What do you know!

A letter to the secretary general of the UN. Hat tip to NoTricksZone

"Your Excellencies,

There is no climate emergency

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.

Check NoTricksZone for more.

The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly, grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, continuous electrical power.

It appears some of those 97% have grown some balls.

It has been a long time coming. Bring ng on the future climate change cultism trials. No executions, but reparation payments from the funds they have made and years of demeaning social community service, plus compulsory de-programming!!

Dear Hasbeen,

The following link will give you some insight into
how reliable the "No Tricks Zone" website really
is:

http://www.snopes.com/fact-check/scientific-papers-global-warming-myth/

The article is in essence merely a link to a post from
a blog that goes by the name "No Tricks Zone."

Snopes.com is a fact-checking website - well regarded source
for sorting out myths and rumours on the internet.

Take what "No Tricks Zone" publishes with a grain of salt.
Also check out the signatories of the letter you cite
and their backgrounds. Viv Forbes from Australia is
an interesting case.

you don't need to be a 'real scientist' to see the multitudes of failed and false predictions made by the gw fraudsters over the last 50 years or so. You only need a tiny bit of commonsense. The 'science is settled' brigade are an insult to any person who can think. Look at the way thery have used an autistic girl to pedal their very false and sick and hateful narrative.

Fake news, a term invented by the right, who are the true users of that term, has convinced many to over look truth
These so called scientists need to be looked at very closely
Many of them are not from this field

"Snopes.com is a fact-checking website - well regarded source
for sorting out myths and rumours on the internet."

Struth Foxy,

Better pinch some of that salt that you recommend others to take.

Snopes used to be passably acceptable but no longer. Lots on the WWW if you care to look but just one example...

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/10/how_stupid_is_snopescom.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html

I don't much care one way or t'other. I do my own fact checking. So I consider outsourcing it to suspect groups to be less than optimal.

As to NoTricks. Its one of my favourites. The blog author is based in Germany so we see a lot from him on what's going on in the non-English speaking world of climate alarmism and its opponents.

You have of course read the full report Belly, so feel qualified to make the judgement call that this is fake news. How the hell a report of a letter by 500 scientists to the evil UN secretary general can be "fake News" I fail to see.

It is time for our well meaning lefty folk to read a bit more widely than lefty propaganda, & with more knowledge stop making fools of themselves, believing & repeating all the propaganda.

mhaze,

You need to do more research into the author and the
"No Tricks Zone"website. Although I suspect it
won't make any difference to you seeing as it's your
favourite as you say.

You make a disclaimer as to what I cited - well that's
par for the course. And you give the references of
"American Thinker," known as "American Stinker" by
many for its conservative and biased views.

And then also the UK Daily Mail - most of whose
supporters are also conservative. Not that there's
anything wrong with that.

Each to their own.

cont'd ...

I only wish that people including Hasbeen would take their
own advice and stop reading propaganda and have an
occasional read of the facts that do exist.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Snopes is a terrific site and one of the best in the business at pulling apart the crap that is dished up mostly from the rabid right.

Your example of them not getting it right is inane. They were not addressing the original site but rather the pictures that were arriving via email and social media.

Hasbeen's letter to the UN is filled with dubious characters and to say there is a single reputable scientist among the 500 would be gilding the lily. I really do want to pat him on the head. Serving up rubbish like this just elicits pity in the rest of us.

As to notrickszone they are a bunch of shady distorters of the truth who are constantly getting told to take down other people's research because they are deeply misrepresenting it.

Hasbeen one of us is wrong, not just wrong totally wrong
You may think it is me, but I do have very very many on my side
Why I ask is this planets climate such a combative thing
Could it be a large group of fools *like me* have been conned? to what end?
Or seeing the total catastrophic over night/year/ loss of fossil fuels, is some group [owners of said fuels?] behind what is at best confusion over what is true
Watch Sky/Fox get one opinion/loaded comment, read better news get another
Let me be honest, if climate change is not at least in part man made I AM AN IDIOT
Divide and Conquer, it may well be a group unseen or only briefly seen, are pulling our strings will one day try forcing us to think as they want us to

Keeping an open mind, I read the letter http://tundratabloids.com/2019/09/24/500-climate-scientists-write-to-un-there-is-no-climate-emergency/.

The signatories identify as "ambassadors of the European Climate Declaration". (I can't find a list of the full 500; another website says their names will be released soon.)

Professor Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands; Professor Richard Lindzen, USA: Professor Reynald Du Berger,French Canada; Professor Ingemar Nordin, Sweden; Terry Dunleavy, New Zealand; Jim O'Brien, Rep. of Ireland; Viv Forbes, Australia; Professor Alberto Prestininzi, Italy;
Professor Jeffrey Foss, English Canada; Professor Benoît Rittaud, France; Morten Jødal, Norway; Professor Fritz Vahrenholt, Germany;
Rob Lemeire, Belgium; The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, UK.

The only name I recognised was Viscount Monckton. Now, I know the climatology field in Australia, and have met some of the researchers. But who, I wondered, was Viv Forbes? Actually he is listed on OLO; see: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=655.

More info not included in OLO: http://www.desmogblog.com/viv-forbes.

"Viv Forbes is the Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, which was created to “defend the role of carbon on earth and in the atmosphere,” and which describes Forbes as a 'pasture manager, soil scientist and geologist from Rosevale in Queensland.'

Forbes has also had a long association with the coal industry. According to his archived biography at Stanmore Coal where he acts as director, Forbes has over 40 years of coal industry experience and has worked with Burton Coal, Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal, South Blackwater Coal Mine, Tahmoor Coal Mine, Newlands/Collinsville Coal Mines, MIM, Utah Goonyella/Saraji, Gold Fields, Austral Coal, and others. Forbes was also appointed general manager of Rocklands Richfield coal company in 2006.

He is also associated with other skeptical organizations including the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) and the Australian Climate Science Coalition (ACSC)."

So Viv Forbes is not a climatologist, he is a long time activist supporting the coal industry.

It's important to be sceptical. But it's especially important to be sceptical of those who make a career out of being sceptics, but have no research experience in the fields they are sceptical about. It's even more important to be sceptical of people and statements that you emotionally agree with, to avoid bias confirmation.

This will not please the climate liars one little bit. They are going to have to do overtime now to to invent new lies.

Dear Foxy,

Do you ever get the feeling you are wasting your time arguing about global warming and its consequential climate change with people like Hasbeen, runner, mhaze, individual, Loudmouth and ttbn? The thing they all share in common is their ignorance. They are the sort of people who will argue about anything just for the sake of arguing about something especially on topics like global warming and climate change which they have absolutely no knowledge.

Hasbeen is a plastic engineer and mhaze is just an engineer; runner is a complete nutcase; Loudmouth keeps saying he is educated but when I ask him to name his degrees he clams up; and ttbn and individual are just a pair of know-all-know-nothing wannabes. I don't think they even have a clue of what they are saying from one moment to the next. They drag in facts and figures from any obscure source they can get their hands on and they think it makes them look intelligent and knowledgeable. In reality it makes them look stupid.

Dear Mr Opinion,

I've been on this forum for more than a decade.
I've known the people you mention for a long time.
I've interacted with all of them. We disagree
often and don't see eye to eye on many issues
however even though our discussions may at times
be quite robust - underneath all the arguments
you will find decent, fair, and honest human beings that
deserve respect.

Arguments and differences of opinion can at times be
frustrating - but at the same time - how boring
would it be if we all agreed?

cont'd ...

Yes of course at times my feelings go through a
whole range of emotions. But then a stiff drink
or good sex (joking) makes me feel much better.
Also reading the posts of people like Steele, Banjo
Paterson, Belly, Cossomby, and others, cheers me up.

No, I'm not going to go there.
But glad to see who it is demonstrating a little normality with a bit of levity, very heartening.
One of my favourite topics, glad to see who the author is.

Foxy my regards and yes agreement too
We do launch in to one another, some of us, but for the most part we do respect each other
This subject, along with anything Trump gets us heated
But I come here to learn too, reading others thoughts, no matter how much I disagree, is worth the effort
Some, by their own actions, are in the never bother to read bin, after all personal insults are not facts

Mr O, you are defiantly right, at one time Hasbeen was denying climate change based on the hearsay of some young 85 year old neighbour down the road, and the fact his fruit trees were doing something or another. When bingo finishes for the morning down at the Shady Rest retirement home, instead of have nap time, the old fellas take turns on nursey's computer to stoke you and others up.

Foxy you are also right, without our resident bunch of geriatrics there would be no one to argue with.

Hi Paul1405,
I've sometimes wondered why Graham Young hasn't updated the OLO website to draw more people in.
- But that doesn't necessarily mean I want it to change, or that I don't like OLO the way it is.

It's not too difficult to build an awesome website,
Take this for example.
http://demo.rockettheme.com/joomla-templates/fluent/
They come pre-built with pages ready to go.
http://demo.rockettheme.com/live/joomla/fluent/pages/portfolio
http://demo.rockettheme.com/live/joomla/fluent/features/particles
Then you just install forum software into that site;
http://www.kunena.org/
And do a little CSS coding to make sure the forum fits nicely and looks good with the colours and font matching.

Foxy,

You might note that I didn't comment on the letter to the UN. I'll wait until I see who the 500 scientists are. But we all know that it'll make no difference to the partisans on either side and will be less than useless in regards to the UN who see nothing but dollar signs in regards to climate change policy. It might serve to blunt some of the 97% malarkey but even there its unlikely.

You might also note that I didn't endorse 'No Tricks' in regards to this issue. I simply said I like NTZ because it gives a window into non-English speaking science. I know that they often over-egg the pudding but going in eyes-wide open (you should try it some time) you can still get lots of useful information.

I also note that you haven't attempted to address the issue of the contents of the letter to the UN. Rather than address the message, which you're clearly incapable of doing, you've attacked the messenger. Same old Foxy. One trick pony.

In surfing my usual climate sites, I'd guess I've already seen 10 or so that also carry stories about the letter. If I was to link to them, would you systematically try to shoot all those messengers as well? What am I saying...of course you would. When its all you've got, you've gotta go with it, n'est pas?

If you want to just shoot messengers and use others to load the bullets (eg snopes) its probably just as well to know a bit about the loader. Rely on Snopes if that helps you appear to be impartially examining the issue. But, as with so much else over the past few years, you'll be happily led down the garden path.

Misopinionated,

Okay, bugger it:

T. Cert; BA; BA (Hons); Dip. Bus (acc); Dip. L.G. Admin: Gr. Dip. Ad & F Ed.; Dip. Ed.; Gr. Dip. Prop.; M. Pol.; M. Bus (Admin. Mant).

Now let's move on, if possible without the juvenile trolling.

Joe

mhaze,

You clearly stated that the "No Tricks Zone" was
one of your favourites. And you further gave us
two more conservative links as a back up.

But that's fine and understandable. You protest too
much methinks, in this case. But that's par for
the course.

As Cossomby pointed out so beautifully in her post -

It is important to be sceptical, but it is especially
important to be sceptical if those who make
a career out of being sceptical (including their websites)
have no research experience in the fields that they are
sceptical about. Hence my mention of Viv Forbes on
page 1. His background speaks for itself.

I read the letter to the UN and then checked on who
the signatories were.

No surprises there.

Also as Cossomby also stated - we need to be sceptical
about those whose views agree with ours to avoid
confirmation bias. That is very relevant as well in
matters such as these. However when people do have
the experience and the knowledge necessary to know what
they are talking about - they are
more credible than those who don't

Foxy, given that Cossomby is more Courteous than most, their posting history dose indicate that they are about as unbiased as Paul, which is saying something.

"You clearly stated that the "No Tricks Zone" was
one of your favourites. "

Yes, twice. And explained why its a favourite site. It provides links to interesting data. But I always take its opinions with a little more than usual salt.
I guess you can't fathom just going to a site for information rather than opinion since you only go to sites to be told what to think.

"And you further gave us two more conservative links as a back up."
Well no. I gave those links to show why you should be wary of Snopes. Struggling to follow the flow of the discussion?

Just on Snopes,I came across this in my wanderings overnight... http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=Y4WGtjQJVoI

So no attempt to defend going after the messenger rather than the message...about what I've come to expect.

______________________________________________________

SteeleRedux,

Rather bizarre that you post a spittle-laden attack on Shadow Minister when he hasn't even posted on the thread. Bizarre but very SR.
I especially liked this..."As to notrickszone they are a bunch of shady distorters...".
'They'? 'They' are one person. Its Pierre L. Gosselin's personal blog. Good to see you thoroughly researched the site before unloading on it </sarc>....what a dill.

mhaze,

Give it a rest.

Nobody's buying what you're selling.

Oh yes they are Foxy. It's SR who should go try a new line of work, he's failing at this one.

Dear Hassie,

Nah. Obviously SR is succeeding from the reactions
he's getting.

"Nobody's buying what you're selling."

No one's buying evidence based opinion?

Well we know you're not in the market.

But I'm not selling anything. I'm here for 3 reasons...

1) to have my opinions challenged with contrary evidence. Hope you can join in one day.

2) Offer alternate views to those not yet indoctrinated.

oh...

and 3) to record my current views so I can look back over time to check my accuracy and/or see how my views have evolved. (I currently have almost 2 decades worth of OLO writings. At my leisure I go back and see what I thought of this or that 10 or 15 years ago).

Hassy, there is a first for everything, even for you, finally you got something right "unbiased as Paul". I admit I am as biased as ALL posters on the forum are, even you. I'm sure you have carefully considered voting Labor at the last 50 elections, before casting your vote for the LNP or some far right mob.

mhaze,

Your track record is not a good one on this
forum. But if you believe that it is - good
for you.

As for continuing to argue with you?

Not interested.

You'll find plenty of kindred spirits on this forum -
who think it's more important to slavishly congratulate
those who have the wisdom to see things their way than
to renew dignified and respectful dialogue.

Me? - Your views don't impress. And the so called
"evidence" that you continue to provide is lacking
in substance.

Therefore I'll leave you to it.
Talk to your friends.

Well hold on there Joe, I see you're got more degrees than a thermometer. Even went as far as getting your bus licence twice. Knew Mr Ed as well, and had a few dips to boot. You didn't mention the flag making, or your folks were mates of Joe Stalin, brownie points with us in those two.

The forum knuckle draggers will drum you out of the band, over edemacated me thinks!

Hi Paul,

I was asked on a number of times by your bum-buddy Misopinionated to match his Year 10 studies and his TAFE diploma in environmental sociology, whatever that might be, so I complied, out of politeness. That's my way. So then you try to sink the boot in. Okay, that's your way.

Now we know where we stand :) Now, can we get back to topic ? Some little snot screams at the world about imminent disaster unless eh gets her way - what's your take on that ? Not that it would be a surprise.

Joe

Loudmouth,

I am holding back saying what should, and others, like yourself, are saying about who I think you are describing.
Some light research uncovers the fact that this 'çhild' has acting blood in her veins, by way of her parents and grandparents.
I sat there looking at this vial arrogant, (I won't say it) and immediately reckognised that it was all an act.
Her performance was disgusting to say the least.
Her attitude and delivery, even though it was all an act, was of a rabid dog.
Over-all i felt that her act of rage and carry on at the people she was performing to was rude and unbecoming of anyone, especially a 16 year kid.
If ever there was a case for a good hiding, this was it.
Oh and after they finished with her I would continue with the parents and her handlers for being so desperate and evil as to even consider using a mentally challenged, child to bolster and promote some personal and sick agenda, for ultimately, personal and financial gain.
GW, CC movement lost a lot of ground over yet another farcical attempt at pushing a falsehood.
DISGUSTING!

Dear Loudmouth,

What did you do your BA in?

Oh, and BTW Joe, even if the OLO clowns are too contrite to accept your academic status, I am humbled by your station.
Even though I have lost your favour, for which I am actually sorry about, it never-the-less does not diminish my original and continued perception of you and your depth and breadth of knowledge.
Now we have the proof and justification as to why I recognise you as someone of note and standing, well above many on here, including myself.
Well done!

Just watching the movie 'Denial' on TV about Holocaust denialist David Irving and I automatically thought of all of the anthropogenic global warming denialists on OLO. David Irving didn't want the world to know about the Holocaust in order to hide the guilt of the Nazis from public opinion. Similarly, our team ot OLO denialists don't want the world to know about anthropogenic global warming. The question is who are they trying to protect?

Mr O,

the TRUTH!
I am beginning to lean towards the 'truth', not the 'facts', because facts don't automatically tell the truth.
Facts are merely a collection of information.
The odd thing about this information is, that like language itself, it is a question of inflections and semantics.
So it is why we have such discord with certain controversial topics, like the environment.
Even though the facts appear to show there is a problem with our environment, I for one cannot shrug off the feeling that we are not being told the truth about the environment and it's impact on us.
I understand there will always be division in many things, and so it is with this topic.
What is different with this one is that it involves science.
Now as little as I know about science, I would have thought that it was pretty clear on the method and outcome of this particular topic.
So you can imagine my surprise when I read that scientists cannot agree on the reasons, origins and the guilty parties and their individual actions affecting GW and CC.
Basically they disagree about EVERYTHING!
So who are we supposed to believe, when both parties are from the same group or field, and we are supposed to rely on, and trust, them.

We have a lot of personal attacks on creditability posted here, very little demonstration of actual science, its benefits to humanity and is it causing climate abnormalities? Has the use of heavy metals, burning carbon; how has it changed Earth climate. Take the use of chemistry, how has it affected Earth? These are the source of human development and impact on environment. Demonstrate how these have impacted Earth. Where are the real science gurus? Has man done enough to arrest its impacts to health? Talk science not attacks on personal credibility. Both science and our resourcefulness of natural resources has improved human society. Demonstrate otherwise, otherwise return to being naked hunter gatherers.

Dear ALTRAV,

From your opening remarks you were sounding like a French structuralist.

It is not true that there is widespread disagreement among the scientific community. Bazz - yes that's right, Bazz the denialist - has actually referred us to an article that states from a research survey that 99% of the scientific community is in agreement on anthropogenic global warming:

Cook, J., et al. 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature', Environmental Research Letters 8 (2), 2013.

Bazz misinterpreted the article and thought it said the opposite, that 99% were in disagreement. It's like David Irving visiting Auschwitz and meeting Holocaust survivors and then telling everybody that it never happened. All that the denialists can see are the lies; they are blind to reality.

Do you believe that all of the scientists around the world are putting their heads together to fabricate lies about what is happening? Hasbeen, individual, mhaze, Loudmouth, runner, et al, want us to believe that is the case. Sorry fellas we're all just a bit too smart to be fooled by the likes of you.

Dear Loudmouth,

I will admit to being a little relieved not to see and History qualifications within your resume. It would have been a little depressing if there were given your Rabbit Proof Fence intransigence.

It seems I did indeed misattribute the original post to Shadow Minister for which I apologise.

It was of course from Hasbeen. My only excuse was that it appeared far more erudite and fulsome than the usual fare we get from the old fella but I now realise it was pretty well all cut and paste.

It looks like Ridd has joined this motley bunch of 500 which is a pity because I thought his focus and complaints were around reef runoff. It seems he is now fully engaged with the powerful interests seeking to downplay global warming in oder to retain profits.

When you lie down with dogs...

Dear SteeleRedux,

Loudmouth is going to tell us what he did his BA in; very likely he might have done history as a qualifying component of his BA. I'm hoping he and I have done some of the same subjects so that we can have a real Q&A between us on topics outside of the Forum topics.

Misopinionated,

BA: politics, economics and geography.
BA Hons: economic geography and community development.
M. Policy in relation mainly to Indigenous policy and history.
Also studies in accounting, local government admin, primary/secondary/Ad. & Further Ed, land law and property, and general business admin.

So what on earth is environmental sociology ? It sounds like about as wanky as any postmodernist could desire.

Any chance of getting back to topic, instead of this infantile slagging and pissing contest ?

Joe

Foxy,

"Your track record is not a good one on this
forum."

That's an 'eye of the beholder' thing. But I'm pretty happy with the way things have gone here over the past year or three.

Three things pop put.

1) I was, from the outset, sure and assertive, that the whole Russia-gate thing was utter rubbish. In the face of the Trump-hating cabal here, I continually pointed out the sheer absurdity of the whole thing.

And then when Mueller started, the cabal constantly assured us that impeachment was a certainty. But I tried to get them to understand how wrong that was. One of the cabal assurd us that, since she'd in the US she had special insights and she knew Trump was gone. Others were predicting the end of Trump every other month. Poor SR saw Trump's subservience to Putin in every decision Trump made.

It was gratifying to be finally shown to be utterly correct and that those who admonished me for being too naive were utter wrong. That level of vindication is rare.

2) That same US-living member also assured us that Trump was illegitimate because the electoral college was anti-democratic. She knew because she'd lived in the US. It was fun to point out that she was utterly wrong on that point as well. She failed to own up, but I note that the I've-lived-in-the-US trope has been dropped (although I suspect it will now return).

3) to my knowledge, none of my statements of fact have ever been conclusively disproven. Contested yes, which is good, but never disproven.

mhaze,

one thing I am reminded of and amused by, is whenever the mention of the "college", in American politics is used to justify a loss. Given the opportunity, I quickly remind them that it was the same system that also put THEIR side in power in some other election, so how stupid and narrow minded can some people be?
And some wonder why I go tropo at some when they make such supercilious statements.
Ergo my not wanting people to vote, in the first place.

mhaze,

Here's a partial list o some off Trump's behavior.

His, like yours, speaks for itself.

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-complete-listing-so-far-atrocities-1-546

This stuff is all historical and a matter of record.
We all know he's just another normal healthy guy.
He has already admitted he's not perfect.
We all know he's not perfect.
Now that I have re-stated the obvious that we have all heard for the hundred and fifty-eth time, as you continually keep doing this, and it is pathetic, so;
WTF is your point?
You show your true colours and an extreme lack of courage to own up to your shortcomings and flaws, by not coming out and saying what you really mean, but hide behind this veil of innuendo's and repetitious dogma.
You say proudly, you have been on Quora for decades, and yet you have learned nothing.

It is important to watch and criticise by science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiPIvH49X-E&fbclid=IwAR0WvemAbkeUSZCQouaHBk4vLkPliTwQrlaE4XXijcMfNExMo0cs7pHA72M

Misopinionated,

Hello ? Are you still there, or have you retired to your 'ivory tower', i.e. a tin shed out the back of your TAFE college ?

To get BTT: are kids aware that the temperature doesn't just go up by one or two degrees a century, but actually goes up by TEN to FIFTEEN degrees, or even more, every day ?! EVERY DAY !

Question: would they notice if it went up by, say, eleven to sixteen degrees every day ?

And are kids aware that sea-levels go up, not by a millimetre a year but by maybe a metre or more TWICE A DAY ?! It's called tides. And king tides are even worse ! Dirty big tidal surges ! Jesus, what are we going to do ? We're all doomed.

Sitting out in her super-yacht, Greta wouldn't have noticed, and therefore assumed that it wasn't happening anywhere.

And it's all the fault of old people who just don't care: they caused all the problems, of which young people are obviously blameless no matter how much energy they actually use - after all, old people invented CO2, so it's up to them to eliminate it. But they won't. Bastards ! And eliminate all that hydrogen dioxide vapour too - NOW ! Or by next Friday, otherwise we'll really put on a tanty.

And Abbott and Costello were thought to be funny ?

No, we haven't reached the foothills of Peak Stupid yet.

Joe

Joe,

Feel better now?

cont'd ...

Joe,

Greta is a very well informed young child.
But she is a child - who's passionate about
saving the planet for her generations.
You on the other hand are an adult.
Matching her anger is not a good look for you
both as an adult and a parent.

Joe,

A man of your years and experience has no need to argue with a poorly educated stripling who isn't aware that his kind of stupidity has been tried and found wanting over many generations. Getting through to his sort is like herding cats. With its union-run state schooling system, a 2017 UN study had Australia ranked at 39th out of 41 in high and middle-income countries in the quality of education. Cats are at least taught by their mothers to dig a hole before they crap and to cover it up. I don't think the qualifications this peanut is always talking about are worth the paper they are written on

Foxy, it's about time you started backing off a little.
You're beginning to wear a little thin.
Maybe you need a rest.

To move on, why have you, and for that matter, anyone else not picked up on Josephus's link?
This is pure gold, the stuff that stops liars and deceivers instantly by showing them up for what they are.
The link is about a presentation at an International Conference on CLIMATE CHANGE, where over 31,000 scientists signed a petition distancing themselves from and debunking GW CC and suggesting to the US govt that all the rhetoric so far is wrong, and is nothing like the real state of the world, either now or in the future.
Don't take my word for it, the link is just up a few entries.
I think it's about time we started thinking CONSPIRACY THEORIES!
So what is really going on then?
If this GW CC thing is all a beat-up, why?
My research has given me the answers but I am not saying for fear of spoiling it for you guys so you do some latteral thinking and research and you will figure it out for yourselves.
A hint; a group of a certain ethnicity whos eligibility to join is being one of the wealthiest people in the world.
It has names that begin with letters such as B or E or I.
Go for it.
But before you do please do have a look at Josephus's link, some will scoff, some will be surprised and some even shocked.

Dear mhaze,

You write;

“I was, from the outset, sure and assertive, that the whole Russia-gate thing was utter rubbish. In the face of the Trump-hating cabal here, I continually pointed out the sheer absurdity of the whole thing.”

If it had been utter rubbish and absurd he would have been cleared of collusion, he wasn't.

To quote Mueller himself;

““The finding indicates that the president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,”

Come on Foxy. Greta is yes a child who has not had the time to learn enough to understand anything.

She is simply regurgitating the tripe fed to her by some very nasty & manipulating people who should be charged with cruelty to dumb animals.

Dear Hasbeen,

What don't you have a good hard look at yourself.

This young lass has got you so bloody triggered you are calling her a dumb animal. Why? Why do you feel so threatened by her?

If she was any of the things you described you would have ignored her. But she has your old knees a knockin' doesn't she.

You and your ilk really are that pathetic aren't you. What a sad lot of old farts, pissing your pants over some imagined calamity, you are having to scream and yell insults at a teenager to feel you are helping warding it off.

Get a grip.

SR,

OK big mouth, you've over stepped the line again.
You charge Hasbeen for something you know absolutely nothing about.
Have you done any research on her? Don't bother answering, I know you haven't, if you had you would be sitting shtum instead of stepping into the ring with no pants on.
Now to shut you up, did you know she is mentally challenged, ie sick.
Her father and both her grandparents are actors.
I don't know what you were looking at, but the smart arse know-nothing, arrogant, rude presumptuous upstart of a little maggot that I saw, dared to sit there as if she was auditioning for a part in a movie, berating the members of the UN and the people of the world, accusing us all of something she knows nothing about and has no right to even think about, let alone give us all a spray.
If you disagree then you too are guilty of child grooming and worse.
Her parents, handlers, managers everyone behind her are guilty of child abuse.
You don't put a mentally disturbed child up as anything, she is doing what she thinks is right because everyone is telling her so.
If you cannot read her, then you've also got a problem.
Either way, if she is carrying on like she did at the UN, knowingly, then I have nothing but disdain and disgust for her.
If she truly does not know what she is doing then I shift the ill-will and direct it at all the adults coaching her.
If you had researched her you would know that if it's an act, it's a good one, and all I would give her is a nomination to the oscars.
As for her genuineness to the cause she is reported to believe in, not buying it.
If you study her closely, at her neutral moments, you can see right through her eyes with her zombie like vacant stare, a sign of some form of emotional abnormality mostly seen in psych wards.
So, if she's not a nutter, then she's a con.

SR,

as it appears everyone seems to have ignored a very important item Josephus put up, which is currently topically relevant and important, yet for some reason, has escaped everyone's attention, thought it extremely important to once more bring it to everyone's attention, because it is ground breaking and a game changer amongst many other game changers, which today are having trouble breaking through all the hoopla pushing this GW CC thing.
The link below really is worth watching so, watch it n weep!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiPIvH49X-E&fbclid=IwAR0WvemAbkeUSZCQouaHBk4vLkPliTwQrlaE4XXijcMfNExMo0cs7pHA72M

It's pathetic that all the big names of climate fraud have allowed themselves to be side lined by an autistic kid who is being manipulated by her abusive parents; parents who should be protecting her from the circus she is now embroiled in. In most circumstances, society would be calling for action to be taken against parents exploiting a child's disability in such way. What they are doing is akin to selling her off to a travelling freak show.

Well - here she is being discussed and causing
a reaction. Not bad for a young kid. And look
at the impact she's having worldwide and the
attention she's getting for her cause.

Foxy,

Yes, I hope she gets more coverage. Somebody like her needs to push the limits of absurdity on the climate bogeyman. Are we heading for doom within, say, ten years ? Armageddon ? The end of days ?

Seriously, what does worry me is that some susceptible children will get so terrified about the odd degree rise in temperature and the odd inch rise in sea-level, that they will do the unthinkable ultimate, and in great numbers. I hope nobody gets that stupid, but it's a real possibility.

Meanwhile the world gets on with living, producing, improving their life conditions, even in areas where it's already pretty hot and always has been. We've got over hysteria before and we can do it again.

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

You just said: 'Meanwhile the world gets on with living, producing, improving their life conditions, even in areas where it's already pretty hot and always has been. We've got over hysteria before and we can do it again.'

You're sounding a bit Scott Morrisonian there. Just throw in a few 'Jobs and growth, jobs and growth' and you've got him to a tee.

Dear Foxy,

I just stuck my head out the front door and saw tens of millions of Greta Thunbergs coming down the road. And they all look very angry. They definitely don't look like they are planning to vote LNP at the next election.

Dear Loudmouth,

Environmental sociology is that branch of sociology that studies the relationship between the environment and people and their social systems from a sociological perspective. It adopts an interdisciplinary approach covering the humanities and the sciences and has recourse to the major social thinkers particularly from sociology, anthropology and philosophy eg Durkheim, Marx, Bourdieu, Giddens, Foucault, just to name a few.

But this shouldn't be news to you, especially given that you have several humanities degrees in politics, economics, geography and community development. I would have thought that someone with that educational background would be familiar with all of this. Please don't embarrass yourself by asking me who Foucault is!

Misopinionated, I thankfully know foucault about Foucault.

And I didn't know Marx was an environmentalist.

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

I get it.

Poor little Greta will fizzle out very soon, forgotten by the Leftists and other creeps taking advantage of her naivety, autism and other serious problems, for their own false and rotten interests. She isn't just suffering from adolescent self-righteous anger at her elders, convinced that she is infallible; she is a very sick, confused little kid who is being used and abused by people who can only be described as scum. There can be no forgiveness for adults who put such a fragile child under stress, filling her head with horrors that there is absolutely no evidence for. Nothing that the climate creeps have predicted over the last several decades has ever occurred.

Greta Thunberg is not the only young, highly impressionable person to be terrorised by the green movement, led by the radical Left, as they try to bankrupt the hated capitalists by terrorising the young and gullible with expectations of early death and planetary demise.

This girl is just the best known of the many tragic young victims of awful parents and scare-mongering activists who have gone well beyond threatening kids with the 'bogey man' to make them easier to control.

If someone doesn't acknowledge having seen the video first submitted by Josephus and then again myself, I will be forced to re-submit it until someone acknowledges it's existence.
I fully expect those who believe in this GW, CC thing to either not comment, or comment in defiance.
Those who are not completely sold, like me, or outright rejection of this GW CC thing, probably watch it and accept it and say no more.
But until I get some comment about it one way or another, it is hovering, waiting to be printed again.
I find this video a watershed moment in this whole debacle, and it cannot/must not be swept under the carpet.
It IS relevant, it IS genuine and therefore it carries much more weight than the nay sayers will want to acknowledge.
Anyway, I can only present the facts, or in this case re-present them, thanks to Josephus and his dutiful dedication to detail and the truth.

the fact is ALTRAV that leftist have never cared about facts or reason. They know if they tell lies often enough that many start to believe because they want to believe. The warmist elite are genuinely hypocrites to the max and simply use pseudo science in their schemes to transfer wealth and power to very corrupt people at the expense of the poor. They are prepared to use child abuse to achieve their gains.

ALTRAV

I never bother with references to videos, media reports or anything else simply because they always back up what the poster who refers to them thinks. I've never known anyone to ask people to look at something that is contrary to his or her views:).

In the case of Josephus, I generally agree with his point of view on most things, so there is no point in my subjecting myself to an earbashiing on something I already know. People who don't agree are not going to look at the video either.

There's something else. There are some very sick posters on OLO (not Josephus of course) who would not be above sending people they disagree with to a site that could be harmful to their computer security. Unfortunately, trust is one of the virtues that no longer exists in a leftist society.

ttbn,

I understand.
I expect that those in opposition will always look at something knowing it is in opposition but because they are looking for flaws to pick on or debunk the submission.
Either way I would hope that something like this link will put paid to much of the GW CC agenda, especially it's cred, when you have so many experts openly dismissing the topic and in fact pleading with the govt to not only not believe it but to reject it outright.
Maybe that is why Mr T denounced CC as early as he did, apart from the fact it would compromise US businesses, and put them at a further disadvantage.

An interesting article in The Guardian tell us
that amid leadership coups, cultural offensives,
and the revolving door of energy policy acronyms,
the Australian public has remained steadfast in
its belief that more needs to be done to address
climate change.

Apparently according to surveys the majority of the
voting public in this country has not moved from
its view that meaningful action is required by the
government.

To younger voters especially, the Coalition comes
across every bit as much a fossil, as the fuel they
seek to dig up.

When voters are regularly asked whether they
believe Australia is doing enough to address climate
change - the majority (including one third of Liberal
voters) say they the country is not.

The major point being made is that the failure of this
government has been not just the toppling of its leaders.
It's the reason for the topplings - which is pointed out as
being - more than the blind pursuit of power - but power
in the name of energy.

With the added warning - that the reckoning is coming, and
it will be harsh.

Foxy,

Thankfully, China will become a developed country in the next five years, going by the criterion of average annual income of $ 12,000. Then they can start to do something about reducing their 27 % share of CO2 production compared to our 1.3 %.

Joe

Joe,

I doubt if this will impress the steadfast majority of voters
in this country if our governments don't lead the way in
meaningful action in addressing climate change.

How much others pollute compared to us - is intellectually
lazy reasoning.

Understanding the Greta hysteria....

http://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/thunberglucky-400x600.jpg

Greta admonishes adults for ruining her childhood...
http://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta-597x600.jpg

You might also read about the "Children's Crusade"... (http://historylearning.com/medieval-england/the-crusades/childrens-crusade/)

The more things change....

One day soon, when she's no longer of use to the GW carpet-baggers, she'll be cast aside with nary a thought. One day we'll read about that that mentally ill girl who was famous for 15 minutes was committed... or worse. I feel so sorry for her. A troubled soul abused by all those around her.

All this juvenile silliness about climate and other things, from children and adults who act like children, is summed up in the Introduction of Douglas Murray's book, 'The Madness Of Crowds'. Murray writes:

"We are going through a great crowd derangement. In public and in private, both online and off, people are behaving in ways that are increasingly irrational, feverish, herd-like and simply unpleasant".

'To younger voters especially, the Coalition comes
across every bit as much a fossil, as the fuel they
seek to dig up.'

says Foxy who has very much enjoyed the lifestyle given to her by fossil fuels.

More importantly, the statistics she promotes to win her point are as believable as she is.
I hate it when someone lies about anything, so expecting anyone to believe that a majority of people say this or that is a gross mis-representation of the truth/facts.
There is no way anyone can say, hand-on-heart that they canvassed enough people to make such a BS statement.
People say what sounds right to avoid conflict.
This fits perfectly into this particular situation, and has no baring on the true state of people's opinions.
Just like polls.
And to top it off, I don't take to kindly to threats Foxy!
"With the added warning-that the reckoning is coming, and it will be harsh".
Fine, right back at ya'.

Dear mhaze,

Why are you calling her 'mentally ill'? Having Asperger's is not a mental illness. Depression is a mental illness, so is psychosis. I don't see any of that on display.

SR,

Asperger's is a socially and mentally disabling condition, which in common parlance means a mental illness. She could be on the NDIS for life if she sailed here.

She says people are dying. Where ? Who ? And that entire ecosystems are being destroyed. Where ?

The problem with hyperbole - in spite of its consolations - is that you can overdo it and destroy the possibly-correct kernel of your argument.

As for wetting ourselves about it getting hotter, let's remember that maybe a third of the world's population live in the Tropics, between 23 degrees north and south of the Equator. You know, some of our favourite tourist sites, especially for Europeans, eager to get out of the bloody cold. You know, those parts of, say, Indonesia and west Africa, where you can get two or even three crops a year ?

How are the Maldives doing ? Has a single building been washed away yet ? Is it true that some islands in the Pacific are ever-so-slightly growing in area ? Is it true that more CO2 in the atmosphere (and of course there is) mean more greening of the planet ? That every degree-rise will open up millions of hectares to farming across the northern hemisphere ?

Get a grip.

Joe

Folks,

In my previous post I made it quite clear that my information
came from an article in The Guardian.

When attempting to participate in any discussion an
imperative point to remember is to always know your topic.
It gives the element of authenticity to your opinion.

Dear Steele,

It looks like you're touching a few nerves.

Love your work!

Loudmouth,

once more, the words of wisdom.
As for some arrogant little, (I refrain from using words I should use, but as a sign of respect to you I won't) so and so, she is in a quandary.
In one hand she is eager to please her parents, grand parents, handlers, managers and so many others who have been "grooming" her for this for some years.
It can be said that she is trying to please them, and she really does not understand what she is doing or going on around her.
On the other hand she is a nasty little attention seeker who is enjoying the limelight and is milking it for all it's worth.
Either way, the evidence and statement of material facts are in now, and it is a sad fact that the people behind her are all guilty of child "grooming", all to the benefit of gains for their own ends.
As you say Joe, she gave no actual reference to gauge by, just a very "childish" and of course pathetic attempt at trying to make her points by spraying abuse and virtue shaming the UN and in fact the people of the world.
As I've said before, with a father and grandparents as actors, the only thing I would waste my time on her, is to nominate her for an oscar.
Although some have said she was "overacting".
I caution people before they become too invested or emotionally drawn into this girls antics, there is a much disturbed person behind the scenes, that tell a different story to the one she is selling.
I suggest looking into her handler, the 26 year old always within arms length of this kid, as a starting point.

[Deleted for abuse and poster suspended.]

Dear Loudmouth,

What a lot of self serving bollocks.

So those who compete in the Invictus games physically ill? What about those who compete in the disabled Olympics? Physically ill too?

I get that you are fired up to tear this girl down and supportive of others with a similar agenda, but it doesn't mean you get to throw around labels with gay abandon.

And how in the hell do you think you get to dismiss the concerns of someone because they have aspergers?

Get a grip yourself.

SR,

hey, hey hold on, just a second.
Before you get to go off on one of your holier than thou rants, firstly you MUST qualify your position in all this, because unless you know something we don't, loudmouth or anyone else is allowed an opinion.
And here's a reality check for you.
If someone doesn't like someone or something, they don't have to justify it to you or anyone else.
They just don't like them!
Just like you, you don't like anyone who disagrees with you, even though you think you know it all, you don't.
Why you would invest in this brat is beyond belief, are you that gullible and naive, that you can't see through her?
Oh and BTW, those people you speak of asking Loudmouth if they are physically ill.
You moron, he did not mention physically ill, you did.
What she is, is MENTALLY ILL!
Typically try to deflect to win a point.
PATHETIC!

I suggest the UN approach jussie Smollett to be their next spokesperson to preach on gw. He would fit the bill well.

Greta's problems...

"After years of depression, eating disorders, and anxiety attacks, she finally receives a medical diagnosis: Asperger’s syndrome, high-functioning autism, and OCD. She also suffers from selective mutism—which explains why she sometimes can’t speak to anyone outside her closest family. When she wants to tell a climate researcher that she plans a school strike on behalf of the environment, she speaks through her father."

Just a taste. Look into her life without looking through the alarmist prism. What's being done to the poor kid is criminal - not in a legal sense but in a parental sense.

But while her life is like watching a train crash in slow motion, the reactions to her remains of interest. She brings nothing new to the table (well apart from the food in those pictures everyone wants to ignore) but all the we're-all-gunna-die crowd swoon and genuflect as part of the herd. I've done extensive research on Jones Town and the most fascinating part is how so many people meekly and, often, enthusiastically, drank the Kool Aid. But watching all this unfold is a window how even intelligent people can get caught up in the madness of crowds and loose all sense and reason.

Hysteria about the end of the world brought by a catastrophic man-made climate change spread by the Greta Thunbergs of this world serves to shift the public sentiment from what has worked and continues to work to wild schemes that borrow from socialism, Luddism and millennial religion.

As with Communism and Nazisim, the fascist AGW Leftists value young people in their movement.

Get them early and they are a force for the future.

Kids are impressionable and easier than adults to manipulate.

Peer pressure reinforces all the time.

Children are naive and ignorant, with no knowledge of the past.

Kids have the energy adults don't.

Kids are all too ready to kick over the traces, to rebel just for the sake of rebelling.

Collective action has the power to bring about
change. People may be just drops but together
they can become an ocean

Historically significant change is often brought about
by the organized efforts of a social movement - a
large number of people who have come together to bring
about or resist some social or cultural change.

National and international social movements that
demand action - are
a persistent feature of the Western world.
We're all familiar with anti-war movements.

The Vietnam war came to an end largely as a result of the
antiwar movement, a social movement that consisted
disproportionately of young people, including many college
students.

When the antiwar movement first challenged the war, it
received little support from politicians
or the press, and its goals seemed almost
hopeless. But the tide of public opinion
gradually began to shift.

In the 1968 presidential primaries , an antiwar candidate
backed by student volunteers did unexpectedly well and
President Johnson decided not to run for re-election.

From that point on, political debate on the war focused not
on how to stay in it, but on how to get out of it.
Through collective action, ordinary people with few resources
other than their own determination had changed a national
consensus for war to a national consensus for peace.

We should not under estimate the collective actions of
individuals. As history has shown - great things can be
achieved.

Of course, this teenage hissy fit was just a waste of time, money, emotions and resources; it might as well have never happened. I was away during it; never thought about it - for all intents and purposes it didn't happen. Millions of people, unstuck from the media, would have had the same experience.

Nothing will come of it. The naive expectations of young naifs and misfits will never be satisfied by politicians who have to answer to voters, not voteless kids who will just have to wait their turn, and who will hopefully get a bit of gumption before they take over for their own sakes.

It's a bit like ignoring the ABC: if you don't watch or hear their BS, things will be the same. Your life will not change, nor will the world - certainly not because of the ravings of ignoramuses and activists who the politicians, for all their other faults, ignore in favour of the 'quiet majority'. People who live their little lives via overheated social media and scare-mongering media don't get this. The self-preservation instincts of politicians rule, not mobs and ratbags.

OR, when a few un-informed, minority have an agenda contrary to the govt of the day, there is another word for it, and it's not a good or nice word.
Minorities have always made their demands known, more often than not by just being plain bloody annoying and disturbing/distressing the greater and majority of the public, to satisfy their own mis-guided self interests.
Anti war rallies being praised might appeal to some, but what about the many who are suffering because of the govt or bad elements causing the people to suffer.
If it wasn't for military intervention, those people would be worse off.
So we know nothing about what is really going on, politically, and that's why these rallies are just annoying and merely demonstrate the fact that there are a small minority that want to take control for their own selfish end.

Minority influence has been used effectively by
movements throughout various centuries to shape
public opinion and it still continues as we know -
today.

During the 1910s the Suffragette movement challenged the
status quo to gain voting rights for women.
The Civil Rights movement in the US during
the 1950s and 1960s used minority influence
to gain support for the equal rights of citizens.
The Feminist movement achieved a great deal as did the
Gay Liberation organisations. Same Sex Marriage legislation
being passed in many countries.

We have people fighting for disability rights, the care
of the elderly, mental health issues, the right to die,
people against family violence, child abuse, sexual
abuse, men's rights, people for religious rights,
freedom of speech, and so many other issues.

If we did not have these things happening we would not
have new ideas, change or growth. And yet we do - have
done, and will continue to do.

It's sad when we see people so narrow minded as to focus so much time, energy, resources and money to these minor and pathetic, self serving causes that only benefit a small minority of the population, and add nothing to the overall well being of same population.
In comparing the vote, we find that half the people get their way and the other half don't.
This is a clear definition of discrimination.
I know it sounds bizarre, but there you have it.
As part of a minority I want things, but I can't have them because the majority say otherwise, so why is it that some minorities get what they want and the rest don't?
Because they are a pain in the arse and annoy the crap out of those in power, and along with a little incentive, blackmail and a leg up here and there, along with a lobbyist again with some financial incentive, we suddenly get these 'social" changes, with clear advantages to the minorities, at the expense and disregard of the majority.

A tolerance of criticism and of dissenting opinions
is fundamental to democracy. Governing parties must
resist the temptation to equate their own policies
with the national good, or they will tend to regard
opposition as disloyal or even treasonable - as
totalitarian regimes do.

Similarly, democracies must avoid the danger of the
"tyranny of the majority." In some cases the
democratic process may work in such a way that a small
minority - for example Sikhs in India - are rendered
permanently powerless. For groups in this position
democracy might as well not exist, and it is important
that government should recognise the grievances of
minorities that have little political clout. If the
losers in the political process do not accept
the legitimacy of the process under which they have
been lost, they may resort to more radical tactics
outside the institutional framework.

We have seen this result in world conflicts that still exist
today.

cont'd ...

Another effect of our distinctive political system
is that it encourages people to try to influence
the way individual legislators vote on specific issues.

We should mention interest groups who use a variety
of tactics to influence those in power. From donating
money to election campaigns to advertising in the
media, to pledging their members'votes to certain
candidates and even resorting to outright bribery in
certain cases.

Many large interest groups including large corporations
maintain highly paid full-time professional staffs of
lobbyists who meet regularly with legislators and
government officials to try to influence policies and
decisions.

Our political system and culture thus encourages an
informal, behind-the-scenes interaction among parties,
elected officials, and private interest groups.

An understanding of this process gives a much fuller
picture of the political order.

So same old, same old, then.
That's 5 minutes of my life I'll never get back after reading, what has many names and descriptions and none worth mentioning.
Nothing new, that required all those words to convey.
Nothing that would justify why minorities get special treatment over that of the majority.
If that is a highlight of democracy, I can see how it is a failure.
There is no justification or excuse as to why we all cannot have our cake and eat it too.
I maintain that many of the minorities, such as SSM, would have had a much bigger backing, if the majority of people also were happy with their demands and requests, but no, we have to be deprived and the queers get their way.
Now do you all get an idea of what some of the realities of life are about?
That's an old one; If I am happy, it's more likely I'm going to want others to be too.
But if I'm always upset, having to watch others get their way and me miss out, well given the opportunity, I'm going to see that they are just as unhappy and repressed as I am.

Dear mhaze,

You quote; “After years of depression, eating disorders, and anxiety attacks, she finally receives a medical diagnosis: Asperger’s syndrome, high-functioning autism, and OCD.” That was her at the age of 11 years old mate. Why are you bringing it up at all?

This was from the same article;
“I am also not questioning Greta’s role as a public speaker, nor the power of hundreds of thousands of protesting school children, nor that climate change is an existential threat to humankind. But adults have a moral obligation to remain adults in relation to children and not be carried away by emotions, icons, selfies, images of mass protests, or messianic or revolutionary dreams.”

Which is a perfectly reasonable position to put and shows a care for Gerta not found in the obscene right wing pundits.

Here is her at a recent interview conducted in her native tongue. While there is some small stiltedness, likely due to her asperger's, it flowed nicely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTxMkFrba44

I think those of us who aren't intent on tearing the lass down like yourself should applaud her efforts

Prejudice and discrimination are found in any
situation of hostility and inequality between
certain people and groups - be they racial,
ethnic, religious, et cetera.

The key feature of prejudice is that it is always
rooted in generalisations and so ignores the differences
among individuals.

Prejudiced people tend to think in terms of general
categories if only to enable them to make sense of the
world by simplifying its complexity.

These people have a psychological make-up that has a
distinctive set of traits, including conformity,
intolerance, and insecurity - typical of many prejudiced
people.

Those who have this personality pattern,
are found to be submissive to superiors
and bullying to inferiors. They tend
to have anti-intellectual and anti- scientific attitude; they
are disturbed by any ambiguity in sexual or religious matters and
they see the world in very rigid and stereotypical terms.

This type of personality sociologists have claimed is
primarily a product of a family environment in which the
parents were cold, aloof, disciplinarian, and themselves
bigoted.

It is generally accepted that some people are psychologically
more prone to prejudiced thinking than others.

Dear Steele,

Once again - well said.

OH, PE-LEASE, Foxy.

"Dear Steele, once again-well said"?
Oh you people have no shame.
What exactly did he say?
He was quoting mhaze, he didn't say anything worth even acknowledging other than giving us a link to some useless interview, and insulting mhaze for daring to quote something you don't like.
Again you two show your ineptitude and mental inadequacies to comprehend the real world and what is going on around you.
I think I might have finally understood about you two and those in sync with you.
You guys show your hand by supporting her because you can relate to her and her handicaps.
You guys are what she will be like at your ages.
Now it all makes sense.
I was wondering why some people could not see through her act.
It's because they don't want to.
Those outside your inner sanctum are blinded by subjectivity and emotion, at the site of this little con job of an actor.
Well you guys carry on telling each other how wonderful you all are, I'll stick with the truth.
BTW, if she cleans up her over-acting, the best she can hope for is a nomination at the oscars.

Speaking of scientists...

FDA: Over 6,000 Dead from Puberty Blocking Drug for Transgender Children
http://humansarefree.com/2019/09/fda-over-6000-dead-from-puberty.html

One of the traits of Marxists is that they do not stumble or self-question as anybody aiming at the truth might. Their narrative is littered with contradictions, hypocrisy and absurdities

Prejudice is an irrational, inflexible, attitude
toward an entire category of people. Therefore
anyone who is prejudiced against any one group
will tend to have a negative attitude toward
any individual in that group, in the belief that
they all share the same supposed traits. Prejudiced
people are not concerned about genuine group
characteristics they simply accept any negative
statements that feeds their existing hostility.

The Sydney Morning Herald tells us that -
two days after rallying seven million protesters
across the world by invoking the threat of climate change
Greta Thunberg was credited for motivating voters
to redraw the political landscape in Austria.

Amazing!

Foxy, rubbish.
What a load of......
That's not true and you know it.
I hate suicide bombers.
The records show they are mainly Muslims.
Do I hate Muslims?
No!
Because of their record I 'might' be wary of them.
I still carry on and interact with them.
I am friends with them.
I have hired them.
In the main, they are no different than anyone else.
So stop trying to make false accusations.
You may think that ALL Muslims are bombers but there are those that do not, so don't generalise.
The unfortunate thing I have said before is that people are justified in being 'wary' of them, but that is their right as they may feel threatened by them, and they are scared of what is a matter of record, and they have every right to be.
So you need to stop making fallacious statements in an egregious attempt to sound knowledgeable but only end up making a prejudiced statement yourself.

ALTRAV,

Try what I do: it's very relaxing and rewarding. Ignore her.

The woman is like the talking clock, which doesn't stop until you hang up. There was a story yesterday that the talking clock is to be dispensed with. You and all other posters have the power to dispense with this nutty Marxist; she will not survive without an audience. Hang up!

ttbn,

I hear you.
My position is that I cannot stand BS.
Like PC, it's a lie, and I can't just stand by while someone openly makes comments and opinions which are clearly, at the very least questionable.
I realise she is like the proverbial "sticky beak", and has to comment on everything, AND I realise this is an OPINION forum for which I am completely bemused, as there is no place in life for "opinions".
Either something is true or it's not.
That might explain why there are so many unrealistic views on OLO.
I much prefer objectivity over subjectivity, as opinions fit into the latter category.
Anyway, I can't reject the saying where if you tell a lie enough times, eventually it becomes truth.
She has issues, fair enough we all do, but to be so invested in this, and possibly other mediums/forums, she must be lacking in company and craves the interaction with others, even if it's only in the written form.
As you will note, I DON'T comment on every new posting, only the ones I can add value to.
I have to admit that OLO is, at times lacking in "meat", as far as interesting topics go.
Not my first choice of forum, luckily I am on one or two others.
Anyway I take your words on board and thank you.

SR asked, rather bafflingly, "That was her at the age of 11 years old mate. Why are you bringing it up at all?"

Because you'd asked "Why are you calling her 'mentally ill'?" after I'd commented on her mental illness.

I answered your question and now you wonder why? Try to keep up with the rest of the class. But fear not - no matter how much of a bozo you make of yourself, Foxy will be there to tell you "well done". I wrote a while back about the need among some of mutual assurance.

Note: I'm not "intent on tearing the lass down". I couldn't care less about her other than that I feel sorry for her at the way she is being used by people who supposedly love her and care about her. She's a tool that will be discarded as soon as her usefulness expires. I wonder if she'll cope with that.

She adds nothing to the issue and merely demonstrates how vacuous the alarmist side is.

Apparently, some would have us believe
that - Greta Thunberg, the 16 year-old climate
activist is mentally ill, not cheerful enough, and
is being manipulated by her parents?

Lets look at the facts:

On September 23rd Greta Thunberg, 16 year old climate
activist and contender for the Nobel Prize spoke at
the United Nations Summit where in a stinging speech she
exhorted officials to do something about climate change.

It was the kind of speech that's perhaps destined to go down
in history among other calls to action. Aside from that -
she is quite correct.

The world might not look like a scene from Mad Max where many
of us are, but that doesn't mean climate change isn't already
devastating people around the globe.

India is running out of water rapidly. People are migrating
from Guatemala because "food doesn't grow there anymore"
due to climate change. Climate change will hit the world's
poorest the hardest. Even in America - Texas is currently
experiencing its first 500-year-flood in five years. Around
the globe the insect population is dropping at record speeds.
Insects comprise the lowest level of the ecosystem.
So we won't be eating much without them.

And yet for some strange reason a young woman pointing out
these unpleasant truths and asking officials to step up and
take steps to save the planet is exceptionally triggering.

Triggering to largely older, white men, on the right.
And boy - are they flailing in their attempts to respond.

"This is child abuse. Greta Thunberg is being cruelly
manipulated by her parents. She's mentally ill."

And more.

In the meantime millions join her in protests around the
globe. Her detractors are about as effective as these
kind of detractors have always been historically - ending
up on the ash heap of history.

Foxy,

What did I say about overstating the obvious.
Your doing it again.
Firstly her "stunt" at the UN was unbecoming of anyone, and especially so from some smart arse jumped up arrogant, CHILD!
You are a despicable person for condoning such behaviour in such a forum by this, rubbish of a person.
If you could not see through her, then you as are guilty of fraud and lies as she and her lot are.
Both you and her ought to be ashamed of yourselves, her for disrespecting the UN delegation and you for condoning it and for supporting her.
Your trying to glorify this brat only exposes your inability to reason, just like her.
You have, as usual given nothing new and the allegations you have just offered to mitigate and justify this arrogant things spray and vial delivery, are as worthless as she is.
In the meantime millions of morons like you two join her around the world to do what? Eh? what? What in your little world do you think she is doing?
She like you and millions around the world are being a big pain in the arse, because all I seem to read about is someone trying to virtue shame some govt or other in to doing "SOMETHING" about GW or CC.
Now this is where you and on your followers behalf get a chance to redeem yourselves, by telling us EXACTLY what it is we should all do, RIGHT NOW!
You have no idea, like any other ignorant, petulant brat, because there is no quick fix, and anything worth considering is expensive and won't deliver the promised results, like renewables.
One day maybe, but 'right now', all I can suggest to you and your little champion is SHUT THE #@&( UP!
So because your so smart and have access to all this info, why don't you cut n paste some solutions for the world to adopt, "RIGHT NOW"!

Foxy wrote:"India is running out of water rapidly. People are migrating from Guatemala because "food doesn't grow there anymore"
due to climate change. Climate change will hit the world's
poorest the hardest...Texas is currently
experiencing its first 500-year-flood in five years [?]. Around
the globe the insect population is dropping......
So we won't be eating much without them."

None, absolutely none of that is true. Although Foxy has undoubtedly read headlines to that effect, when you research it, none, absolutely none of that is true.

But these alarmist assertions of fact are what the we're-all-gunna-die crowd have been reduced to.

And to avoid criticism for their lack of evidence, they enlist the services of a troubled teenager to shout tripe and then demand that no one question her because she's a troubled teenager.

Foxy I could walk you through the evidence that those who back Greta financially are people who have a financial interest in so-called green energy policies. But its complex and requires reading beyond the headline, so...nah.

Greta brings nothing new to the issue. She's just shouting what she's been indoctrinated into believing. She shows no new insights. She reacts the way any teenager used to getting their way does. By throwing a tantrum and demanding that everyone do as she says.

Again, I feel sorry for the kid. She's been raised to think that throwing tantrums is the way to get what you want. She is now being treated like a demi-God - a Swedish church is now saying she's been deputised by Jesus for Christ's sake (system won't let me use the more appropriate word). Her most insane assertions are treated as fact - she claims she can actually see the level of CO2 in the atmosphere, see the actual atoms - and no one is telling her to try to stay in the realms of the real world.

And one day in a year or three, it'll all be gone because her usefulness to those using her will evaporate. And given her problems, nothing good will come of that.

The naivety of teenage brats is one thing, but how about these loons?

Senior lecturer in mechanical engineering at RMIT University, Hormoz Marzbani, advised his students that they could go on the climate change rampage on public streets instead of attending lectures and still receive full marks for the day's assessment.

All the students had to do was mail selfies of themselves in the mob to him.

John Prins, professor and head of the medical school, wrote to students saying they were “encouraged to consider joining with staff” at the climate strike.

I have proven my point that a young woman pointing
out unpleasant truths and asking officials to step up
and take steps to save the planet is exceptionally triggering
to older white men on the right. And once again - boy -
are they flailing in their attempts to respond.

"Not true!, All lies!, No influence!" And so it goes.

Sound familiar?

You betcha.

In the meantime Greta Thunberg has influenced the political
landscape in Austria, Germany, and Europe - and we'll see
as time goes by - where else.

Well done.

Austria, Germany, and Europe
FGoxy,
I'd say the iphone armed invaders from the Middle east had a lot more success in changing the political landscape there. How do you think young Greta would fare strutting her hype among a mob of religious fanatics? Do you think they'd take notice of this little brainwashed infidel ?
After all, their doctrine doesn't even mention the environment.

Dear Individual,

I think that countries like Indonesia, Pakistan,
Nigeria, Bangladash, India, whose populations have
increased greatly from 2000 - to 2019, and the
total world population is predicted at being over
9 billion and rising by 2050 - will whether they like
it or not have to do something to maintain sustainability.

That's the reality - that awaits us all.
Sooner or later we shall all have to face it.

'contender for the Nobel Prize'

Why didn't I see that coming?

Greta Thunberg doesn't mean anything to me.
She's just there to build a 'narrative', so they come along next week and say they have 'consensus'.
I see through their social engineering bs.
I won't save me from you lot though.

I didn't know our nations policy's were decided by mentally challenged kids...
Oh damn I forgot, that's what those people in parliament are.
- And some of you lot aren't far behind

Foxy wrote:"I have proven my point..."

Well that certainly would be a red-letter day on this site. But sadly Foxy the proof is more in your head than in reality.

""Not true!, All lies!, No influence!" And so it goes."

Who said that? Truly Foxy who said that? When you have to create strawman arguments its proof that you've blown it.

Answer me this Foxy. What did Greta say that you found illuminatory? What new facts did she bring? What new insights? What did she say that hasn't been said 100 times by 100 different alarmists and we're-all-gunna-die aficionados? What did she say that made you swoon? Why should we care if some kid regurgitates something that been said over and over by others. Is it just that she said it in a stern voice? Perhaps a psychologist I read who said that her tantrum allowed adults to vent their anger vicariously while still pretending to be adults, was right.

In the end the kid's outburst adds nothing to issue except to expose the lengths to which the climate carpet-baggers are prepared to go to achieve their aims.

I see the incident as an insight into the human condition. The same impulses that led to the Children's Crusade apply today. As thinking beings we've not progressed one iota in 1000 yrs.

Oh and I still worry about the future health of the poor kid.

Dear mhaze,

No you do not worry about the future of this kid one bit. You worry about the message reaching people through her advocacy. Your and other's attacks on her are far more attacks on that message and the fact you are doing it through attempting to dismiss and deride her is pretty contemptible.

"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind". (George Orwell).

No SR. What is contemptible is grown adults making use of a deranged kid, brainwashed top hell, to try to make a scientific point that they can't make scientifically.

SR,

So that's how it works, is it? I post over and over about concerns that a troubled kid isn't built for the let down following the end of her 15 minutes of fame, and never once comment on her 'message' and you declare that indeed I don't care about her and am desperately worried about the efficacy of her 'message'.

So you just declare that you know my motives better than I, redefine those motives and then tell me how bad it is that I have these motives that I've never enunciated. Do you see how unethical that is? Nah, guess not.

Perhaps, if I was as unethical as you, I could declare that secretly you have a thing for 16 year old girls and that's why you're enthralled to saintly Greta. IF I was as unethical as you.

But since you are so taken with her message perhaps you could answer the question that I knew Foxy was never going to address..."What did Greta say that you found illuminatory? What new facts did she bring? What new insights? What did she say that hasn't been said 100 times by 100 different alarmists and we're-all-gunna-die aficionados? What did she say that made you swoon? Why should we care if some kid regurgitates something that been said over and over by others. Is it just that she said it in a stern voice? Perhaps a psychologist I read who said that her tantrum allowed adults to vent their anger vicariously while still pretending to be adults, was right."

________________________________________________________________

By the way, just to be clear, I don't really think you're into 16 year old girls.....17 year olds on the other hand....

(joking, SR, joking)

ttbn,

" If liberty means anything at all, it means the right
to tell people what they do not want to hear."

(George Orwell).

Dear Steele,

Ignore mhaze.

Here's a link that explains a great deal about Greta Thunberg:

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/26/20882958/greta-thunberg-climate-change-trum-attacks-right-wing

It's worth a read.

the warmist religion followers must be totally embarassed every time they see how the sea level dropped at Port Denison. No wonder they still buy their homes around Sydney Harbour with no intention of changing their own lifestyles. Has Zali brought her electric car yet? Thought not. She can join the Flannery virtue signalling club.

Just to counter Foxy's worthless attempt at trying to sell more of the same rubbish, I submit the following to further explain some of the disgusting lies and untruth's being pushed around, to try and keep a futile agenda alive.
As is the case, if all this rubbish, by rubbish I mean comments which are trying desperately to push a lying cause such as the stuff Foxy keeps immorally touting as truths and facts, is to be believed then we must see proof of her points.
Where-as the link below gives damning proof which clearly qualifies and identifies the fact that Foxy's words are a fiction and her sources are that of liars and mis-leaders.
But I will now step aside and let the link speak for itself.
This is just another slap in the face for Foxy and Co.

http://cecaust.com.au/media-releases/banks-push-deadly-climate-agenda

And what's good about it also is that it's not as long as some of the rubbish Foxy comes up with, which merely shows she is trying to hard to make a moot point.
And if you have to lie or exaggerate to make your point, you are immediately sidelined, which is what is happening to Foxy and Co.

A recent global survey on the thoughts and feelings
of humans concerning climate change and its effects
was recently released by YouGov, a global political
opinion and data company that has made a science of
global online surveying.

This particular study was compiled from the answers of
people in 28 countries.

The findings were that almost 90% of the world believes
that climate change is real.

Also, young people are more likely to take
climate change seriously and 42% of the world's population
is under the age of 25.

No rational person is going to deny that the planet has a
finite amount of resources or that it can tolerate only a
limited amount of pollution.

If world population continues to grow rapidly, along with
consumption, if industrialisation spreads around the world,
and if pollution and resource depletion continues at an
increasing rate - we are heading for disaster.

In our modern industrialised world, we often feel insulated
from nature and confident that our technology can give us
mastery over the natural environment. We forget all too
easily that we too are animals, ultimately as dependant on
the environment for our survival as any other species.

Once again the doyen of the Forum has spoken.
And in her usual, un-interesting, say nothing, un-informative way, we are told what we already know.
Boring facts, which under closer scrutinee, confirms that the comments and resolutions mentioned are as variable as the weather itself, and therefore cannot/must not be taken seriously.
What we have learned, no confirmed, from this last posting is that 90% of the world are gullible, stupid, naive and presumptuous, to even comment on such a question.
Who in their right mind listens to opinions to technical questions from anyone other than the experts on the questions topic?
And in this case, not even the experts agree.
No please Foxy, another one of your failed attempts at point scoring.
Until you respond to my submissions, such as the previous one with the link to real and relevant references and comments, you are just "pissing in the wind", and wasting everyones time.
As usual.

"Calm yourselves, good people ...
I am the OLO Doyen."
(apologies to Nell Gwyn).

cecaust.com.au - this link belongs to the Citizens
Electoral Council - a minor political party in
Australia affiliated with the international LaRouche
Movement which was led by American political
activist Lyndon LaRouche, convicted fraudster, and
the founder of the LaRouche Movement.

LaRouche began his career as a Trotskyist and praised
Marxism. He was a great believer in conspiracy
theories. Too ludicrous to name them all - enough
to mention his accusing the Queen of drug trafficking.

Anyway, the cec has been described as "far right"
"fascist" and "lunar right."

Giving any of their links as references on any issue -
should not be taken seriously.

Dear Foxy,

I wasn't sure where you got the website but doing a quick search led me to a poster I no longer bother reading and I thought you were of the same mind.

As to the CEC they are basically fruitloops but I still engage with some of their stuff just because it presents a different viewpoint. They are basically small enough they don't pull their punches giving to to both sides of politics.

Dear Steele,

The link was given by the poster you mention
on page 22 of this discussion. I felt
it important to give some background information on
the organisation. The whole point was to get people
to look up the organisation and make up their own
minds about its cred. Occupational habit, to give
people the necessary data and information.

However, regarding this poster - I really do try
to refrain from getting involved - for obvious
reasons.

Foxy wrote: "The findings were that almost 90% of the world believes
that climate change is real."

Well that's very true. But its only part of the story.

Surprising (grin) Foxy decided to not tell the full story because the poll had also asked about the beliefs as to the cause of the climate change. They provided a breakdown between those who thought human activity was "MAINLY" responsible, those who thought human activity was "PARTLY" responsible, those who thought the changes had NOTHING to do with human activity, and final those who thought there was no change.

Foxy provides the total of the first three, but (and I can't imagine why - /sarc) doesn't provide the breakdown.

Now I know the breakdown of the numbers, but I thought I'd let Foxy provide them in a follow-up post since it would do her the world of good to provide the unvarnished truth for a change.

But just for fun these are the Australian numbers:

5% think the climate isn't changing. So 95% think it is. That's the number Foxy wants you to focus on.

But that 95% breaks down into:
5% who think humans don't cause any of the change
43% who think humans aren't the main cause of the change.
44% who think humans are the main cause.

I don't know why Foxy wouldn't have passed on all those numbers (smile). Surely she wasn't trying to hide anything - perish the thought. Perhaps, as with most things, she read the headlines and didn't bother with the details. Details after all can be sooooo confusing.

So come on Foxy. Give us the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It'll be a nice change for you.

mhaze,

I did give the name of the survey so that people
could look it up for themselves. I only gave
a few stats - because my main point was in my last
couple of paragraphs. Which you seem to have missed.

However, I am pleased that I have inspired you to
find the survey and that you got the information
you were looking for. Glad to have helped.

You're welcome.

Foxy wrote: "The findings were that almost 90% of the world believes
that climate change is real."

Let's also put that word BELIEVE into a context.

Kids with Muslim parents believe in Islam
Kids with Christian parents believe in Christianity
Etc,

And just like them Greta Thunberg is a little muppet being lead by other muppets.

Dear AC,

I don't understand your specific kind of reasoning - but
I do admire your total commitment to it.

Climate change IS The Muppet Show...

The Muppet Show Theme (Season Five)
http://youtu.be/EJ9yAV8uQ7g

It's time to play the music
It's time to light the lights
It's time to get things started on the muppet show tonight

It's time to put on makeup
It's time to dress up right
It's time to raise the curtain on the muppet show tonight

Statler : "Why do we always come here?"
Waldorf "I guess we'll never know"
Statler: "It's like a kind of torture"
Both together: "To have to watch the show!"

Dear AC,

At least you seem to have a goal.
Unrealistic and unattainable - but its
a goal.

Hi Foxy,
I didn't see your comment, I didn't think anyone else was around.
- It's just my way of poking fun and making the point that I think it's all an over exaggerated dog and pony show.

I'm using the progressives own tactics against their own progressive ideology.
Rule 5 states "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

- Not that I needed much help to learn that one -

Dear AC,

I fully understand where you're coming from -
but be careful with your target for ridicule.
Weak people throw rocks at things that shine.

Hey Foxy,
I have some views on things that tend to often be different to others.

When I was a kid growing up;
Say I tripped up a bit for not watching where I was going;
On a bit of concrete or a step or something;
- Then I'd get laughed at and called an 'idiot';
And if I complained about it, they'd say "well watch where you're bloody going next time".
So you see, my argument in support of 'ridicule' is that it is a non-violent form of correction.
A little bit of humility isn't bad, it keeps you grounded.

"but be careful with your target for ridicule.
Weak people throw rocks at things that shine."

That's not it at all.

If Greta wants to be an activist and advocate for global changes that affect everyone's lives, then she has to face the scrutiny from the people who's lives will be affected in her actions.
Whether she's a kid or not makes no difference.

If she can't handle the heat she shouldn't be in the kitchen.
Responsible parents or teachers might have tried to dissuade her from such actions and facing such scrutiny;
Irresponsible parents or teachers would probably indoctrinate, coach and lead her with their beliefs, and encourage her to push their agendas.

None of the said parents / teachers or even Greta's decisions herself have anything to do with me, but if her actions have the potential to have a negative or detrimental impact on my life, then I have a right (a duty even) to express my opinion.
Bad things happen when good people do nothing.

I understand words can cause harm;
My intent when I ridicule is to simply make my point;
And it's usually measured if directed at an individual in how I think that person might take it.
- I want to make my point, I don't want anyone to cut their wrists or have need to seek counseling.
But sometimes I will let people dig their own holes deeper, if they keep coming back for more.

Dear AC,

While I do understand where you're coming from.
The following link should give you an understanding
of where I'm coming from:

http://www/vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/26/20882958/greta-thunberg-climate-change-trump-attacks-right-wing

cont'd ...

Dear AC,

Apologies for the typo.

Here it is again:

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/26/20882958/gret-thunberg-climate-change-trump-attacks-right-wing

Mhaze,

To go back to your survey results, that "44% who think humans are the main cause" of global warming, how many of that 44 % think that it's caused by CO2, by some other gases like hydrogen dioxide, or by particulates, or some other human-produced cause ?

Or, for the extremely naive like me, by the actual production of enormous amounts of heat in our social and economic activities ?

Sometimes I feel sorry for CO2, it gets such a bad rap.

Joe

Foxy no wonder you are so misguided if you read the sort of gutter crap in your last reference.

Yes Joe, I have always thought that fossil fuels obviously heat the planet in their burning. Electricity for example, requires a large amount of heat to produce, then is used to produce a further huge amount of heat to produce metals, plastics, hot coffee & food.

This heat is obviously very short term, being radiated into space very soon after it's production. Space does appear to have an endless capacity to absorb our heat. If it can stay at near absolute zero while absorbing the heat from countless nuclear furnaces in the stars, our puny little production is unlikely to strain it's capacity.

Obviously the urban heat island, used adroitly by the warmist brigade in their propaganda, is our fault in covering the place with heat absorbing materials. Compared to the heat supplied by that big golden thing in the spy, taking our puny efforts seriously is laughable.

Loudmouth/ Foxy,

" how many of that 44 % think that it's caused by CO2"

That wasn't asked in the survey. I suspect most think its CO2 since they wouldn't be aware there are other options. A bit like Foxy et al they just believe what they're told to believe. If next week the climate gurus decide to wage war on methane, then the loyal followers will think its methane that's the problem.

Just a bit more on the survey and Foxy's assertions:

It seems that Foxy didn't actually look at the survey but found someone who wrote about it. She lifted whole chunks from that article and presented it as her work....naughty naughty.

And the bloke she copied from got it wrong anyway. Copying from her source Foxy/source writes "almost 90% of the world believes
that climate change is real". That means that more than 10% think climate change isn't happening. But in the actually survey not one single country has more that 10% saying there is no climate change. So the "almost 90%" is actually more like 95%. Based on that, we can assume that the other figures Foxy copied were also wrong, but the survey data isn't comprehensive enough to know one way or t'other.

Foxy assumes that she introduced me to the survey but its been out for a few weeks. I was aware of it which is how I knew from the outset that Foxy's assertions were wrong.

Overall its a pretty crappy survey which is why I didn't mention it on these pages. For a start it's an online survey and therefore only surveys those with an internet connection. It therefore ignores half of China, India and Indonesia as well as others. So saying what 'the world' thinks is rather fraught.

Still it told Foxy what she wanted to hear and that's all that matters.

Dear Foxy,

Bazz has kindly referred us to this article:

Cook, J., et al. 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature', Environmental Research Letters 8 (2), 2013.

It shows that 99% of scientists are in agreement with the fact that global warming is the result of man made action. Bazz thought it said the opposite, that is why he was so eager in telling everyone about it. The sort of thing that happens when the illiterate amongst us (nudge nudge wink wink, know who I mean) start debating on matters that they are ignorant about.

I once watched a journalist try a survey in the street to see if people just signed a petition without understanding what they were agreeing too. The survey was; "Do you agree that Governments should not allow Hydrogen monoxide to enter our water ways." Over 90% of respondents agreed. The true scientists saw the fallacy. Should try this sometime, if it is to do with environment people are conned.

Josephus,

The product they wanted banned was Dihydrogen Monoxide

It has been done by quite a few people these days but I think the first to do it were Penn and Teller...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw

Hundreds of signatures. Not thinkers, just joiners. Just people anxious to be part of the 'woke' crowd. We see a lot of it in this group.

mhaze,

A few corrections:

YouGov, according to Wikipedia, is a British
international internet based research and data
analytics firm with headquarters in the
UK with operations in Europe, North America, the Middle East
and Asia-Pacific.

In other words it's a global political opinion
and data company that has made a science of global online surveying.

What I quoted from the survey was:

1) The study was compiled from answers in 28 countries.
2) The findings were that almost 90% of the world believed that
climate change is real.
3) That young people are more likely to take climate change
seriously.
4) That 42% of the world's population is under the age of 25.

I then went on to give my opinion - that no rational person
is going to deny that the planet has a finite amount of
resources or that it can tolerate only a limited amount of pollution.

I explained that if world population continues to
grow rapidly along with consumption,
if industrialisation spreads around the
world and if pollution and resource depletion continues at an
increasing rate - we are heading for disaster.

I continued that in our modern industrialised world we often
feel insulated from nature and confident that our technology
can give us mastery over the national environment. That we
forget all too easily that we too are animals dependent on the
environment for our survival as any other species.

I trust that this clarifies things for you - and you
might manage to tone it down with the personal insults.

Dear Mr Opinion,

My apologies for nor being able to respond earlier
but I had used up my posts and had to wait.

Thank You for bringing the Cook article to my attention.
I'd missed it earlier. I did manage to scan it now
briefly and I did pick up the fact that "among abstracts
expressing a position on AGW 97.1% endorsed the consensus
position that humans are causing global warming."

Also that "their analysis indicates that the number of
papers rejecting the consensus on AGW - is a vanishing
small proportion of the published research."

So Thanks for the information.
It is appreciated.

Hey Josephus,

People believe the dumbest stuff.
Here, watch people signing petitions to save the triceratops, woolly mammoths and sabre-tooth tigers...

Trump's Sons Kill a Triceratops on Hunting Safari - Liberals Believe, And They're Very Upset
http://youtu.be/Gc4Mi4ocyDw
Obama Care Supporters Petition to "Add Carcinogens" to the Water Supply
http://youtu.be/BftyB69xQC4
Liberals Want Bigfoot Added to Endangered Species List
http://youtu.be/h1rNqjXTwBw

- Not sure this helps my argument though -

Hey Foxy,
I read about 2 lines of your article...
- And got to here:
"Trump’s sneering attack came amid a torrent of often misogynist.,."
Sorry, I'm not going to give an audience to that feminazi crap...
Funny where the linked article went.

The Misogyny of Climate Deniers
http://newrepublic.com/article/154879/misogyny-climate-deniers

These people are deranged and never stop.
If all these people care so much about climate change and population growth when they're importing Muslims and Africans, then I think they should all be loaded onto a rocket and fired into the sun.

Why don't all you climate types just consider a mass-suicide to help the planet if you all care so much?
At least we could then say you put your money where you mouth is.

Tell me are we pumping less oil or building less oil pipelines, or stopping the wars fought over them? No.

The world is NOT going to end in 12 years, but the climate change agenda will ENTIRELY take whats left of our sovereignty in half of that.

Stuff climate change and stuff globalism and stuff your stupid muppet show.
If you want to be ruled by foreigners, then do the rest of us a favour and leave Australia.
I prefer to keep our soverignty, not have policies dictated by little girls barely past their first period.

AC,

Your bringing up little girl's periods?
Goodness me.

From your post it appears that you are the human
version of period cramps.

cont'd ...

AC,

And you, and the likes of you, every time you wake
up and open your mouth - you pollute the planet.

Foxy responds to me by offering a few corrections - and the makes none.

She tells me YouGov are an international survey company, which, I gather means they know all about doing good surveys in her mind. (In the same way as McDonalds, being a international food company knows all about world cuisine, I guess).

But, had Foxy read the actual survey from YouGov, she'd have seen that even they point out the limitations of this survey.

But Foxy didn't read the survey. She read someone who used the survey to make his points. Foxy then lifted paragraphs from that article and used them as her own. She also had no way of knowing if the figures in the article were right and didn't bother to check.

In fact the only testable number in the article is wrong, which should make one wary of the others.

But the article told Foxy what she wanted to hear, so, in her mind, that's all that matters. She used it as fact. But the "almost 90%" claim is false.

The survey also told me what I wanted to hear - that most people in the world don't think man is primarily responsible for GW. But I didn't think the survey was valid so I didn't use it. I wonder if Foxy is capable of understanding the difference?

As to her other points, the earth has unlimited resources and pollution in the west is in decline.

Overall what happened is that Foxy found a few dodgy numbers, used them and the exact words of others to make her point without bothering to find out if they were right, got found out and then, as usual, went into defence mode which in this case is to utterly ignore the errors in her post.

Indeed Foxy often, by implication, makes these same defences ie if you ignore all the errors then my post was absolutely correct.

Some people never give up! There was nothing left to say about this subject after a week, but the poor, pig-headed souls continue to think that they are duty-bound to convince the unconvincable. OLO is turning into an echo chamber for a handful of people with nothing better to do.

In the meantime, the hideously man-hating White Ribbon gravy train has bitten the dust. Now, that's something positive.

Dear Foxy,

No need to thank me re the Cook article. It's Bazz who deserves the thanks. He pointed it out to me because he reckoned it was proof that 99% of the scientific community are not in agreement that global warming in our era is caused by people. Talk about poor comprehension skills.

Thanks Bazz! We owe it all to you.

PS No wonder Bazz doesn't want to discuss anything with me any more. Once bitten, twice shy.

mhaze,

Could you please point out where exactly did I use "the dodgy words of others" that you keep banging on about?

And give us a link to your claims that what I quoted from the
survey is false and wrong.

cont'd ...

mhaze,

This is the link that you are trying to discredit and
from which I got the information. You're accusing it
of being "shonky" - why? Neither Forbes, nor James
Conca, nor YouGov are "shonky." The only one displaying
shonkiness here is you.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/09/17/how-does-everyone-feel-about-climate-change/#5d410e114051

Dear Foxy,

You need to keep in mind that mhaze is just an engineer.

Dear Mr Opinion,

I don't know what mhaze's profession was/is
but if he's really an engineer as you claim then all
the more reason that he should know better
than to brush aside "YouGov," as a "survey
company". When in fact YouGov is much more than that -
it's a British international internet based research
and data analytics firm with headquarters in the
UK and operations in Europe, North America, the
Middle East and the Asia - Pacific.

His attitude does not make sense - according to
his supposed qualifications - and his troll-like behavior
directed at me even less so.

If it can be copied & pasted then it must be true.

Individual,

That depends from whom and by whom - doesn't it
old chap? (smile). Otherwise - it's all
"fake news" isn't it?

Setting the record straight, copy and paste.

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPYRFIs5bpY&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3EPJnIAuY_NJ4tJfQ3PssJwrSRgvgAWNJtWA5lAuHhYQy0pdHs5zaEFz

Foxy wrote:

"Could you please point out where exactly did I use "the dodgy words of others" that you keep banging on about?"

Well despite the fact that you put in quotes I didn't say "the dodgy words of others". I said that the numbers in the article were dodgy and that you used the words of others:

1 Dodgy numbers. The claim was that "Almost 90% of the world believes climate change is real". That's plain wrong as I explained above. Given that the only number in the article we can verify is wrong, I have some doubt about the other numbers.

2. You directly copied whole sentences from the article and passed them off as your own. You wrote "A recent global survey on the thoughts and feelings of humans concerning climate change and its effects was recently released by YouGov, a global political
opinion and data company that has made a science of global online surveying." The article used the exact same word. You did similar things elsewhere in the post.

"You're accusing it
of being "shonky" - why?

Despite putting in quotes, I never said it was shonky. The survey, is limited and should be used with extreme caution, but not shonky. But the numbers used in the article don't align with the survey and are therefore questionable.

Its more than a little funny that you use quotes to suggest I said things I didn't say but forebear using them when lifting whole sentences from the article. I know you do it a lot. I just thought I'd call it out this time.

Again, there's nothing wrong with the survey but it, through its methodology, ignores half of the populations of three of the most populace nations on earth. So claiming that the world thinks this or that is just a misuse of the data.

And both the article and you, ignore the most important take from the survey ie that, of those surveyed, a plurality thinks man is not the main cause of climate change.

Dear Josephus,

Did you really post a link to that serial data torturer Heller?

How about someone credible at least. Perhaps a climate scientist of some description would be good.

Foxy wrote:"I don't know what mhaze's profession was/is
but if he's really an engineer as you claim "

I refer you to this post...

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8947#291597

where I wrote: "1) I'm not an engineer. You obviously got that from MrO. But he's a certifiable moron. He just made up the claim and then managed to forget that he'd made it up and convinced himself it was true, because (and stop me if I repeat myself) he's a certifiable moron. And anyone who blindly follows the rantings of a certifiable moron is ...well I'll let you finish that sentence."

I'd also refer you to this post...
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8954#292181

mhaze,

It appears that you want to continue arguing with me.

That does not interest me.

I shan't be reading your posts any longer or responding
to them. You've been slavishly trying to turn the pages on this
discussion with the same worn out tactics.
From my point of view - I'm now closing the book.

Foxy wrote: "It appears that you want to continue arguing with me."

But previously you asked "Could you please point out where exactly did I use "the dodgy words of others" that you keep banging on about?"

I wasn't arguing with you, I was merely answering that question.

Now, obviously that answer was devastating to your self-image and equally what it revealed was indefensible, hence your decision to end the discussion.

Wouldn't it be easier to just own up and promise to try to do better next time?
oh sorry...forgot who I was talking to.

SR,

"How about someone credible at least. Perhaps a climate scientist of some description would be good."

Why? the video was about manipulation of statistics so you'd need a statistician to debunk the claims, not a climate scientist. But I suspect you struggle to find a qualified statistician who'd disagree with Heller. When Wegman, a leading statistician, looked at the stats behind the Hockey Stick he was flabbergasted at how innumerate the climate science community was.

These childish rhyme chanters are really starting to annoy me.

"The oceans are rising, no more compromising"
https://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/climate-protesters-shut-down-cbd-streets-20191007-p52ygi.html

They're like the most annoying brainwashed 8 year old girls you could ever find.

I bet they still enjoy all the comforts that burning coal gives though.

Here's a little gallows humour:

A pilot idea:

99% of world scientists contrive an environmental
crisis - but are exposed by a plucky band of
billionaires and oil companies. (smile).

cont'd...

"Global Warming isn't real because I was cold today!
Great News - world hunger is over because I just ate."

Dear Armchair Critic,

You write "I bet they still enjoy all the comforts that burning coal gives though."

But they want those comforts to come from renewable energy. What is wrong with that old boy?

SR you're not really stupid enough to believe that the renewable energy contribution to our power supply could be ramped up from 5& to 100% in less than 50 years.

All this bull dust about 2030, or even 2050 is a con, & anyone who believes it is even possible, let alone desirable is in the words of the drink driving add, "a bloody idiot".

Dear Hasbeen,

Adam Morton, in The Guardian, tells us that -
"Clean energy set to provide 35% of Australia's
electricity within two years. The renewable boom will
end without a national policy to encourage future clean
investments, industry warns."

The Clean Energy Council Chief Executive, Kane Thornton
said, "the industry was still on track for 50% clean
energy before 2030..."

You can read the complete article at:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/31/clean-energy-set-to-provide-35-of-australias-electricity-within-two-years

Is it true that it takes one hundred tonnes of coal (more or less) to make one tonne of steel for a wind tower ? And probably something similar to make one tonne of cement as well ? I suppose someone's worked out how much CO2 that produces ?

I don't know how many tonnes of cement and steel go into one wind tower, but I'm also told that each tower needs ten metres of concrete footing to keep stable.

I wonder how much CO2 is produced in the production, and maintenance, of one wind tower, over its working life of twelve or fifteen years ?

And of course (since it's the purpose of wind towers) how much CO does it save ?

Am I allowed to ask such questions ? More to the point, will I get an answer ?

Nah.

Joe

Joe,

I've got some questions for you.

Aren't our remaining coal power stations ageing
and breaking down?

Building new coal power stations? How expensive are they?

How many years do they take to build?

Aren't they highly polluting?

Is coal really a match for clean renewable energy?

Foxy you are at it again. Quoting the Guardian is not on in polite company, it is just as bad as quoting the conversation or the ABC in general.

Yes the Clean Energy Council would say that, after all they are lobbyist for windmills & ripping off the taxpayer to build their monstrosities.

You had better hope they are wrong, because the next state to be sitting generally in a cold dark house, waiting for the power to come back on is yours. Victoria & South Oz both go dark without Queensland coal fired power & Tasmania hydro. So take your pick. We can burn coal, or dam the rivers, cause wind won't do it.

Foxy,
Do you actually know the answers to my questions, or have you ever asked them yourself ? Would you dare ?

Or do you think that the fairies come out each night and knock up wind towers, all completely free of CO2 ?

Joe

Dear Hassie,

Be careful when you follow the climate denial
Masses. Sometimes in Masses the "M" is silent.
(smile).

Joe,

Why would I answer your questions - when
you're suffering from CCDD. (climate change denial
disorder)? and my answers won't make any difference to
you. I've learned from previous experience and attempted
conversations with you - concerning our
Indigenous people. Total waste of time. Nor worth
repeating.

I'm sure one of your kindred spirits will come forward.

Dear Foxy,

I tried to warn you about mhaze. I picked for what he is: just an engineer.

Dear Mr Opinion,

I would hesitate about blaming someone's
behavior on their profession.

Dear Foxy,

I have worked with engineers all of my working life and they are all tarred with the same brush. They have an opinion of themselves that just doesn't make sense. They think they're something they're not. If I had a dollar for everytime I heard an engineer say 'We're just like doctors' I would be a very wealthy man.

Dear Mr Opinion,

I'm sure that all of us have known some lousy
doctors, lawyers, teachers, nurses, and many
other people in a variety of various professions.

Unfortunately the faults lie in the people
themselves.

Dear Foxy,

True, but it just happens to be intrinsic among engineers.

Hey SteeleRedux,
"But they want those comforts to come from renewable energy. What is wrong with that old boy?"

- Absolutely nothing, in principle -

I'd be happy for ALL our energy needs to come from the sun, wind and hydro if it were feasible.

I'm certainly not against implementing things which have a lower impact on the environment.

I support and commend all of these ideas and efforts.

But here's the catch...

'The bigger picture'.

And the bigger picture is, 'I won't support cutting my nose off to spite my face'.

I'm not going to support our nation shooting itself in the foot economically, when nations are funded by debt.

It's not like we've got all this cash stuffed under the bed we don't know what to do with.
All of these agendas on put more constraints on everyone's ability to move to better technology.

Governments:
Take this article as an example;
With the result being 'It's costing us more to achieve nothing'
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=20491

This does nothing to help us create clean energy, it just keeps us broke.

I read somewhere that money designated to the clean energy fund will be spend dealing with waste.

Think about consumers;
When you charge them more for everything under climate change agendas; cutting down coal plants, driving up the cost of everything;

Then they can't afford to buy solar panels.

Everything has a flow on effect.
I support better ideas and a move to better ways of creating energy.
But I won't shoot ourselves in the foot to do it.

This doesn't mean that I think the government is going about things the right way at the moment.
I'll happily support better policies, it's just that don't have them yet.

* "cutting down coal plants"?
It would be interesting thing to see.
Sorry about that, I meant 'shutting'.

Armchair critic,
I really wish they'd just shut down Coal-powered stations for a week every month just as a trial for when the morons get their way. Then we could see who screams the loudest for power without a care where it comes from.

Not that I care, but MrO and Foxy are still raving on about me being an engineer.

These people are just immune to facts. If they want to believe it, it becomes true.

The moronic mob was out again yesterday, blocking traffic and generally disrupting people's lives. What happened to high pressure fire hoses, tear has and the use of police dogs and horses. If the 'authorities' don't start exercising some actual authority very soon, Australia will fall into total anarchy.

The morons have vowed to keep breaking the peace and making themselves obnoxious until 'something is done' (about climate change). Nothing can be done. Get these animals off the streets.

'Conversation' Leftists are trying to equate the climate lunatics with Gandhi’s independence movement against British rule in India, the suffragette fight for the right of women to vote and the US civil rights movement.

Totally deranged!

mhaze,

Another correction for you - Foxy was not
raving on about you being an engineer -
not at all. She was defending the profession.
You need to read what people say not what
you think they say. You obviously do care
but you should get things right. The truth -
and all that.

ttbn,

The truth passes through 3 stages -
first it is ridiculed.Second it is violently
opposed. Then it is accepted as being
self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer).

Foxy,

So we're at the second stage already ?

Joe

Saw a Headline saying "What else could they (protesters) do ?"
Well, for a start they could stay out of peoples' way going to work. The could get their message across by example of not using petroleum products & fuel guzzling vehicles to go to the march.
They could turn off their air conditioners, they could turn off the refrigerators, they could could stop using their phones & computers, the list is quite long of the example they could set for other young people instead of disrupting everything !
Above all, they could go to work & find out the impact of being disrupted trying to earn a living !

Individual,

You may not be aware that everything that you suggest
is part and parcel of our modern daily technology -
- all the protestors are asking is
for all of us to minimize the excesses of major
polluters. And that is the job governments should be doing
but aren't.

If we take an example of the protestors in Hong Kong -
the Hong Kong government has made some adjustments to its
earlier policies. Proetsting does get results. As for
the protestors and earning a living?
- many are earning a living and studying
towards professions to earn a living and contribute to
society.

Foxy, you like the protesters do not have a clue what Governments are doing to manage human and Earth health. What do you identify as what needs change?

Be real; not just a Government protester. You make the change. The Government can only enforce law, like confiscate all petrol and diesel vehicles, and stop mines that give us our quality of life.

Dear Josephus,

They can invest in renewables. Where our future lies.

Remember when bought food containers had a dual purpose like those jam jars that doubled as kitchen glasses?

That's the kind of simple ingenuity I'd support.

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/piers-morgan-mocks-greta-thunberg-as-he-launches-attack-on-shameless-extinction-rebellion-hypocrites/ar-AAIsYGZ?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Angered after seeing a picture of some activists queuing for food in McDonald’s during Monday’s demonstrations, Piers said: “The hypocrisy that comes with these people. This is where they went for lunch. They went to McDonald’s. To eat mass produced beef out of cardboard boxes.”

“We all want to save the planet. We all want to do more... I’m not lying on the floor screaming, going to McDonald’s, paralysing traffic in London and behaving like a total imbecile.

“They are saying we are gas-guzzling horrible people, they are nipping to McDonald’s. Shameless hypocrites.”