Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

KyussB

Media Bias Fact Check has direct links to a member of a propaganda think thank (it's founder, no less...) - what more do you need to know?

Are you so gullible that you will trust someone who is a member of a think-tank that is proven to put out bullshit, as being an arbiter of truth?

If it was the reverse situation - someone publishing e.g. climate change research which justifies immediate-action/alarm, with membership of a Soros-linked think-tank - you'd be all over it...you're a hypocrite, so long as it aligns with your rhetoric/views.

Veritas Libertas

KyussB wrote: »

Media Bias Fact Check has direct links to a member of a propaganda think thank (it's founder, no less...) - what more do you need to know?

Are you so gullible that you will trust someone who is a member of a think-tank that is proven to put out bullshit, as being an arbiter of truth?

If it was the reverse situation - someone publishing e.g. climate change research which justifies immediate-action/alarm, with membership of a Soros-linked think-tank - you'd be all over it...you're a hypocrite, so long as it aligns with your rhetoric/views.

David E Van Zandt?

windy shepard henderson

KyussB wrote: »

Media Bias Fact Check has direct links to a member of a propaganda think thank (it's founder, no less...) - what more do you need to know?

Are you so gullible that you will trust someone who is a member of a think-tank that is proven to put out bullshi, as being an arbiter of truth?

what bull**** are you talking about , ? you argue the point of the green deal and when ist put up to you you say i never canvased for that


wake up you clown , you said you wanted a green deal , when people challenged that deal you said you wanted something else

you have no idea of what you want or what you are talking about ,

do you know what to do the next time you see people talking about climate change .....piss off somewhere else :rolleyes:

KyussB

I'll make this current for posters again, seeing as it got drowned out in the last pages:

Predictably - given that the supposed climate change 'skeptics' on this thread, have a complete lack of skepticism towards the sources they shit out onto this thread, so long as it backs their rhetoric - the 'eat your babies' woman at the AOC town hall meeting, was a Trump supporter and member of the LaRouche cult:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180104921678569473

Direct thread, here:
https://twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/1180000492707024897

windy shepard henderson

ok lets simplify this , are you in favor of the green deal or not ? yes or no

windy shepard henderson

it would appear that the intelligence would not be the best

if i had a lego set i would send it on to you to give you time with your response:pac::pac::pac::):):):):):):)

:D:D:D

windy shepard henderson

how hard could a qustion like that be to respond

especially from a person raving about the green deal all day ,

either get on or piss off my friend :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

windy shepard henderson

still no answer after all the talk ....;):rolleyes:

windy shepard henderson

are you or are you not in favor of the green deal my friend for the 1000th time :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

lleti

It's all a massive plan to take power away from the Saudis and Russia. Not that I like Saudi Arabia or anything but the whole "save the planet" thing is just a cover so they take power back from SA.

gozunda

KyussB wrote: »

Predictably - given that the supposed climate change 'skeptics' on this thread, have a complete lack of skepticism towards the sources they shit out onto this thread, so long as it backs their rhetoric - the 'eat your babies' woman at the AOC town hall meeting, was a Trump supporter and member of the LaRouche cult:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180104921678569473

Direct thread, here:
https://twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/1180000492707024897

So you believe yer one Cortez claiming the girl supporting 'eating babies' was a Trump supporter?

My my - the ****e is flying now ... :pac:

Provide some proof or get out...

gozunda

KyussB wrote: »

Here I am careful to point out that the Green New Deal is based upon a transformation of capitalism, to preserve capitalism from the effects of climate change - yet other posters accuse me of being the one to bring up communism, when it's always other posters accusing me of that...
Face it: You lot don't support Capitalism, you support Oligarchy (which is anathema to true capitalism), and the preservation of the current order of fossil fuel oligarchs like the Kochs. I support Capitalism - and I provide the template, in the Green New Deal, that Capitalism needs to survive the threat of climate change (a threat which capitalism itself produces).
Nobody has challenged the ideas I put forward - they only have ideological objections, not practical ones.There is no popular consensus that market solutions will arrest climate change fast enough, as you claim - cite that. 100% Green Energy is simply a matter of producing enough renewable energy production and storage - that still requires a lot of R&D to reduce rare-earth usage, before it's viable, but it's perfectly possible.Nobody has suggested a 100% Job Guarantee. Do some actual reading up on the JG - it's for providing jobs when the private sector doesn't want the unemployed.You accused me of engaging in alarmism and scaremongering earlier: That's precisely what you're doing with your 'hammer and sicle' bullshit. I'm more of a capitalist than you/others who object are - you lot support oligarchy, not capitalism.The Green New Deal supports massive investment in science - in a R&D program that is a couple/few orders of magnitude greater than what private industry can support. Calling that 'anti-science' is bollocks. Climate change denialism is anti-science.

The Green New Deal it's not capitalism then?

So what about all these socialists such as the UK socialist party claiming that the Green New Deal is a socialist ideology?

Bizarre that now you suggest that the free transfer of goods and services should be thrashed in favour of unilateral state control and still call it 'capitalism'

Yup sounds legit ....

lleti

KyussB wrote: »

I'll make this current for posters again, seeing as it got drowned out in the last pages:

Predictably - given that the supposed climate change 'skeptics' on this thread, have a complete lack of skepticism towards the sources they shit out onto this thread, so long as it backs their rhetoric - the 'eat your babies' woman at the AOC town hall meeting, was a Trump supporter and member of the LaRouche cult:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180104921678569473

Direct thread, here:
https://twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/1180000492707024897

So basically AOC links to a tweet of someone saying someone is part of something.

Wow...gottem!

Pa ElGrande

lleti wrote: »

It's all a massive plan to take power away from the Saudis and Russia. Not that I like Saudi Arabia or anything but the whole "save the planet" thing is just a cover so they take power back from SA.

That has very little relevance any more, the 1970s/80s governments were definitely looking for alternative energy sources to avoid the chaos of the 1970s blockades. (1)(2). Since the OPEC has lost it's power to control oil prices and the world has moved to gas (including Ireland). Electricty generation in Ireland now depends on natural gas and the inter-connectors for grid stability.

If you look at Germanys energiewende (Energy transition) they are shutting down nuclear, burning more coal and importing more natural gas from Russia. They also have the highest electricity prices in Europe and that is not without its consequences. They tend to make big noise about unreliables output during the Summer, and say nothing during the Winter when Solar output vanishes and there tends to be a 2 week period in November when the German plains are covered in fog with no wind and unreliable energy generation is practically non existent.


Climate change is political activism, it has nothing to do with science which is why anyone who dares hold a view that contradicts or appears to contradict the CAGW narrative is labelled a denier. The orchestrated campaign behind the promotion of Greta Thunberg (as a human shield) to keep the issue in the headlines since people are growing resistant to wind turbines (1)(2)(3) and more taxes.


Anyway as I have said before there are a coalition of groups behind climate change, these main drivers are Malthusians, Socialists and Rent Seekers.

Warren Buffett has admitted as much. In 2014 he explained: “I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate [. . .] We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit.”

source

Pa ElGrande

KyussB wrote: »

I'll make this current for posters again, seeing as it got drowned out in the last pages:

Predictably - given that the supposed climate change 'skeptics' on this thread, have a complete lack of skepticism towards the sources they shit out onto this thread, so long as it backs their rhetoric - the 'eat your babies' woman at the AOC town hall meeting, was a Trump supporter and member of the LaRouche cult:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180104921678569473

About the LaRouche movement. It is the left wing eating its own.

The movement originated in radical leftist student politics of the 1960s. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of candidates, some with only limited knowledge or connection to LaRouche or the movement, ran as Democrats in the United States on the LaRouche platform.[1][2][3] In 1988, LaRouche and 25 associates were convicted on fraud charges related to fund-raising. The movement called the prosecutions politically motivated.

source

KyussB

Not a fan of Woody Allen at all, but some of these threads are like that scene from Annie Hall, where he's arguing with someone about a philospher, and the guy he's arguing with keeps on going even after Allen pulls the philosopher himself into the frame out of nowhere, to tell the guy he's wrong.

Here's the woman at a LaRouche cult meeting and at AOC's town hall- funnily enough, the language these guys use is a lot like that the 'skeptics' use in this thread:

Something the 'skeptics' (that completely lack any skepticism so far as this story is concerned...) could have found out just by scrolling the fucking link I gave...

Thelonious Monk

It amazes me how afraid you all are of having less money and lower standard of living. That is essential for a cleaner earth. How would you ever have survived in harder times in the past? And you call us pink haired folk snowflakes...
Bring on massive carbon taxes and less money and stuff for everyone I say, if only to annoy the right wing loonies in this thread.

windy shepard henderson

What the hell? Some of ye on here are a hoot....

windy shepard henderson

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It amazes me how afraid you all are of having less money and lower standard of living. That is essential for a cleaner earth. How would you ever have survived in harder times in the past? And you call us pink haired folk snowflakes...
Bring on massive carbon taxes and less money and stuff for everyone I say.

Less money???
The biggest culprits at the moment in terms of climate changes are the 3rd world and far east,.... Not a good idea my friend

Thelonious Monk

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

Less money???
The biggest culprits at the moment in terms of climate changes are the 3rd world and far east,.... Not a good idea my friend

Per capita we are some of the worst in the world. Less money means buying less crap.

windy shepard henderson

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Per capita we are some of the worst in the world. Less money means buying less crap.

Climate change an ozone layers don't work on a per capita basis

If you are destroying your eco system or mass polluting it does not take into account of your per cap basis..... So this argument makes zero sense

Thelonious Monk

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

Climate change an ozone layers don't work on a per capita basis

If you are destroying your eco system or mass polluting it does not take into account of your per cap basis..... So this argument makes zero sense

Well we already destroyed our eco system and turned it into a giant cattle farm many moons ago.

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

About the LaRouche movement. It is the left wing eating its own.

Here in Ireland, generally we just lump such groups - cults like LaRouche/Libertarians/etc., the likes of Gemma O'Doherty, extreme Marxists/anarchists etc. - all into the same 'loony' bin, rather than considering them a part of the political spectrum, as they all have more in common with each other than anyone actually involved with politics here.

windy shepard henderson

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well we already destroyed our eco system and turned it into a giant cattle farm many moons ago.

Ah no not another one...

Thelonious Monk

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

Ah no not another one...

The truth hurts

Thelonious Monk

KyussB wrote: »

Here in Ireland, generally we just lump such groups - cults like LaRouche/Libertarians/etc., the likes of Gemma O'Doherty, extreme Marxists/anarchists etc. - all into the same 'loony' bin, rather than considering them a part of the political spectrum, as they all have more in common with each other than anyone actually involved with politics here.

It’s funny because boards and the journal are full of absolute nut job right wingers but no one I know in real life has these extreme views or are unwilling to listen to science and facts and figures. Is Ireland really a cesspit of right leaning anti everything folk?

KyussB

No, Boards just gets astroturfed more - especially by Libertarians, extending all the way to Alt Right stuff. You do, however, get some in older generations in Ireland, who are more susceptible the falling victim to nonsense/propaganda, through old age, declining mental health or reduced faculties - YouTube is awful for tripping such people up, as it's full of conspiracy theory clickbait shite.

In person, people know they would be given a wide berth, spouting some of the stuff here.

suicide_circus

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It amazes me how afraid you all are of having less money and lower standard of living. That is essential for a cleaner earth. How would you ever have survived in harder times in the past? And you call us pink haired folk snowflakes...
Bring on massive carbon taxes and less money and stuff for everyone I say, if only to annoy the right wing loonies in this thread.

windy shepard henderson

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The truth hurts

No its called going so far off center that you fall off the edge

Pa ElGrande

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It amazes me how afraid you all are of having less money and lower standard of living. That is essential for a cleaner earth. How would you ever have survived in harder times in the past? And you call us pink haired folk snowflakes...
Bring on massive carbon taxes and less money and stuff for everyone I say, if only to annoy the right wing loonies in this thread.

Really? You might ask the opinion of the Haitian environmentalists about that lower standard of living. Here is the border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Or may by consider the cleaner earth in Europe prior to the industrial revolution. Go ahead with the Carbon taxes, the environmentalists movement stands to benefit from the wealth transfer.