When we're all living "The Day After Tommorow" don't get mad at me when I say, "I told you so."

So...You actually think we can control the sun?

Maybe that's because the temperature has been decreasing in recent years...the global temperature cycles up and down.

 

That's why it's "climate change" now, instead of "global warming". Can't really call it warming when the temperature is dropping.

 

Idiots. They're going to destroy us with this garbage.

:thumb: :thumb:

I'm on the "What harm can it do to believe it?" side. I'm not nearly educated enough to refute it, but in the overall scheme of things, I feel I have a responsibility to do as little harm as possible while I'm here.

Surely he wouldn't have grown this thing if he thought the globe was warming.

I'm on the "What harm can it do to believe it?" side. I'm not nearly educated enough to refute it, but in the overall scheme of things, I feel I have a responsibility to do as little harm as possible while I'm here.

See Waxman, Markey. Enough said...

I'm on the "What harm can it do to believe it?" side. I'm not nearly educated enough to refute it, but in the overall scheme of things, I feel I have a responsibility to do as little harm as possible while I'm here.

I completely agree with that. I try to leave the smallest footprint possible.

I'm on the "What harm can it do to believe it?" side. I'm not nearly educated enough to refute it, but in the overall scheme of things, I feel I have a responsibility to do as little harm as possible while I'm here.

 

Depending on the response, it can do a great harm to believe it, at least to a country's economy. I do agree that everyone should feel a responsibility to do as little harm as is reasonably possible.

CO2 emissions have continued to rise, yet there has been no increase in the global temperature for 11 years. In fact, it has dropped.

 

I agree with RM. I don't think there's any harm in believing it. There's no harm in believing 72 virgins await you in heaven if you blow up an infidel. The problems arise from the actions the beliefs lead to.

 

There's an upcoming "climate change" conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. Here's some snippets from what the green gurus hope to accomplish...

 

Page 18, Item 36

36. The new agreed post-2012 institutional arrangement and legal framework to be established for the implementation, monitoring, reporting and verification of the global cooperative action for mitigation, adaptation, technology and financing, should be set under the Convention. It should include a financial mechanism and a facilitative mechanism drawn up to facilitate the design, adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate, in order to assure the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention.

 

Translation: One, America foots the bill (or a large percentage of it). Two, whatever is agreed upon takes precedence and is superior to our own Constitution, i.e., the rest of the world can dictate terms to us because this treaty would supersede our own Constitution.

 

Page 18 & 19, Item 38

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

(b) The Convention's financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts, including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, © a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.

© The Convention's facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; © a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange.

 

Translation: America gives money to the rest of the world. And, since our one vote carries the same weight as, say, Zimbabwe, and since the treaty would supersed our Constitution, we would have to abide by this global "government" and law.

 

Page 62, Item 36

36. All Parties, except for the least developed countries and small island developing States, shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.

 

Page 122, Item 17

17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]

(a) Compensate for damage to the LDC's (least developed countries) economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees:

(b) Africa, in the context of environment justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.

 

Think about the ramifications of some of this language. We have to compensate LDC's for lost opportunities, resources, land, lives and dignity? Who determines what opportunities and dignity was loss? And, what the price tag for that is? In a world that by and large dislikes or hates the United States, how is it in our best interest to agree to something like this? Especially when these "environmentalists" are flying by the seat of their pants. It was all global warming until the warming stopped...now its climate change. They're just pushing an agenda when there's just as much evidence against them, if not more. And, the world is buying it.

 

Seriously, I'm at a loss. I'm baffled by the stupidity of supposedly smart people. (I'm talking about political powers that be, especially in the United States, before anyone takes offense.) Are they not capable of rational thought? Or do they just love Al Gore that much?

 

If Barack Obama and this democratic Congress gets us into this, we'll never get out and it will be the end of America as we know it. You cannot agree to something that supersedes our own law and puts us at the mercy of the rest of a world that hates us.

 

Insane that its even possible.:idunno:

So...You actually think we can control the sun?

 

We....we didn't listen.... Get used to that sentence.

We....we didn't listen.... Get used to that sentence.

:lol:

 

You need to quit watching Al Gore and Michael Moore movies. We'll be fine and there is nothing we can do, except listen to these fools lies about the biggest scam known to man.

 

You have noticed the cooler summer temps we had and lack of hurricanes......right?

:lol:

 

You need to quit watching Al Gore and Michael Moore movies. We'll be fine and there is nothing we can do, except listen to these fools lies about the biggest scam known to man.

 

You have noticed the cooler summer temps we had and lack of hurricanes......right?

 

 

Actually, I'm not a huge fan of Michael Moore. I've been watching South Park. :thumb: But again, I keep forgetting that people on message boards take everything verbatim. I need to remember the sarcasm face.

Actually, I'm not a huge fan of Michael Moore. I've been watching South Park. :thumb: But again, I keep forgetting that people on message boards take everything verbatim. I need to remember the sarcasm face.

 

South Park episodes actually form the basis of most of my political beliefs.

South Park episodes actually form the basis of most of my political beliefs.

 

U and I have a lot in common.

Did I read this correctly?

 

Someone who thinks "what harm can it do to believe", or basically that it can't hurt to NOT pollute and to take care of the earth, was compared to someone believing that 72 virgins will wait for you in heaven if you "blow up the infidel".

South Park episodes actually form the basis of most of my political beliefs.

Why stop there? I try to base most decisions in life on WWCD!