• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Topic: Eco-Judas?

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Eco-Judas?

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    Patrick Moore, founder and former president of Greenpeace. He abandoned the organization he founded. Why?

    Read His Article

    It's a long article and, naturally, I disagree with some of his points. I don't think there's any legtimate science that conclusively proves polution is the cause for the ozone hole. There's just as much evidence to show that it could be a natural phenomenon. The point is, here is a group of people that lie through their teeth. They've sabatoged a movement that had good intentions and was based on honest research and turned it into a big fund-raiser for communist activists.

    This Is Your Environmental Movement
    Michael Peter

    If music be the food of love...
    play on

    William Shakespeare

    homepage

  2. #2

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by His Frogness
    I don't think there's any legtimate science that conclusively proves polution is the cause for the ozone hole.
    Has science ever conclusively proven anything? There are always loose ends. The thing is, legtimate science points to a high probablility that polution has caused the ozone hole. That's about the best you can do on any subject.

  3. #3

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    The environmental movement is very complex, as are the problems in this world. The left tends to be disorganized in general. There are too many people with strong wills and a passion for the truth. Politics requires compromise. So the position of the left has nott been boiled down to a simplistic formula, the way they have done for the right. He is definately not an Eco Judas. Your comments about environmental science simply reflect that you have read none of the important scientific journals of our time and have gotten all of your information from administration soundbytes. 95% of the worlds scientists and 99% of the most accomplished scientists, believe in human caused global warming and ozone depletion. Notice that all of the nobel prize winners believe in these things. The scientist who do not are mostly political appointees. This is not an issue in any other country in the world except the US. Question what you are being fed. Otherwise, you are simply a sheep, with a little black mustache.

  4. #4

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Phoenix
    The environmental movement is very complex, as are the problems in this world. The left tends to be disorganized in general. There are too many people with strong wills and a passion for the truth. Politics requires compromise. So the position of the left has nott been boiled down to a simplistic formula, the way they have done for the right. He is definately not an Eco Judas. Your comments about environmental science simply reflect that you have read none of the important scientific journals of our time and have gotten all of your information from administration soundbytes. 95% of the worlds scientists and 99% of the most accomplished scientists, believe in human caused global warming and ozone depletion. Notice that all of the nobel prize winners believe in these things. The scientist who do not are mostly political appointees. This is not an issue in any other country in the world except the US. Question what you are being fed. Otherwise, you are simply a sheep, with a little black mustache.
    Nick, I fully admit that I have not delved into the scientific journals that assert the cause and effect of global warming. What I distinctly remember is the global conference that was organized a few years ago, in which scientists from all around the world got together to try and ascertain the cause and effect. The result was inconclusive. The different sciences could not agree on even small scientific data. Geologists had data that rebuked Biological data. Biologists had data that atmospheric scientists disagreed with. The result of this conference was that there was not enough verifiable evidence to support anyone's claim about anything. That didn't stop the WHO from compiling a report, based on this conference, that global warming was a real threat and humans were the cause, despite the fact that the conclusions of this conference were anything but.
    So, the WHO releases the report, the mass media just passes it on, and it's all a lie. It's very similar to the reprehensible actions of Greenpeace, which Patrick Moore so eloquently describes in his article.
    The point here is that through the hard work of Patrick Moore, the environmental movement gained respect, and as he states in his article, was appealed to by corporate America to find solutions everyone could live with. Instead of working with industrialists, they just made their demands ever more ridiculous, which is about the time he noticed the big shift in the environmental movement. It was no longer about the environment. It was more about anti-capitalism and anti-globalization. It was more about fund-raising than protecting the environment.
    If I'm guilty of being fed my opinions through political soundbytes, you are equally guilty of being fed your opinions by complete, total and verifiable liars with no credibility. The WHO, the leading authority on world health issues, has no credibility. None.
    I do want a clean and healthy earth, and it's easy to see why many have an intuitive feeling that man's pollution has a negative effect on our environment, but I need more than an intuitive "feeling" and a bunch of wacko leftists "saying so" for me to be willing to agree.
    Michael Peter

    If music be the food of love...
    play on

    William Shakespeare

    homepage

  5. #5
    Moderator/Developer Brian2112's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Out of my Mind
    Posts
    1,858

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    I don't think there's any legtimate science that conclusively proves polution is the cause for the ozone hole. There's just as much evidence to show that it could be a natural phenomenon.
    So are you advocating that we pollute more? This makes sense. Obviously, those of us “communist, Godless, leftist, traitor, elitist thugs” are responsible for the ozone hole and the fluoridation of water, in the pursuit of subverting our constitutional republic by poisoning our precious bodily fluids. j/k

    I notice the “Eco – Terrorism warning” thing that Ashcroft issued never developed. I wonder if this was an attempt at psychological association of environmentalists with terrorists. I mean what the heck? We re-define the word “terrorist” as politically suits us.

    I stopped giving money to Greenpeace when their tactics got violent. I agreed with the cause, but not the tactics. I found other more productive groups. In the meantime, I think we can all agree that we need to pollute more and fart less.



    Brian
    "So what if some parts of life are a crap shoot? Get out there and shoot the crap." -- Neil Peart
    Hint:1.6180339887498948482 Φ

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Ojai, California
    Posts
    305

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by His Frogness
    There's just as much evidence to show that it could be a natural phenomenon.

    I really don't see a reason anymore to argue with people like you. I could post article after article by, as Nick mentioned, top ecologists, environmentalists, Nobel Prize winners, meteoroligists, etc., etc,- scientists who have done, and are doing independent research uncircumscribed by political or business forces. Thousands of these people have signed petition after petition that warn us of the probability of grave dangers that we face if we continue down the raod we are on. Many of these people, and I know a few, have given their lives to such research and view honesty, integrity and truthful reporting of their theories as paramount.

    And then some little weenie like you comes along with apparently absolutely no first hand knowledge of the subject , calling into question things you really have no comprehension of.

    You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

    Take a class in humility, spend a few hours delving, and shut up until you do.

  7. #7

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by runamuck
    I really don't see a reason anymore to argue with people like you. I could post article after article by, as Nick mentioned, top ecologists, environmentalists, Nobel Prize winners, meteoroligists, etc., etc,- scientists who have done, and are doing independent research uncircumscribed by political or business forces. Thousands of these people have signed petition after petition that warn us of the probability of grave dangers that we face if we continue down the raod we are on. Many of these people, and I know a few, have given their lives to such research and view honesty, integrity and truthful reporting of their theories as paramount.

    And then some little weenie like you comes along with apparently absolutely no first hand knowledge of the subject , calling into question things you really have no comprehension of.

    You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

    Take a class in humility, spend a few hours delving, and shut up until you do.
    I see I have been put in my place by the leading authority on scientific data, runamuck, from Ojai. Thank you for descending down to our little forum with your unquestionable wisdo---I mean, vitriol.
    Michael Peter

    If music be the food of love...
    play on

    William Shakespeare

    homepage

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Ojai, California
    Posts
    305

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by His Frogness
    I see I have been put in my place by the leading authority on scientific data, runamuck, from Ojai. Thank you for descending down to our little forum with your unquestionable wisdo---I mean, vitriol.

    Nice try changing the subject.

    Yes. I'm angry.

    How's the delving going?

  9. #9

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Quote Originally Posted by runamuck
    Nice try changing the subject.

    Yes. I'm angry.

    How's the delving going?
    I understand your anger, and I apologize for being the catalyst of it. I in no way mean to assume that my own limited knowledge is sufficent enough to dictate world policy in regards to environmental protection. Indeed, I am a weenie.

    My entire argument is this; How can we know what's true and what isn't when no one that supplies the facts has any credibility? I'm not villifying Greenpeace, The Sierra Club and the WWF, they have villified themselves (please read the article I posted).

    I am an open-minded person, but admittedly have not re-evaluated my greeness for quite some time. I am willing to give an honest look at any evidence you wish to present me with, but I will dismiss it outright if it comes from Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, or the WWF.
    Michael Peter

    If music be the food of love...
    play on

    William Shakespeare

    homepage

  10. #10
    Moderator/Developer Brian2112's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Out of my Mind
    Posts
    1,858

    Re: Eco-Judas?

    Runamuck,

    With all due respect, I offer this humble thought: I agree with everything you posted until you wrote this:
    And then some little weenie like you comes along with apparently absolutely no first hand knowledge of the subject , calling into question things you really have no comprehension of.
    and this:
    Take a class in humility, spend a few hours delving, and shut up until you do.
    It has been my personal experience that if you want to convince someone as to the credibility of your argument, that you do so in a humble way. The “Take a class in humility” remark is hypocrisy, and you are smart enough to know this. To insult someone by implying that they are ignorant, or not intelligent enough to be debated with, will receive a defensive stance, which further entrenches someone in their beliefs – whether they are right or wrong. I disagree passionately with what His Frogness seems to believe. But such passions lead to nothing but anger if not tempered with wisdom. Anger = loss of rational thought. Hopefully, His Frogness was not offended by my earlier post, as I tried to make it a “tongue in cheek” kind of response. A little humor goes further than anger will. The issue itself is a serious one, but in our dealings with each other, we must remember that we all come from different backgrounds and beliefs.

    Perhaps this is what Nick referred too in that the Democrats tend to be dis-organized. While I disagree with His Frogness, I also disagree with the aforementioned statements which lend credibility to the perception that we liberals are “Arrogant Elitists”.

    If His Frogness is making an attempt to understand something (which he appears to be), that is quite different than proclaiming that “I have all the answers”.



    With respect to both,



    Brian
    "So what if some parts of life are a crap shoot? Get out there and shoot the crap." -- Neil Peart
    Hint:1.6180339887498948482 Φ

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •