HACKERS REVEAL!! Climate change scientists have been manipulating and fixing data

Johnnyorganic said:

Ignorant stereotypes aside, you make some good points. If the goal of the debate were pollution control I might go along with it. I am in favor of sustainable energy and conservation myself.

But the Man Made aspect of the debate is not about pollution it is about control. It is about wealth redistribution. It is about the Green Industrial Complex. It is about corporatism.

How arrogant are we to believe that anything we do will alter the fucking climate? The Earth has been much warmer and much colder throughout its existence. Natural history is very clear on this point.

One thing about solar and wind, both of those are unreliable and must be backed up with conventional, or nuclear, sources to prevent brown-outs.

Small scale solar and wind power are great and to be encouraged, but industrial sized projects are highly subsidized boondoggles subject to frequent breakdowns (windpower) and unreliable weather. And nuclear, forget about it in the U.S. where NIMBYism runs rampant.

And why don't we hear anything about industrial hemp from the Warmers and other environmental nut-jobs? I mean Jebus Christmas, talk about environmentally friendly! Drought resistant. No chemical pesticides required. Hemp bio-diesel, food, building materials, plastics, cloth, paper, and stock feed. All from one little plant.

Industrial hemp has the potential to save small scale agriculture in this country and revitalize our economy. Then again, this might make Americans less dependent on government. Nevermind.

Click to expand...

Can I get an Amen brother!?

Planting hemp (or trees) would be great, but that's not enough that doesn't begin to address a portion of what this is all about. If you think it's only about global warming you're wrong.


If it's all about money why are the ones drawing it up arranging the money to mainly flow to the poor countries and out of the hands of the people you say just want it for themselves?

Also I realize some politicians aren't very articulate at times, but the wording in that quote you all love so much where Obama says "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" I find very suspect. Do you have another reference to back up that this quote is valid in what it actually means and not just a slip of the toungue or a misquote?

Most people would say a phrase such as "wouldn't necessarily" rather than "would necessarily". Politicians would never ever say costs will skyrocket, they would play costs down or use words other than skyrocket.

It makes very little sense to those that actually do question everything.



s

Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry

So if someone wants to build a coal power plant they can, it's just that it will bankrupt them. - Barack Hussein Obama

Click to expand...

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Johnnyorganic said:

Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry [youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hdi4onAQBWQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Click to expand...

He didn't say "WE WILL BANKRUPT THEM!! MUWAHAHAHAHA!!!" he said "do it, it will bankrupt you" He's forcing companies that dump shit into the air to be accountable for it. (even IF man made climate change is fake) all the other shit in the air from burning coal isn't good for US to breathe in.

Also about the firefighter talking earlier about pure O2 being harmful and CO2 isn't toxic it just suffocates you.
Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Makes perfect sense if we lived in a time when the environment were in balance. We'd be foolish to believe that there is not a MAN MADE imbalance of carbon and CO2 in the air. The very nature of building a coal power plant generates CO2 that prior to that power plant DID NOT exist. It is FOOLISH and downright IGNORANT to ignore FACTS. This extra CO2 DID NOT EXIST before this new plant was built. End of story, that is clear reasoning and logic. Now argue that Obama told me this and made me crazy when I drank his magical Kool-Aid.

Also, why is accountability bad?
Toy manufacturer's are accountable when they put a recommended age on their products.
Music producers are accountable when they place a GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED/REQUIRED Explicit Content warning on their album cases.
Drug companies are "accountable" when they issue warnings, and blah blah (i don't really believe that, but they tell us they are)
Why shouldn't this industry be held accountable for what it is doing?


Shack

OregonMeds said:

Planting hemp (or trees) would be great, but that's not enough that doesn't begin to address a portion of what this is all about. If you think it's only about global warming you're wrong.

If it's all about money why are the ones drawing it up arranging the money to mainly flow to the poor countries and out of the hands of the people you say just want it for themselves?

Also I realize some politicians aren't very articulate at times, but the wording in that quote you all love so much where Obama says "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" I find very suspect. Do you have another reference to back up that this quote is valid in what it actually means and not just a slip of the toungue or a misquote?

Most people would say a phrase such as "wouldn't necessarily" rather than "would necessarily". Politicians would never ever say costs will skyrocket, they would play costs down or use words other than skyrocket.

It makes very little sense to those that actually do question everything.

s

Click to expand...

You must have brushed over my statement about wealth distribution.

The U.N. is dead set on diminishing the global influence of the U.S. Man Made Climate Change was a perfect vehicle until someone let the cat out of the bag.

And you apparently missed my point on industrial hemp.

If we are willing to look at other sustainable energy sources that are proven to be unreliable and dependent upon subsidies, why is industrial hemp ignored?

Shackleford.R said:

why is accountability bad?


Shack

Click to expand...

How is targeting an entire industry for bankruptcy good?

That was close JohnnyO thanks for that, it's a bit too coal specific but I can see how the costs will spill over.

The problem though is he is right, coal is dirty and not renewable and now is the time if anyone is going to build new plants that they must be renewable. There's no reason not to go renewable, we have the ability, the technology, and the workforce to implement them. Even if we just build fields of windmills and if it's nowhere near as cheap or efficient as burning coal we still must switch because it's the best choice long term.

I can understand why people wouldn't want it, we want things as cheap as can be and damn the overall costs you don't see in your bank account directly.

I have stuff to do before I can come back and answer the post above me...

It's not but neither is burning coal.
Have you seen what has happened to the Appalachian Mountains? ENTIRE mountaintops have been stripped mined, and will be forever re-faced all in the name of power. These coal workers cry they can't find another job. THEY CAN! Find another GREEN job or related field that isn't fucking up the earth. Jesus Christ, get off Obama's balls and let him create this new industry, along jobs to support/maintain it!


Shack

OregonMeds said:

That was close JohnnyO thanks for that, it's a bit too coal specific but I can see how the costs will spill over.

The problem though is he is right, coal is dirty and not renewable and now is the time if anyone is going to build new plants that they must be renewable. There's no reason not to go renewable, we have the ability, the technology, and the workforce to implement them. Even if we just build fields of windmills and if it's nowhere near as cheap or efficient as burning coal we still must switch because it's the best choice long term.

I can understand why people wouldn't want it, we want things as cheap as can be and damn the overall costs you don't see in your bank account directly.

And you didn't answer the first question, if it's about money why is all the money flowing away from those you claim want it for themselves?

Click to expand...

When revenue is funneled through any apparatus, you have less at the end than you had at the beginning.

The Owl Gore carbon credit brokerage companies benefit from all the Cap & Trade transactions.

The U.S. Government pinches its share of any tax and regulation revenues before sending tribute to the U.N, which will funnel said revenues through its apparatus before it is redistributed to the various Third World shitholes.

The bribe the shitholes get in the end for supporting the Antropogenic Climate Change hoax will be much diminished from the source revenues.

There's plenty of money to be made for everybody complicit in the scam.

You seem like a pretty intelligent guy and I am surprised I have to explain that concept to you.

OregonMeds said:

Planting hemp (or trees) would be great, but that's not enough that doesn't begin to address a portion of what this is all about. If you think it's only about global warming you're wrong.


If it's all about money why are the ones drawing it up arranging the money to mainly flow to the poor countries and out of the hands of the people you say just want it for themselves?

Also I realize some politicians aren't very articulate at times, but the wording in that quote you all love so much where Obama says "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" I find very suspect. Do you have another reference to back up that this quote is valid in what it actually means and not just a slip of the toungue or a misquote?

Most people would say a phrase such as "wouldn't necessarily" rather than "would necessarily". Politicians would never ever say costs will skyrocket, they would play costs down or use words other than skyrocket.

It makes very little sense to those that actually do question everything.



s

Click to expand...

Here is a link to the video.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi..._trade_makes_electricity_rates_skyrocket.html

How are you lefties going to respond. Video evidence. I didn't just make it up. Cap and trade is economic suicide for the country and each and every individual American. Sorry, this is not the time to be taxing the shit out of us.

Johnnyorganic said:

When revenue is funneled through any apparatus, you have less at the end than you had at the beginning.


Sure and you will win me to your side of the issue if you can show me how the authors of this gain personally.


The Owl Gore carbon credit brokerage companies benefit from all the Cap & Trade transactions.

Al Gore is a piece of shit I will not defend either, we are on the same page there.

If you can show me where his organization or he himself receives money from this, you'll also win me over.


The U.S. Government pinches its share of any tax and regulation revenues before sending tribute to the U.N, which will funnel said revenues through its apparatus before it is redistributed to the various Third World shitholes.


Didn't we just hear above a complaint that this takes the UN out of the loop, but now you say the UN is just part of the conspiracy. Which is it, you can't have it both ways. Yes the US government would have to get it's share, unless you think we have nothing to change here and that change won't take money.


The bribe the shitholes get in the end for supporting the Antropogenic Climate Change hoax will be much diminished from the source revenues.

Speculation


There's plenty of money to be made for everybody complicit in the scam.

Ok just show where the money goes wrongly like I said and I'm all on your side.


You seem like a pretty intelligent guy and I am surprised I have to explain that concept to you.

Click to expand...

I was too lazy to format my responses outside your quote, my responses are in it.

You didn't have to explain it, I already get that but usually in a scam the bulk of the money goes to the perpetrators or their front man themselves.

"How is targeting an entire industry for bankruptcy good?" It's good when that industry has been found to give negative effects that outlast and outweigh the positive and when there is a better alternative ready. And technically it doesn't put anyone out of business it forces them to invest in other means of generating their revenue. Only if they fail to change and adapt will they be put out of business.

OregonMeds said:

I was too lazy to format my responses outside your quote, my responses are in it.

You didn't have to explain it, I already get that but usually in a scam the bulk of the money goes to the perpetrators or their front man themselves.

Click to expand...

Everybody gets paid off along the way and the ultimate goal is still reached.

The corrupt scientists who cooked the books get their grants.

Owl Gore, et al., get immensely rich trading carbon credits.

Democrats stay in office because the economy crashed and the bulk of the population depends on government largess.

The U.N is King of the Global Hill and the U.S. is subservient to it.

The Third World shitholes get their bribes.

Shackleford.R said:

It's not but neither is burning coal.
Have you seen what has happened to the Appalachian Mountains? ENTIRE mountaintops have been stripped mined, and will be forever re-faced all in the name of power. These coal workers cry they can't find another job. THEY CAN! Find another GREEN job or related field that isn't fucking up the earth. Jesus Christ, get off Obama's balls and let him create this new industry, along jobs to support/maintain it!


Shack

Click to expand...

A natural resource will eventually run out in a region where it has been exploited for decades. Basic economic principle.

If Appalachia did not expand its economic base during the salad days I should pity the inhabitants?

Even so, the U.S. has plenty of coal. Immense quantities.

And if Cap & Trade is the answer, why the hell do we have the E.P.A.?

Why especially since each state has its own natural resource conservation board/commission?

Kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

You'll eat today, but starve tomorrow.

how is this plot foiled?


i think by end of next year we may get huge majorities, this guy is so crazy he may get impeached before alls said done


i cant believe we put this fuck in office

I like the way you slipped this one into a previous post, by the way.

OregonMeds said:

"How is targeting an entire industry for bankruptcy good?" It's good when that industry has been found to give negative effects that outlast and outweigh the positive and when there is a better alternative ready. And technically it doesn't put anyone out of business it forces them to invest in other means of generating their revenue. Only if they fail to change and adapt will they be put out of business.

Click to expand...

What better alternative? Solar and wind cannot possibly meet current demand, much less future demand. And as I pointed out earlier, they must be supplemented due to climate conditions. Nuclear power is out of the question. As is industrial hemp apparently.

Why do we have an Environmental Protection Agency? Is it completely impotent?

Or do we have a reasonably clean environment in the U.S.?

Do we or don't we?

I don't ever "sneak" stuff in but I do very often forget to say something and think I have enough time to get it added before someone has a chance to even read it. You were just faster than I expected anyone to be in even reading it. Out of all the things I've ever argued with you about nothing has ever offended me personally before, up until this.


Is a slight shit stain in your freshly laundered shorts ok as long as that soap you used was less expensive? Are your ass and balls more important than the environment you live in then? I don't understand.

you can put this is my, "saw this one coming" section.... so obvious... there is so much money to be made by this "religion"

OregonMeds said:

I don't ever "sneak" stuff in but I do very often forget to say something and think I have enough time to get it added before someone has a chance to even read it. You were just faster than I expected anyone to be in even reading it. Out of all the things I've ever argued with you about nothing has ever offended me personally before, up until this.

Is a slight shit stain in your freshly laundered shorts ok as long as that soap you used was less expensive? Are your ass and balls more important than the environment you live in then? I don't understand.

Click to expand...

If you are personally offended I struck paydirt.

Because I suspect you are only offended because I called you on it.

Slipity slip.

The stuff being said here makes me ashamed to be a cannabis grower and legalization supporter. I'm upset to know that some of my fellow NORML members are in this thread speaking on these issues this way.
How can you promote industrial hemp and not promote other "green" alternatives. Use industrial hemp as a bio-fuel substitute in coal power plants, and BAM there is your backup system for the "inefficient" solar and wind power.
Also what about tidal power? It's being used in New York City or it's Chicago, I believe. In the river generators have been dropped in and using the river current (without building a dam) generate electricity. The city plans to expand this system.

Rather than everyone sprawling out all over the place, urbanize cities, lower the demand, by decreasing the size of the grid. Individual homes with installed (professionally installed) solar panels on the roof, donate power back to the grid within only a few short months. With so many options, why not?! Just because we can continue to use this? Best estimates give us about 50 more years of fossil fuels. If we don't do something now and continue to stifle technology, we could be up a creek in 50 years. But I guess the "Oh well, won't be my problem in 50 years, planning to be dead," is so strongly embedded in some, there is no point even mentioning something that doesn't directly effect you.

By the way, stop calling me a "liberal" I'm progressive. I believe old time thinking has no place in modern society. My favorite definition of insanity comes from Albert Einstein, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." So why stick to dated conservative principles, and stifle progress, when it's just by definition "insane"?


Shack

Big P said:

how is this plot foiled?


i think by end of next year we may get huge majorities, this guy is so crazy he may get impeached before alls said done


i cant believe we put this fuck in office

Click to expand...

Impeachment is a formal process in which an elected official is accused of unlawful activity, and which may or may not lead to the removal of that official from office.

Impeachment and removal from office are two different things. Dumbass. Our leader for the past 8 years committed far more illegal acts as Prez. than current administration. You may disagree, but he has YET to break any laws.


Shack

OK I'm confused Johnny, we've always had what seemed to be reasonable disagreements on the up and up and I've conceded to your points on occasion and you have done the same. I think you may have even repped me recently in one such exchange and I was looking for a similar opportunity to do the same in return. However unless a child just took over your computer I think you just lost me there taking the low road of slander and personal attacks. Good day sir, I thought you were better than that.