Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
A more fundamentally interesting discussion would be why the majority of people who think climate change is a scam would place themselves right of center, and whether their conclusion followed the evidence, or whether they sought out the evidence to support the conclusion.Originally Posted by BigBear
"A lot of people seem obliged to have a viewpoint."
I consider myself a lefty, but not a Communist. Just say, I'm a Capitalist with some Socialist leanings.
I only saw the video once, and I seriously thought it was right wing bashing of enviromentalists.
If I am wrong, I apologize.
Yes Sir, that would be.
I thought it was just a poor taste lefty... until I started to think of "spoofs"... if it is a spoof, I could see it being a right wing propaganda thing as you said... But I just don't know enough about the ad/commercail/etc.
It was made by Richard Curtis of Four Weddings/Love Actually fame in support of the 10:10 project in the UK. He and about 40 members of his crew and actors donated their time and efforts for free. It was made 'on spec' somewhat, which means the 10:10 project didn't say "can you show teachers blowing up kids" or anything like that. He presented the film to them, they posted it on their website and almost immediately realised it wasn't in very good taste so they pulled it.
As far as films go, it was very Richard Curtis. All mawkish and middle class. Nice to see Trevor Lock at the end though, I like him.
"A lot of people seem obliged to have a viewpoint."
That doesn't even make sense. Get your brain checked.
This video has been part of a Glenn Beck topic the last few days.
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to Fight, he'll just kill you.
Not to mention the fact that a "carbon tax" is basically an "existence tax."
"There are no finger prints under water."
Paul Krugman, NYT,July 26, 2010:Who Cooked The Planet
" Conservatives who dismiss climate change as a hoax are making a spectacle of their ignorance."
"Conservatives who treat Global Warming as just another scare story are almost certainly mistaken."
"But will any of the deniers say "OK, I guess I was wrong " and support climate action? No. And the planet will continue to cook"
"First of all, we didn't fail to act because of legitimate doubts about the science. Every piece of valid evidence-long term temperature averages that smooth out year-to-year fluctuations, Artic sea ice volume, melting of glaciers, the ratio of record highs to record lows-points to a continuing, and quite possibly accelerating, rise in global temperatures."
" Nor is this evidence tainted by scientific misbehavior. You've probably heard about the accustions leveled against climate researchers -allegations of fabricated data, the supposedly damming e-mail of "Climategate," and so on. What you may not have heard, because it has recieved much less publicity, is that every one of those supposed scandals was eventually unmasked as a fraud concocted by opponents of climate action, then brought into by many in the news media. You don't believe such things can happen? Think Shirley Sherrod."
" All serious estimates suggest that we could phase in limits on greenhouse gas emissions with at most a small impact on the economy's growth rate."
So it wasn't the science the scientists, or the economics that killed action on climate change. What was it?
The answer, is the usual suspects: greed and cowardice.
If you want to understand opposition to climate action, follow the money. The economy as a whole wouldn't be be significantly hurt if we would put a price on carbon, the coal and oil industries-would. And those industries have mounted a huge disinforamation campaign to protect their bottom lines.
Look at the scientists who question the consensus on climate change; look at the organizations pushing fake scandals; look at the think tanks claiming that any effort to limit emissions would cripple the economy. Again and again, you'll find that they're on the receiving end of a pipeline of funding that starts with big energy companies, like Exxon Mobil, which has spent tens of millions of dollars promoting climate-change denial, or Koch Industries, which has been sponsoring anti-enviromental organizations for decades."
Or look at the politicans who have been most vociferously opposed to climate action. Where do they get much of their campaign money? You already know the answer."
Last edited by ERNO; 10-07-2010 at 18:00.
When I was a kid scientists said that we were heading into another ice age.
Then they said acid rain was going to wipe out marine life and make drinkable water scarce.
In gradeschool I remember reading a book about a future when the air was almost unbreathable.
These inoculations of propaganda over the years have rendered me immune to the bullshit.
I don't deny that the climate may be changing. I do deny that it's man made and more taxes and government is the solution.
I also deny that it's all the fault of the "largest polluter", the United States. Did we kill any whales, build the plant outside Pripyat or cause a toxic river of sludge to pour into the Danube?
It's all politics, and it's all about control.
If you want to understand climate change, follow the money. The amount a single corporation can make is a pittance compared to what those in power will have if they can take control and tell everyone what to do and how to do it "for the good of the planet"
The climate change argument is another float in a long parade of liberal hypocrisy. They claim we evolved from primates, and that survival of the fittest is the law of nature.
Yet instead of supporting this ideal by being proponents of adaptation to the changing planet, they demand to be given control of everything to keep the climate exactly the way it is.
(Meanwhile in California it's illegal to clear underbrush, creating a tinderbox for forest fires and forcing people to choose between safeguarding their homes or facing prosecution. In Utah the owner of a car dealership faced prosecution for collecting rainwater in a cistern to save money washing the cars on his lot. He didn't have water rights for the rain.)
The darwin dogma is used to their benefit when they make fun of the religious, then is completely ignored when they tout their climate change agenda.
It is unknown whether the thought has crossed their minds that the planet may be changing on it's own. Personally I think if the climate is changing we should adapt and get on with life. They claim we are the cause but are unable to prove it. I guess they just want everyone to trust them, to take it on faith.
Ironically hypocritical if you ask me.
stop feeding the troll.
on other forums they ban trolls.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote