Craig Rucker of CFACT writes:
You’d be surprised at what they don’t know at the UN climate conference in Bonn.
Then again, maybe you wouldn’t.
Although the evidence keeps mounting up, most of the delegates in Bonn are unaware that there had been no warming for 16 years.
Watch CFACT’s latest video update from Bonn and see for yourself.
CFACT’s Mission Bonn is your eyes, ears and voice at the UN climate talks and at the ICLEI forum.
- ICLEI wants to bring UN Agenda 21 to your town.
- The UN wants a binding climate treaty signed in Paris by 2015.
- The Obama administration has vowed to put the brakes on the U.S. economy in the name of climate with, or without, Congress.
We have much more to report on these crucial developments and the threat they pose to the United States and the free world.
source: http://cfact.org
And these are the guys who decide how 10% of your national budget is spent. And before you shrug and say that is of little concern – that is your tax money. You could have an extra 10% in your pocket, if it were not for these loons.
.
In reply again to:
“UN climate change committee representatives appear to be ignorant of the fact that the planet has not warmed for 16 years.”
“The Obama administration has vowed to put the brakes on the U.S. economy in the name of climate with, or without, Congress.”
William:
Climate change is an excuse for environmental fascism. Fascism is irrational, hateful, controlling. Fascism leads to war.
A democracy will not accept draconian rationing of energy. The elites have been hiding the fact that there will be consequences to true world carbon dioxide limiting policies. There will be a massive loss of jobs and a significant reduction in standard of life. There will need to be world population control to avoid starvation. There will need to be a world military to force compliance. See my above comment for details concerning the implications of true world CO2 limiting policies.
The Chinese have noted that the ‘war’ on climate change will lead to a physical war. The developing world will not accept energy limitations.
The current mandated food to biofuel program will lead to food wars. To provide 100% of our fuel from biofuel would require a 100% (300% of EU agricultural land as EU farming practices are less efficient, EU calculation) of the current agricultural land be used to produce biofuel. The food to biofuel mandated policy is insanity. There is almost no net reduction in CO2 from the program if unbiased analysis is used that includes all energy inputs. As people still need to eat, the food to biofuel program is resulting in massive loss of virgin forests to grow food to convert to biofuel. Modern advance agriculture unavoidably emits NO2 as part of nitrogen fertilization. NO2 is 300 times more effective as a greenhouse gas than CO2. There is therefore almost no net reduction in AGW to convert food to biofuel. The food to biofuel program, will significantly increase the cost of food, will result in food shortages, and will result in increase malnutrition and starvation. If the food to biofuel program is not stopped there will be food wars.
Ecofascism is irrational, hateful, controlling. The facts about climate change are being suppressed and the analysis manipulated to push ab anti development, anti people eco philosophy.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism
Fascism:
1. a governmental system led by a dictator (William: or led by the UN, an elitist bureaucracy that wants to have the power to control all democratic countries through regulations or led by an elitist leader who circumvents the checks and balances of a democracy) having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism (William: Ecofacism is anti people rather than anti one particular race. They hate people and capitalism.)
2. the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism
3. a political movement that employs the principles and methods of fascism, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43 (William: Propaganda, suppression of discussion/science, aggressively pushing an agenda that is irrational, hateful, circumventing of the democratic process)
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=27941
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” – Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” – Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment
“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” – emeritus professor Daniel Botkin
“We require a central organizing principle – one agreed to voluntarily. Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change – these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public’s desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary.” – Al Gore, Earth in the Balance
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme
“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” – Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies
“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” – Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund
“Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.” – Professor Maurice King
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner, founder of CNN and major UN donor
“… the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million but less than one billion.” – Club of Rome, Goals for Mankind
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.” – Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, patron of the World Wildlife Fund
“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” – David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club
kim says:
June 7, 2013 at 1:14 am
———————————-
Don’t panic. Sumner will be resumed as soon as possible citizens. 2040. At the latest.
Warmists? 30 years in the iso cubes! Judge dread is the Law.
The truly frightening thing is that they were mostly such a bunch of nerds.
Are we really going to let them run the planet?
Zeke Hausfather says:
“Quick question for commenters here: point out one global temperature dataset that has not shown warming over the past 16 years.”
=======================================================
RSS satellite data [among other data sets] shows no warming trend.
[Snip. Grow up. — mod.]
[snip . . why do you post in this forum? You know it won’t get through moderation as it is abusive, rude, content free and embedded with words you know are specifically not allowed on this site. Why, if you have anything of value and substance to add, don’t you do so within the parameters of this site? . . mod]
[snip . . abusive and use of proscribed words . . mod]
You do all realise that the Met Office is Britishs and forecasts the weather for THE UK ONLY?
[snip. — another mod.]
[snip . . abusive and content free. You seem to be a troll . . mod]
Patrick B says:
June 6, 2013 at 4:11 pm
From an article in today’s ‘Advertiser’ newspaper (http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/dan-spencer-lets-power-ahead-with-solar-options/story-e6freabc-1226658923174):
The writer is making some broad assumptions as to the knowledge and understanding of the issue by young people. From the video interviews we often see on this and other sites, young people are merely unthinking, non-analytical sheeple rather than deep-thinking futurists.
As for older people being against CAGW, perhaps this is because we lived through all of the other disaster scenarios that have been touted and we are still here, working against the current ‘the sky is falling’ mass hysteria.
With all due respect to Americans who probably should know better than I, you need to know this about impeachment:
Nixon was not impeached. Nixon resigned in order to avoid being impeached.
Clinton was impeached. And continued on, because it made no difference to him or his followers.
0bama could be impeached until the cows come home. Democrats don’t leave when their welcome is worn out. It takes a sense of responsibility and desire to do the right thing to make someone vacate office when they are caught breaking the rules.
It has been my experience that most people believe Nixon was impeached, and they are genuinely surprised when I show them that Clinton was impeached.
[snip. Labeling others as denialists is not allowed here. — mod.]
http://www.danavenell.com/images/_ODDBALLSAYS.jpg
RoHa says:
June 6, 2013 at 10:10 pm
“Though I have no doubt that the successor will provide an equally instructive, if somewhat different, example of the same thing.”
Exactly. He is a Rhodes Scholar after all, (we seem to have no shortage of them in Australia), which means he is equally well-versed in the Agenda 21 objectives. We cannot vote our way out of this dilemma.
Sheer Panic! That appears to be the consistent reaction.
John Trigge: ‘… young people are merely unthinking, non-analytical sheeple rather than deep-thinking futurists’
Really? But if they had supported your way of ‘thinking’ they’d be deep-thinking, analytical new young minds wouldn’t they.
‘… older people being against CAGW, perhaps this is because we lived through all of the other disaster scenarios that have been touted and we are still here, working against the current ‘the sky is falling’ mass hysteria.’
What makes you think older people are against real science evidence? Don’t assume just because a few old, rich men deny it’s happening that we are all like this. I was aware of climate change before the scientists started investigating, and probably before any of you were out of nappies [diapers for the Amurkans here] and I haven’t changed my mind since everything serves to reinforce it. What other ‘disaster scenarios’ do you mean? If it’s the ‘coming ice age’ one which was a creation of the tabloid hacks you otherwise turn to for your ‘evidence’ this is a bit thick, but then you are. As for the equally preposterous ‘sky is falling mass hysteria’ you really do need a reality check, you seem to be wallowing in delusion. You may have lived through more years than those youngsters, but you failed to learn anything, still pig ignorant.
[Reply: this is one of your less objectionable screeds. Your name-calling gets obnoxious when used incessantly. Stop it, or you will be snipped. Stick to scientific facts and evidence, and your comments will be posted. — mod.]
[snip. — mod.]
I vote to have “oneworldnet” placed firmly and permanently in the troll bin for his consistently abusive language. We’ve seen it before. His type have such hatred for the truth, and for truth-tellers. Rational discussion of any sort is impossible with them.
[snip . . why do you post in this form? [sic] You know it won’t get through moderation as it is abusive, rude, content free and embedded with words you know are specifically not allowed on this site [because others find them difficult to understand]. Why, if you have anything of value and substance to add, don’t you do so within the parameters of this site? . . mod]
[snip. Morew vicious, gratuitous name-calling. Get help. — mod.]
[Snip. I can do this all day. As stated above, post scientific facts and evidence — without scurrilous name-calling — and your comments will be approved. — mod.]
RSS satellite data [among other data sets] shows no warming trend. Why not post the actual url? Woodforthetrees.org, now that’s a science site isn’t it?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997/plot/rss/from:1997.9/trend/plot/esrl-co2/from:1997.9/normalise/offset:0.68/plot/esrl-co2/from:1997.9/normalise/offset:0.68/trend
Man Bearpig: try this http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/met-office-reveals-last-decade-was-the-hottest-ever-recorded-1836778.html – no, not challenging the Met Office, but this cooling lie didn’t come from them, it came from the Mail, a known lying, rightwing tabloid rag. And you think you have an argument? Don’t need evidence, or wouldn’t understand it?
[Snip. Read the site Policy: labeling others here as “deniers” violates Policy. An exception will not be made in your case. — mod.]
Master_Of_Puppets says:
‘Richard P. Feynman had it right many years ago.’
Got to be desperate quoting someone born in 1918 who died in 1988. And a theoretical physicist at that! What did he know about evidence, data gathering or ocean tempoeratures? Nothing. He spent his life ‘imagining’ the cosmos. Boy, you just can’t find any real live climate scientists who say the things you want to hear! Shame innit.