Archive for March, 2010

saul alinsky

“Respected” Scientists: Humans are too stupid to stop climate change

In line with what James Cameron said about “you have your head up your ass” when it comes to climate change, British scientist James Lovelock thinks you are too stupid to solve the problem of climate change.  From the

I don’t think we’re yet evolved to the point where we’re clever enough to handle a complex a situation as climate change,” said Lovelock in his first in-depth interview since the theft of the UEA emails last November. “The inertia of humans is so huge that you can’t really do anything meaningful.

Do you like that?  You are not as evolved as you need to be to deal with this… you are not as evolved as him or James Cameron obviously because they see it and you do not.  How intellectually elite of them.

Al Gore

I think it’s funny how this article is worded.  Too stupid to solve the problem of climate change?  I submit that many are not so stupid as to be pulled into Cameron and Lovelock’s religion.  If they want the support of someone like me, all the must logically explain how the Holocene climatic optimum, Roman climate optimum, and medieval warm periods were the fault of humans.

This whole thing boils down to the Saul Alinsky approach of simply ignoring those who do not agree with you because your argument does not hold up.

At one point, I was doing a Google search to learn more about the Holocene and Roman climate optimums, and I had stumbled across a Yahoo Answers question that reminded me of this same tactic.  In the Yahoo Answers question (in which the author asks what the roman climate optimum is, but obviously already has their mind made up that it means nothing) the author refuses to accept any information from those branded a “Skeptic”.

So, if Everyone who dares to say anything contrary about man causing global warming, then the Church brands them a skeptic (or a modern day heretic) and completely ignores what they have to say.  Whilst the “Skeptics” actually come to their conclusions using data from everywhere (generally, there are always examples of bias) the members of the Church of Global Warming pride themselves in ignoring data.

This is lock step in line with James Lovelock’s comment and something Saul Alinsky would be proud of.

saul alinsky

Rules for Radicals, Rule number 5:

Ridicule, especially against organizational leaders, is a potent weapon. There’s no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force concessions.

Too stupid to solve the problem of climate change?  No.  We are too smart to fall for your tactics, and too open minded to limit our information to only the church approved dogma.


James Cameron: “You have your head up your ass”

Now that he is in the limelight for his hit movie Avatar, James Cameron is taking a moment to let us know how much better he is then all of us.  He makes movies after all, so he understands science.

In an article from the Hollywood Reporter, Cameron goes on to bitch about Glenn Beck as well, but I’ll focus on his whole “I’m just smarter then you” thing:

The “Avatar” director was equally unsparing in his comments about those who don’t accept global warming as fact.

“That’s right,” Cameron said. “I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads.”

Turning more serious, he added: “Anybody that is a global-warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their ass I’m not sure they could hear me.”

So, that was him being serious, and showing serious utter contempt for those who challenge this religion.  My experience dealing with others in Hollywood (And I have conversed with a few) is along the same lines.  The moment you disagree with them and their religion, they not only loose all respect for you or your thoughts, but then go one step further to back their religion by denouncing any debate or conversation on the topic.

They belittle you with their intellectual nose in the air and follow the religious line.  At no point have I ever been able to have a conversation with someone from Hollywood on this topic while still feeling like they held any kind of respect for the science that dares to say ‘otherwise’.  You are written off immediately as a lemming, which I find ironic considering their worship of Al Gore.

By making the environment the theme of his home video release plan, Cameron is sending a message.

“Look, at this point I’m less interested in making money for the movie and more interested in saving the world that my children are going to inhabit. How about that? I mean look, I didn’t make this movie with these strong environmental anti-war themes in it to make friends on the right, you know.

“They’re not on my Christmas card list,” Cameron added. “It’s not going to change my lifestyle at all if they don’t talk to me. But you know they’ve got to live in this world too. And their children do as well, so they’re going to have to be answerable to this at some point.”

Cameron and “Avatar” producer Jon Landau opened the program by pledging an environmental theme to the release of “Avatar” into the home video market.  The home video release of “Avatar” is now set for April 22, which is not insignificantly Earth Day, as (Glenn) Beck is likely to notice.

So, Cameron, in line with the other Hollywood people I have talked to, instead of having a discussion, simply writes you off as an idiot.  After all, why have a conversation, when you can just write the other side off.  Noam Chomsky would be proud.

If this is how the intellectual liberal elite think of people who disagree with them, there is little hope with them on any topic, let alone environMentalism.  You simly can not argue agasint someone’s religon, and until they actually go back to looking at this as a sicence (of which, the word consensus was only used with the global warming issue, the earth being flat, the earth being the center of the universe, etc…) we are left being laughed at for thinking perhaps the Sun has more to do with the Earth’s climate then my SUV.


Global Warming Brainwashing In Trouble for “overstating the risks”

While brainwashing kids for Mother Earth and Father Gore may be totally acceptable (Gore Youth anyone?) the Advertising Standards Authority in the UK has ruled that some of the recent advertisements from Act On CO2 are making exaggerated claims.

From Telegraph.Co.Uk:

Upholding complaints from members of the public, the ASA said that in both instances the text accompanying the rhymes should have been couched in softer language.

The newspaper adverts were part of a controversial media campaign launched by the DECC last year which attracted a total of 939 complaints.

The watchdog found that the other elements of the campaign, including a television and cinema advert in which a father read his daughter a nightmarish bedtime story about a world blighted by climate change, did not breach its guidelines.

The Jack and Jill rhyme said:

Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. There was none as extreme weather due to climate change had caused a drought.

Extreme weather conditions such as flooding, heat waves and storms will become more frequent and intense.

The origional text of Rub a dub dub does not apear to be changed from the origional (See picture):

Rub a dub dub, three men in a tub — a necessary course of action due to flash flooding caused by climate change.

Climate change is happening. Temperature and sea levels are rising. Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and heat waves will become more frequent and intense. If we carry on at this rate, life in 25 years could be very different.

This reminds me of this thing in history known as the Hitler Youth.  You see, it is much easier to brainwash children because they don’t think as much as adults do.  There is a reason why you can’t vote at age 12, and you can’t purchase a gun or drive a car.  Their judgement is not… well.  Its not all there.

The Hitler Youth was organized into local cells on a community level.  These cells had weekly meetings at which various Nazi doctrines.  Now, I won’t go so far as to say anything about our socialist leaders here in the United States…


But you get the idea.  Getting power is easy.  To keep it, you need to plan ahead.  and this whole Global Warming/Climate Change thing is about power.

After all, none of thier “Fixes” actually reduce the role of Government, do they?

To save the earth, Tax Tax Tax Tax

I came across this article this evening and blood shot out of my eyes as I strained to understand WTF.  I am going to include the entire article.  It is short enough and I have comments on every part of it.

From the New York Times (figures):

Fuel Taxes Must Rise, Harvard Researchers Say

To meet the Obama administration’s targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas at $7 a gallon.

So, to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets put forward by the Church of Global Warming, we have to drive our economy into the shitter?  You all remember what happened when gas was $4.00 a gallon.

To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving must simply increase, according to a forthcoming report by researchers at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

According to them, the cost of driving must more then double to reduce emissions by fourteen percent?  Do you get that? 

To reduce emissions by 14%… Fuel prices must go up by 105%? Wait the what?

The 14 percent target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget for fiscal 2010.

In their study, the researchers devised several combinations of steps that United States policymakers might take in trying to address the heat-trapping emissions by the nation’s transportation sector, which consume 70 percent of the oil used in the United States.

Most of their models assumed an economy-wide carbon dioxide tax starting at $30 a ton in 2010 and escalating to $60 a ton in 2030. In some cases researchers also factored in tax credits for electric and hybrid vehicles, taxes on fuel or both.

In the modeling, it turned out that issuing tax credits could backfire, while taxes on fuel proved beneficial.

There we go.  That’s it.  That’s what it comes down to.  Taxes.  Taxes = Control.  How do you get the price of fuel up 105% artificially?  Tax it.  And if they tax the frack out of us, their power grows.  Amazing when only (according to the WRI, a source that is a member of the Church) 9.9% of all world Greenhouse Gas (Read CO2) emissions are from road transportation.

“Tax credits don’t address how much people use their cars,” said Ross Morrow, one of the report’s authors. “In reverse, they can make people drive more.”

Dr. Morrow, formerly a fellow at the Belfer Center, is a professor of mechanical engineering and economics at Iowa State University

Researchers said that vehicle miles traveled will increase by more than 30 percent between 2010 and 2030 unless policymakers increase fuel taxes.

And this illustrates even more what they would do.  Taking money out of my pocket and putting it into someone else’s for following their religion isn’t enough to help.  Environmental Communism alone won’t cut it.  They need more.

At no time will any of these “fixes” ever… ever call for a reduction in government power or control.  The Church of Global Warming will use everything they can as an excuse to take power from you in the name of their “God”.  This is the same story told time and time again through history. 

They can help you, but first you must give up everything.


How Global Warming distorts US Jobless Figures

How Global Warming distorts US Jobless Figures

We all know global warming causes everything bad and nothing good, but what is the worst thing that it could cause?

Dead polar bears?


The death of the Loch Ness Monster?

Not even close.

No, the worst thing that Global Warming could di is to make Obama look bad. (And I don’t have to use all six degrees of Global Warming to do it)

Where did I leave my Keys to Airforce One?

February 10, 2010 – Right in line with Time Magazine’s typical political stance, they expressed how the blizzards of 2010 were caused by global warming:

In the meantime, warmer air could be supercharged with moisture and, as long as the temperature remains below 32°F, it will result in blizzards rather than drenching winter rainstorms.

And if Time magazine isn’t enough for you, the National Wildlife Federation was a little more certain that it was Global Warming causing the snow. (ripped apart by a fantastic article at

Global warming is having a seemingly peculiar effect on winter weather in the northern United States. Winter is becoming milder and shorter on average; spring arrives 10 to 14 days earlier than it did just 20 years ago. But most Snowbelt areas are still experiencing extremely heavy snowstorms. Some places are even expected to have more heavy snowfall events as storm tracks shift northward and as reduced ice cover on the Great Lakes increases lake-effect snowfalls. Even as global warming slowly changes the character of winter, we will still experience significant year-to-year variability in snowfall and temperature because many different factors are at play.

So, according to the greenies, Global Warming causes global cooling.

What does this have to do with US jobless figures and making Obama look bad you may ask?

The White House came out yesterday to try to head of the upcoming and obviously negative news about US jobless figures.

WASHINGTON, March 1 (Reuters) – White House economic adviser Larry Summers said on Monday winter blizzards were likely to distort U.S. February jobless figures, which are due to be released on Friday.

“The blizzards that affected much of the country during the last month are likely to distort the statistics. So it’s going to be very important … to look past whatever the next figures are to gauge the underlying trends,” Summers said in an interview with CNBC, according to a transcript.

Construction activity was hit particularly hard by the storms, but many restaurants and stores also had to close, putting the brakes on hiring plans and temporarily throwing some employees out of work.

Let me paraphrase:

Wait wait everybody, before we tell you how bad they are, remember, it is all because of the winter blizzards.  Don’t blame Obama.  Blame the weather.

So there you have it.  Global Warming = Global Cooling = Blizzards = disruption in Obama’s Plan = Obama looks bad.

When will the craziness ever cease?

Lift your head up high and blow your brains out

Lift your head up high and blow your brains out

From multiple news sources (here, here, here, here)

For an Argentinean couple, their fears over the effects of Climate Change were the rational reason to take their lives and the lives of their children.   Their seven month old is still alive after a neighbor found the carnage three days later.  The baby went three days with a bullet hole through her chest before she was found.

Reminds me of a song:


And they think us “teabaggers” are bad.  “So save the planet and kill yourself.”  What a bunch of idiots.

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wordpress themes