The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The (Climate) Truth... will set you FREE!

The (Climate) Truth... will set you FREE!

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Once again you are taking sound-bites out of their original context, Boaz.

Ottmar Edenhofer says:

"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy."

You ask:

>>He is openly admitting that the real deal here is about what his words actually 'say'? If not..how would you explain his words?<<

My view is that he was simply being pragmatic.

As in, hey, folks, please do not get the idea that this will be a free lunch. Rich countries will make greater sacrifices than poor ones. So, de facto, we are inevitably in the business of wealth redistribution.

He is after all, a very down-to-earth German economist, not a pioneering flag-waver for the New World Order. He just calls it as he sees it.

IF we have an emission reduction plan, THEN we will have distribution of wealth from rich to poor.

You have interpreted this as a policy statement, where Edenhofer has declared this to be the IPCC's underlying motivation.

But he is describing the effect, not the cause.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 29 November 2010 8:08:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i thought i would try to find out the real numbers
and the real number is 5 million hits

see the google term i used was
'how many economists climate change'

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=how+many+economists+climate+change&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

and reading across the first page..its clearly an economic issue
PUSHED BY THOSE HOLDING THE PURSE STRINGS
the moneyed ELITE..[e_CON-o/mist}..ers

hiding behind a thin veil of deceptive and trickey science MODELING
for greater PURPOSE..to with economics

[its cheaper to do it NOW]...lol

[ITS the RIGHT thing to be doing..[for economists]..

for carbon traders...for securities traders..for the moneyed elites
for those wanting the next big bubble..[solar subsidised INFASTRUCTURE..paid for by CON-sumers]

cash back grants to an elitist mob of industrialists...needing to sell a product

[only made value via govt SUBSIDY]
con the people they are paying for infastructure

when they are really paying for SOME..to get free solar cells on their roofs..[or in their paddocks...

as well as BYING..any solar power..at a prenium price..
SUBSIDISED BY THE BASIC ignorant consumer..

[thinking its..*really for infastructure...
when its for a freelunch allround..to those knowing the economics of govt cashcows...and eCONnomic..THEORY

ps i still dont KNOW how many ECONOMISTS are selling the scam
but i think more than half ARE ECONOMIC..with the truth of their trade

they should have stuck with bottom of the harbour scemes
or defrauding..the taxman...not cashing in on lies and scare camPAINS
Posted by one under god, Monday, 29 November 2010 8:28:25 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles:

Your interpretation of Ottmar Edenhofer's remarks seems to be spot on. It's a pity that a few more quotes weren't given to put things into their correct perspective. I find it a bit disturbing that here in Australia there are still some people who find it necessary to re-run the strategy of denial (perfected by Dick Cheney in the Bush administration a decade ago). Mr Cheney's response a decade ago repudiated years of peer-reviewed findings about global warming and created an alternative reality in which climate change became a hoax or a conspiracy.

This is one way of avoiding debate about solutions to climate change by denying its existence or at least diminishing its importance. Global warming is a complex matter and of course many people share different points of view on this issue (mysel included) but being heavy-handed certainly doesn't help.
Posted by Lexi, Monday, 29 November 2010 9:54:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I posted the following comment in the comments re the Tuvalu item last Friday. As a metallurgist I am satisfied that fossil fuels are too valuable to future generations to be wasted over just two or three generations. I we conserve them for use over a much longer period the planet will accommodate the problems excessive combustion causes.
AlGoreisRich
You drew attention to a site address. I have read it and the main point of the article was, in my view, as shown below. The last sentence (after Why?) is the important comment.
Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.
Posted by Foyle, Monday, 29 November 2010 10:37:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"""
This is one way of avoiding debate about solutions to climate change by denying its existence
"""

Who in the world denies the climate changes? It's been changing for 4 1/2 billion years. It's the criminal/hypocritical taxing of life giving carbon dioxide that's the issue!

If carbon dioxide pollution (which by the way, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant) was such a great, imminent threat, why are we still digging up coal? Why are we shutting down our power plants while giving money to other countries to build more of them?

Al is right to recognise it's nothing but wealth distribution from the poor to the rich and a means of removing more freedoms and rights from the people by governments all over the world.

It's time green latte sipping fools STFU about all these lies. This game is over, time for you to find a new playing field.

It would seem Victorians have spoken, Al. The greens(reds) and labour are on the run and good riddance to the the lot of them.
Posted by RawMustard, Monday, 29 November 2010 10:48:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To use the views of a certifiable lunatic like Glenn Beck as the basis for any logical argument is nothing more than self-promotion and denial for the sake of some sort of idealogical stance.

It's interesting too that the same people who accept the existence of a hole in the ozone layer don't see it as some sort of international conspiracy when it uses the same science and is just as inconclusive in its remedy.
Posted by wobbles, Monday, 29 November 2010 12:07:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy