Poirot just how many times do the purveyor of the global warming/climate disruption, [what ever the latter means], have to change their story line, before you recognize it is just that, a story.

10 years ago these same "scientists" predicted that snow would no longer fall on the UK.

Now they can't get to work for the snow drifts, they change the name of their scam to climate disruption, & people like you still believe. What has to happen to open your eyes?

How much do they have to get wrong, before the whole thing is seen as what it is. Hockey anyone?

I can understand people who just catch a couple of seconds propaganda on the ABC news still do not seen the facts, but you obviously think about this stuff. I am at a loss that anyone who has sorted through the facts, & thought about them could still believe, unless they are a fellow traveler of course.

bonmot,

This thread is about significant news items related to AGW from overseas, many of which don’t seem to get debated in OZ. The quote from Newman was simply to make the point that even within our own media; group think has been identified and is a potential cause of suppression.

Your detailed analysis of who, where, when and how don’t go anywhere near the issues of censorship, suppression, denigration and trivialization of contrary AGW views.

Let me offer you something you can get your teeth into. In the interests of open and honest debate, I will post a contrary scientific opinion to the AGW orthodoxy, one of perhaps 1,500 that have not had air time in OZ. I will initially retain the name of the author, that way you don’t get to play silly burgers with shooting the messenger. You get to the address the issues in the paper and we all get to see how you go.

If your orthodoxy is so robust you will easily be able to challenge one of these papers.

OK?

bonmot:>> Poirot, sonofgloin thinks 'it' all a hoax, a myth.
You can't shed light on those that live in the dark without damaging hurting their eyes.<<

Bonmot let me offer you a gem of wisdom "the truth is rarely found by following, questioning brings revelation"

>> Hope the links help.
Blair<<

No they did not, they say we have been in drought for ages and now we are getting and will get record rainfall this summer.

Bonmot have you ever heard of Dorothea Mackellars poem, My Country:

I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains

Does that suggest anything to you about the cycle of weather here in Oz? So why show me figures about droughts and driving rains and suggest it points to climate change, and you reckon I am a simple soul.

Dear narrowly focused Poirot :) you ask:

"What if the little country down in South America (or Africa or Asia or Anywhere) had been instrumental in you gaining your materials or cheaply manufactured components because its people had been exploited?"

Now...*think* for a moment about human history. It seems to me that contained in your question is a very dodgy assumption that only the Colonial powers or.. "Western Capitalism" has ever exploited said "small country". Remember those wonderful people in South America who in just one day, comitted murder on a scale seldom rivalled in human history by slicing and dicing human hearts from conquered sacrificial victims.

You see...the other problem with your point is that IF you feel one example of historical exploitation should be addressed by us.. hmmm how about ALLLLL such examples be addressed and fixed? That would include my own ancestors in the highland clearances. You see..it IS within our power... but it's simply impractical.

The other problem is this... those advocating 'reparations' for slavery or capitalist exploitation, do not have 'justice' in their mind as much as "POWER".

Surely you've been around the traps long enough to recognize basic Socialist agitation 101 ?....Here is a refresher course.

1/ Pick an issue.. even a small one..where *someone* is unhappy with the government.
2/ AMPLIFY it as much as you can... demonstrate...protest... wave your flags.. condemn the 'capitalist pigs' etc...
3/ Capitalize on the turmoil and sieze power.

(been a-watching Greece/france/Ireland/England lately ? :)

PS that Corbett report (youtube) is AMAZING.. I've not used it before but it's spot on. "Environmental issues have been hijacked by MONEY" and "I" (Gore) am at the forefront of this with my buddy Maurice Strong.

If ONLY we can succeed in getting cap and TRADE laws.. we stand to make trillions.. (really!) The thing is.. we must 'POSTURE' ourselves toward the 'left' to get support for our political assault.
(Demobrats/Labour)

Here is the voice of a special interest :) "mine"

http://repoweramerica.org/take-action/

Stand up for clean energy.
Share your voice on the Repower America Wall.
A majority of Americans support clean energy. But powerful SPECIAL interests are blocking OUR path, spending millions to protect the status quo. Join thousands of Americans who have already shared their stories and help make sure our leaders see and hear our collective call.

*COUGH choke.....*

And of course AL is not a special interest promoting this stuff so HE can make megabucks through carbon trading etc ? (Generation Investments LLC)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/14/al-gore-climate-change

QUOTE
Gore is in the capital, as he is every few months, to spend a couple of days meeting with his partners at Generation Investment Management, the "sustainability-driven" asset management firm he set up in 2004 with David Blood, who, as the former chief executive of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, once managed investments worth $325bn

As chairman, Gore, 61, says he spends about "one day a week" working for Generation, but his press handlers won't expand on what investments he holds or remuneration he receives,
UNQUOTE

*Falls back laughing*

Dear AL,
You wrote;
"Here is the most fundamental problem mate..... the DIFFerence between Jesus approach and that of the socialist 'hoardes' is FORCE. Jesus did not "force" or make laws. He didn't even advocate redistribution of wealth in a political sense."

Christ's message on wealth is so totally unambiguous that for you to paint it in any other fashion is basically blasphemy.

His instruction that the wealthy man needed to divest himself of all his worldly goods to truely follow him was very clear. His teaching was that the rich had a 'Buckleys to none' chance of reaching heaven.

In denying this and other fundamental teaching of Christ can you explain why you shouldn't be regarded by others as a 'Christ denier' rather than a believer?