Jump to content

Is Global Warming about Global Warming?


ASL Veteran

Recommended Posts

I know, I know, come on ASL Vet. Take off the tin foil hat and let’s get serious. There is no debate in the scientific community about Global Warming and that we, as a society, must make sacrafices in order to save the planet for future generations. Certainly some governments are making you think that’s the case

Is Global Warming really about saving the planet though? Could there be another agenda at work here? What else could it possibly be about because it sure seems straightforward? The planet heats up because of man made activity so we have to cool the planet down by altering our global economy to be ‘green’. Here is a little article I found and it’s kind of a curious one in the context of saving the planet. Here is a quote from the article and the entire article is linked to below the quote which is how I’ll have it the rest of the way.

What is perhaps most interesting about this story is not so much what it reveals about the impermanence of green jobs as the British labor unions’ attitude to them:

“The court has made its decision, but we will continue with our campaign and the right to work on green energy jobs.”

http://www.openmarket.org/2009/08/04/the-right-to-a-green-job/

That is a bit of an odd thing to think isn’t it? Does it really make sense? It might not make any sense to you and me but it certainly seems to make sense to them. Having a ‘right’ to a green job sure doesn’t seem to be connected to saving the planet does it? Why are the two linked in the minds of these workers? Checking out the US Communist Party website we find an article there that may shed a little light on the subject:

While many of these jobs require extensive scientific and engineering skills, a large percentage are so-called green collar jobs, manual labor jobs in businesses that directly improve environmental quality. These occupations can put workers with challenges to employment, including young oppressed minority workers who may lack education and English skills, and workers who may have encountered the criminal justice system, on the road to good-paying jobs with paths to advancement, including apprenticeships in the building trades.

http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/947/1/153/

Hmmm, very curious indeed. It looks like these ‘green jobs’ are being created for the oppressed in an effort to redistribute the wealth. So the link here appears to be that in order to save the planet we can tailor our governmental policies to fight poverty at the same time by giving green jobs to the oppressed. Here are a couple of videos from Obama’s old Green Jobs Czar. He explains things a lot better than I ever could because he is obviously a true believer. The two videos are about 16 minutes long.

He certainly explains things in strong and easy to understand terms. ASL Vet, you may ask, but he’s just talking about green jobs and revolution? How is the creation of green jobs equivalent to the redistribution of wealth? Well, there are two halves to the green economy. There are the green jobs that are created by the green economy and there is the taking the wealth part. How is the wealth taken?

http://vodpod.com/watch/1814347-last-call-on-cap-and-trade

It’s taken through Cap and Trade of course. Even if you aren’t getting your power from a coal plant though wind power and solar power are naturally more expensive means of generating power on a kilowatt per hour basis. Here is an interesting study about Wind Power and what they found out about it in the state of Texas

http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-09-RR10-WindEnergy-dt-new.pdf

and here is an interesting article about a local government’s feeble attempts at propping up a solar panel company

Did it matter that the company has never earned a penny? That, as The Boston Globe-Democrat reported, “Evergreen has lost $308 million since its founding in 1994, including $84.6 million in the first six months of this year?”

Not to the governor. Once in office, he threw millions in grants, loans, land and the like at Evergreen to create jobs while fighting global warming.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view/20091020in_the_red_with_evergreen_govs_stock_should_also_nosedive/#

That’s a lot of wasted tax payer money right there, but you know what? It doesn’t matter because the more wealth they take from you to fight global warming the more wealth gets redistributed to the oppressed workers. It all fits together quite nicely doesn’t it? From the Center for American Progress we find this tidbit

These policy decisions can connect the energy future of the United States with the cause of social justice through the creation of a new workforce of quality jobs that companies cannot outsource. Sound policy can improve the environment, spur economic growth, and lift people out of poverty on a tide of new jobs. As Carter explained, “environmental justice is civil rights in the 21st century.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/10/greenjobs_event.html

Yeah, but come on ASL Vet, they are just talking about the US. Global Warming is a Global problem so while maybe in the US there are some Social Justice issues going on but how does that apply to the rest of the world? Here is a video which explains it.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/05/manlove_video.html

Here are some of the musings of one of Obama’s current cabinet secretaries

http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?D=2009-10-15&ID=281007

Okay, but certainly Evil Corp will be out to stop this communist plot to take over the world? Certainly it can’t be in Evil Corp’s interests to pursue a global policy of social justice? Aren’t evil corporations all about oppressing the workers??

Why did GE, founded by Thomas Edison, support a bill that killed the traditional incandescent light bulb?

(snip)

Robert Pifer, who will also be laid off in July if he doesn’t find a new job by then, has an explanation for GE’s support of the light-bulb law and its shift to the more expensive fluorescents. “Are they not just trying to force-feed people stuff they don’t want to buy?”

So, GE gets environmentalist brownie points for selling “clean” light bulbs, and they also get to charge more for their bulbs. But there’s another advantage—they save on labor with fluorescents, because they make the fluorescents in China.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/How-GE_s-green-lobbying-is-killing-U_S_-factory-jobs-8162035-55422792.html#

Do’h!! Evil Corp is rent seeking by playing footsie with Big Government in an effort to secure a competitive advantage against other Evil Corporations!! What was it that Karl Marx said about capitalists again?

Oh well, too bad for us Yanks eh? Over in the Commonwealth there is no social justice agenda driving Global Warming.

Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse, the Prince of Wales has warned in a grandstand speech which set out his concerns for the future of the planet.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/just-96-months-to-save-world-says-prince-charles-1738049.html

Do’h!!! Isn’t that Prince Charles? He sure sounds a lot like Van Jones and Cass Sunstein. Oh, but he has no influence over anything. He’s just a crack pot. Besides, why would Prince Charles be interested in redistribution of wealth anyway? Isn’t he one of the wealthy? It makes no sense! Here is one man’s opinion as to what the ‘wealthy’ get out of this

So why do the wealthy and powerful on the left (the "poweratti") embrace this philosophy? Because they believe they will not be touched by it personally, and they can use it to garner additional political and/or social power. Taking the health care issue as an example, those currently in Congress have chosen to follow the refrain, "Government-run health care for thee, but not for me". Other wealthy and politically-connected poweratti obviously believe they will be able to obtain quality health care from other sources, either overseas or in a domestic black market of private physicians and hospitals exclusively for the wealthy.

By enflaming hatred of the wealthy (and by extension, capitalism), the poweratti can brandish social justice as a weapon to seize complete control of government and essentially enslave the populace. How ironic that this hatred should result in extending their power and privilege!

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/the_end_game_of_the_left_1.html#

But the science is overwhelming! Even if some people view climate change in terms of social justice we still have to save the world so why not do this as well?

I think this article will have to speak for itself

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_climate_reports_they_lie.html#

The problem for the ‘social justice’ crowd is that if the science that backs ‘Global Warming’ turns out to not be true then guess what? The entire basis for the imposition of their Social Justice agenda upon the world falls apart too. The solution? Keep on telling you that Global Warming is fact even if it’s not because if you ever start to believe that it’s not true you won’t want to allow your wealth to be redistributed. Here is a one hour and thirty minute video that might be interesting to watch if you have the time. It’s an excellent summary and it might shift your perspective on a lot of things. He basically puts the cherry on top for my post.

Here are the slides that he refers to during the presentation

http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/monckton_2009.pdf

Thank you my friendly forumites for your time. Now it’s time to go out and breathe the free air!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I expected responses like that. If you are in favor of wealth redistribution then just come on out and say it and be honest about what you stand for. Otherwise, just read what the links say and see what is being spoken in the videos and make up your own mind. It's right there for people to see. I am not saying anything that those in the videos aren't saying themselves. Incidentally it probably takes more than two hours to go through all the links and videos that I posted so there is no way Sergei actually absorbed any of the information that I presented. I doubt if hcrof gave anything there a serious look either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True enough. I havn't given the links a proper look. I am going through them now but it will take a while.

While I am sure there is an agenda being pushed by many people I would be more convinced that it is more to do with promoting new home grown industry than wealth redistribution.

Prince Charles has been green long before it was fashionable so I doubt he has a secret agenda. I will comment more when I have watched the videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ASL Vet, if there's someone with an agenda, it's you. There's no point in reading fringe nut articles unless you're a fringe nut yourself. Is any amount of unbiased scientific evidence going to turn your head? Apparently not, you've made your mind that there's a radical agenda behind global warming. It's the same as with evolution vs. creation debate, there's always people with an agenda coming out and saying that the scientists have a secret agenda. Of course you can argue until the cows come home, but what is it going to change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well your links started well but I'm afraid they descended quickly into nut job territory.

'Green jobs' are one of the fastest growing industrial sectors so it is natural that governments and industry would want to take advantage of that. When thousends of auto workers get layed off they (voters) want jobs and a good way of doing that is in the green industries. A second reason why it makes good sense to go green (whether you believe in climate change or not) is to reduce your dependence on foreign oil, especially with big players like china going to any lengths to get some for itself.

The links:

- Well british unions have always been interested in creating and preserving jobs so given the fact that there was no way to keep the factory they announced that they would continue to fight for similar jobs. Hardly surprising and no secret agenda.

- The American Communists publish a very uncontraversial article saying that unempoyment is undesirable and its part of a secret agenda? Shocking stuff! Remember, sitting back and letting a recession run its course has been tried before and it didn't work which is why goverments across the world are pushing stimulation funds. A lot of these funds are being pushed into the above mentioned fast growing industries (green) as an investment for the future.

- Van Jones looks like a showboater shouting popularist comments but nothing he said was very redistributive. He was just saying that these new jobs should go to anyone that wants them. Much like when women began to work in the factories, a larger workforce means a larger economy. And if a Native American has a job then he is not on the streets causing trouble - win/win. BTW, I am not saying that native americans cause trouble, but unemployed people in general cost the state money for any number of different reasons.

- Cap and trade is complicated and I don't want to go into the details because I don't know that much about US politics but I fail to see how making energy more expensive is redistributive. Surely it would affect the poor more than the rich as thier energy bill is a higher proportion of their income?

- The boston herald story sounds like a govenor trying to save face rather than an expensive way to redistribute wealth.

- The Centre of American progress article is more of the same, jobs are good for the economy. Agree with that or not but it is no news.

- The next video. $10million? For poor countries to stay stable, with a bonus of good PR for the USA? Sounds like a bargin to me!

- A site called 'rantburg'? retelling the above story with a heavily conservative spin on it? It's not a source, its just some bloke preaching to the converted. Noone else in their right mind would even get half way through before giving up because of the bias involved.

- The GE article is irrelivent to your original point - Just big business doing what it does best.

- As I mentioned before, the Prince of Wales has been warning about harm to the environment for decades. Maybe because he genuinely believes it?

- Now the links get really bad. "Scientific advancement and medical breakthroughs are ground to a halt, as in the old Soviet Union where technology was frozen in the 1950s"

'nuff said, the writer is retarded.

- The next article is off topic and I don't want to get into that debate. Consider this however, if scientists make their names by disproving established theory, why is the well established scientific consensus on climate change still around? Details are debated, but not the fact that it is a real phenomenon.

- I have never heard of Lord Monckton. I am both british and interested in climate change. What expert knowledge can a man with no background in any environmental discipline bring to the climate change discussion?

Sorry ASL Vet but you really are going to have to take off your tin foil hat. There are hundreds of different 'agendas' with a general trend towards a green economy. The process is more advanced in Europe but then we are a socialist workers paradise attemting to push our green/red agenda across the world! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality of the change in the climate is obvious. IMO the real guestion is if the human activity triggered the global warming and can we really do anything to alter the course.

Of course there is an agenda behind the whole debate. The wealthy want to get wealthier. Or at least retain their edge over the masses. As things stand the global economy is unsustainable in the long run. So is continuous economic growth. Social justice good and proper but as long as the global economy is the order of the day we should follow the money to see who gets the justice socially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem for the ‘social justice’ crowd is that if the science that backs ‘Global Warming’ turns out to not be true then guess what?

Your children and grandchildren end up with a cleaner world, and more social justice to boot?

Fvk me! What a *horrible* thought that is :rolleyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality of the change in the climate is obvious. IMO the real guestion is if the human activity triggered the global warming and can we really do anything to alter the course.

It's possible, even probable, that it is not the sole causative factor, but I don't see how you can argue that it is not a contributive factor. Since global warming is far from being obviously a Good Thing, doesn't it make sense to reduce our contribution to it as much as we can? Even if we cannot stop the process, why not slow it down as much as possible so as to buy some time to adjust to it?

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible, even probable, that it is not the sole causative factor, but I don't see how you can argue that it is not a contributive factor. Since global warming is far from being obviously a Good Thing, doesn't it make sense to reduce our contribution to it as much as we can? Even if we cannot stop the process, why not slow it down as much as possible so as to buy some time to adjust to it?

Michael

And even if it was all bollocks, which all the clues say it isn't, why not just develop green energy to piss off the Saudis?

Honestly ASL Vet, you are in serious tinfoil territory here. Pretty much everyone wins, even if global warming is a myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh - there's skullduggery in the "green" industries...well with trillions of dollars at stake that's a surprise!

Yawn......

As for all that stuff about the unions and communists and jobs...wtf is yuor problem? There are lots of jobs coming in "green" industries, and they want their troops to be in a position to get them...or at least some of them.

And that is surprising how?? Unions want their members to get jobs - and this is news to you??

I'm sure here are "conspiracies" to secure profits and work...but unions wanting jobs for their members is hardly a secret worthy of the Illuminati...:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elmar Bijlsma

And even if it was all bollocks, which all the clues say it isn't, why not just develop green energy to piss off the Saudis?

That is not that simple. There was a documentary about a family trying to make do without any oil products for a year.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?client=opera&rls=en&q=Katastrofin+aineksia&sourceid=opera&oe=utf-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=fv3jSrm5JpPS-Qab1YXJCQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CBEQqwQwAw#

Honestly ASL Vet, you are in serious tinfoil territory here. Pretty much everyone wins, even if global warming is a myth.

With all the production being moved to low-labour-cost countries there will be hell to pay before EVERYBODY gets their share of the winnings though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ASL Vet has some legitimate concerns about the power structure of the left and it behooves us to have an adequate view of what is actually going on before we bag him out - it's unfortunate that the only people still writing in support of a conservative point of view and getting airtime are outright loons.

As for the power structure of the Left - it is global and it is quite happy to maintain the laws brought in by the right for their own ends. In Australia we have a Prime Minister married to a lady who has made most of a billion by heading up a company that has provided public services for nations in Europe - Germany and GB for starters. And our public service contractors over here are owned by German, British and US interests (all this came out of the philosophy of outsourcing and the belief that doing so would lead to efficiencies and a win for the taxpayer. Ho-****ing-ho.) Pollies are traded around for unkown reasons (we scored Butler as Tasmania's GG a little while go for his efforts in Iraq, we now have someone coming over for a Liberal (conservative) Party safe seat in Sydney. You-scratch-my-I'll-scratch-yours has travelled well.

ASL Vet, as far as a hidden agenda for the implementation of a carbon based taxation system, consider this: at present, the value of national currencies relative to one another is distorted by the fact that they're still based, to a greater extent, on the available physical resources available to that nation (mostly gold - hence one the reasons the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand dollars have done so well in the last year). It doesn't matter if this material is uranium, gold, iron, any one of the thousands of commodities traded around the globe, there will always be some sort of distortion able to be manipulated to afford someone an unfair advantage in the global market. Now, if we introduce a (global) tax on carbon, specifically it's transition from the biosphere to the atmosphere, we damp the effect of the commodity based currency system.

Or at least, these are my observations and suspicions. It helps that I do wear a tinfoil hat occasionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elmar Bijlsma

That is not that simple. There was a documentary about a family trying to make do without any oil products for a year.

Non-oil consumer in an oil consuming world. It should be no surprise to anyone that doesn't go very well. Aside from not being quite so fundamentalist about it it'll be easier if the whole of society is making the gradual change with you.

With all the production being moved to low-labour-cost countries there will be hell to pay before EVERYBODY gets their share of the winnings though.

But that trend is already under way, regardless of green industry. It's why western nations should be at the front of the queue on green industry: To get a head start and smooth out our fall from dominance. It's probably going to prolong the West's current position in the world, if anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that trend is already under way, regardless of green industry. It's why western nations should be at the front of the queue on green industry: To get a head start and smooth out our fall from dominance. It's probably going to prolong the West's current position in the world, if anything.

I agree. In my opinion, one of the reasons why the EU is so agressive in using its market clout to make all products greener is that European countries are very good at doing just that. It gives them an edge over much of the competition.

That is of course only one aspect of it. As stated by a lot of people, the world is going green for many reasons. As noble as it is to save the planet, many people see other advantages in joining the green movement, often financial ones.

I can see that I am coming off as a bit of a cynic, but whatever peoples reasons for joining the green movement, hopefully it will have a generally positive effect on the planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The power structure of the left"??

WTF is that? The commo's are split 40 ways to sunday, the Greens are eco-fascists (do as we say because we know what's best for everyone...), the liberals are on a bit of a guilt trip from the Greens but still want their middle-class comforts...

What is this monolithic "Left" that has a "power structure"??!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The power structure of the left"??

WTF is that? The commo's are split 40 ways to sunday, the Greens are eco-fascists (do as we say because we know what's best for everyone...), the liberals are on a bit of a guilt trip from the Greens but still want their middle-class comforts...

What is this monolithic "Left" that has a "power structure"??!!

Sad but true SO - the Left has an international structure that has come out of the International Communists (Trotskyites), International Socialists (rabid ferals and their unwashed and ill-educated offspring) and the union movement. The communications systems of the Left are well developed and have been around for decades. Now that the structure of the Left has matured to the point where it has spawned an aristocracy in its own right (viz the Australian Labour Party's pre-selection methods and hereditary union membership in the US) the realisation has dawned that they need to protect their income (just as any other aristocracy). The education and health systems are most easily controlled because they're usually sponsored to a greater degree by the taxpayer: the public sector noodles along and installs those it regards as reliable for the job, policy is written with profit (for whom?) in mind. It could be that the Left has more in the intellectual bank the the Right, but all I can see is the letting loose of human nature in the halls of power and the resultant pain for the poor sods toiling away underneath. Given that most countries in the west have two party systems where both parties are intent on paying themselves with taxpayer funds from government contracts, I see little chance of an intellectually, or even plainly honest person ever attaining power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By Elmar Bijlsma

Non-oil consumer in an oil consuming world. It should be no surprise to anyone that doesn't go very well. Aside from not being quite so fundamentalist about it it'll be easier if the whole of society is making the gradual change with you.

I would have thought the entire film was available on youtube. :(

Anyhow, the wife went nuts when she learned regular toothpaste was out as it contains chemical byproducts from oil. Also, hauling food out of the stores was no picnic as most prepackaged food are in plastic containers (or containers containing plastics). To name but a few gripes.

But that trend is already under way, regardless of green industry. It's why western nations should be at the front of the queue on green industry: To get a head start and smooth out our fall from dominance. It's probably going to prolong the West's current position in the world, if anything.

Well, since all production is being transferred out the populace is getting unemployed and simply can not afford to go or choose green. The intentions may be good and proper but it will get trampeled under consumers not being able to sustain the development due to lack of funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no debate in the scientific community about Global Warming and that we, as a society, must make sacrafices in order to save the planet for future generations.

"Sacrifices" implies that there are cheaper, easier options. Actually we only have the option to do something about GHG emissions now which is very expensive, OR we spend our dollars on extracting the last drops of oil from ever more difficult places for the next 50 years, which is also very expensive, only that we then have to change to non-fossil fuel energy anyway and the planet is f*cked by global warming.

So its not about sacrifices, but about being smart or being stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

;1163796']So its not about sacrifices' date=' but about being smart or being stupid.[/quote']

That's the point that people don't seem to want to get.

We have a parallel problem here in the Pacific Northwest. The lumber industry is large and influential. Unfortunately, they tend to clearcut on government lands without reforesting. This is great for them on the short term, it's like free money. But the long term effects of clearcutting are devastating. Since most of the land this occurs on is hilly or mountainous, the erosion can be horrific. Even without that, it take fifty years or more until you start to have mature trees again and centuries before you get a climax forest.

Okay, the political problem arises when it is suggested that wiser techniques of forestry should be practiced. All these cut into the lumber companies' profit margin to a greater or lesser degree. They get all weepy and tell you that they will have to shut down their operations and put all loggers, millers, drivers, etc. out of work. The loggers complain that it would spell the end of a way of life and a whole sub-culture.

But isn't it obvious that once all the old growth forests have been cut down, all that is going to happen anyway? At the end of the day, you are going to have unemployed loggers no matter what you do or don't do. I'd rather have unemployed loggers and some remaining forests that can be put to other uses.

A wise policy would be one that embraced the problems and attacked them head on. It would include provisions for retraining and re-employing workers from the logging industry and providing them with adequate income during the transition. Many would still be engaged in some aspect of forestry. They could remain among the trees they say they love and continue to live in their present communities if they choose to do so.

But the more forests are cut down, the harder and more painful that transition is going to be.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Costard the "well developed communications" of "the left" are a joke.

The Aus Labour party's "pre selection processes" are no better or worse than many "right" or "centre" parties.

Hereditary membership of US unions? Given that the hereditary aristocracy world wide is generally considered "the right" (cf Sarkozy and his son too....), and has been around for a few hundred years, then if "the left" is getting a little nepotism going then imitation might be the sincerest form of flattery?!

The isdea that the "Internationals" are a form of command and control system is a little amusing given the generalisations that coem out of htem, the schisms that go into them, the violence that has surrounded Trotskyite relations with the USSR over the years, and hte general ineffectiveness and irrelevance of the whole Trotskyite movement to the rest of "the left" worldwide......

sorry - trying to build up a picture of a monolithic left with some kind of central control just shows how fragmented and disparate "the left" is......as a case for some sort of right wing counter-culture it might succeed....but only for ppl with lots of tin foil for a new hat every day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hereditary membership of US unions? Given that the hereditary aristocracy world wide is generally considered "the right" (cf Sarkozy and his son too....), and has been around for a few hundred years, then if "the left" is getting a little nepotism going then imitation might be the sincerest form of flattery?!

My dad was a printer. He belonged to the Printing union. I'm a printer. I belong to the Printing union.

Wait.

OMFGWTFBBQ I BELONG TO THE VAST LEFT WING HEREDITARY UNION MEMBERSHIP CONSPIRACY!!!1!one!!

(this is almost as good as "Hereditary Membership of the Local Library", "Hereditary Occupation of the Family Home", "Hereditary Use of Family Bach", and "Hereditary Use of Local Supermarket," all vast conspiracies to which I'm also a member, or have been in the not too distant past :D )

sorry - trying to build up a picture of a monolithic left with some kind of central control just shows how fragmented and disparate "the left" is......as a case for some sort of right wing counter-culture it might succeed....but only for ppl with lots of tin foil for a new hat every day!

hehe - this reminds me of the old Domino Theory. Turns out that was FOS too.

Maybe the new Vast Left Wing Green Conspriacy Theory is just the old Domino Theory recycled by those pining for the certainties of the Cold War?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...