solar energy?" Maybe...but only to EXPORT those technologies to mature, captured economies like ours - not for their own use. Because their economy is not mature yet, you see, the Goldman Sachs of the world can still make money investing in its growth - the environment be damned. It's only when a mature economy reaches a stagnation point, like ours, and there's less "honest" money left to be made by economic growth, that the Big Money Guys take the other side of the bet, and put their chips behind profiting from its downfall.

 

[smokingman]

James Lovelock
"We need a more authoritative world. We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that. You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while."

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at global warming skeptics in 2007, declaring"This is treason and we need to start treating them as traitors."

UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland – said “it’s completely immoral, even, to question” the UN’s scientific consensus on climate.

In 2008, prominent Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be “thrown into jail.”

British journalism professor Alex Lockwood said that writers questioning global warming should be banned.

In 2009, a writer at Talking Points Memo advocated that global warming “deniers” be executed or jailed.

January 2014 , an assistant philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology said he wants to send people who disagree with him about global warming to jail.

But it is science...for the children...please we need to tax carbon to save humanity.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Like I've said before, most of the information I've seen quoted on climate change science turns out to have come from primarily politically-based sources.

Getting your science information from politically-based sources is like ordering a pizza from a Chinese restaurant. Sure you might get one, just don't be surprised if it has some soy sauce and squid on it.

And the one big glaring, gaping, gnarly hole that I see in the argument whichever side you are on is that I don't think we are even arguing the real important question. You can argue all you want about "prove that the climate is really changing" and/or "prove that humans are causing the change". And that's fine and well, but like I've said before, even if it is true, and even if humans are causing it, who can prove that humans are capable of stopping it. Show me one case where all the developed nations ever got together and cooperated to accomplish ANYTHING.