A Stunning Piece Of Warming Propaganda

I happened to look at the TV listings five minutes before it came on, and I noticed that PBS' Nova was going to be talking about solar energy. "GREAT," I thought, "I'm really gonna learn something."

And I did in the opening sentences – that global warming IS real and that it IS causing more intense storms. I later learned that CO2 is causing warming, and that warming is causing our increasingly hotter summers.

This program uses the search for alternative energy sources as a front for its propaganda message, and it's the first time I've ever seen anything like it – smooth and scary. If you didn't know better, you would think warming is real, confirmed, looming larger and larger, and that man is causing it.

Oh, and just as I was about to post, I learned that fossil fuels are running out.

It appears that with warmists, the lies never stop.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Advertisements

About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to A Stunning Piece Of Warming Propaganda

  1. John says:

    None of those statements are lies. The Earth is getting warmer. Increased energy in the system will cause stronger and more frequent storms (and droughts). Fossil fuels are running out.John

  2. Inukshuk says:

    Dear John:
    I agree with you, of course. As you mention, the Earth is getting warmer, causing stronger and more frequent storms, droughts, flooding, and wildfires. Fossil fuels are running out.
    How very angry ultra-conversative, right-wing people and media personalities get at being in the minority on the climate change issue. Mainstream science instead of being the current state of science becomes a fraud or propaganda.
    Anyone who disagrees with their minority position as climate change deniers is personally attacked as an alarmist or stupid and demanded to provide proof of their majority position. None of it is said in a civil fashion unless two ultra-conservatives are self-congratulating each other.
    Personal attacks and name-calling are not ethical means of discourse. In the latest election in Canada, voters in Ontario dismissed the attack ads of the conservative politician and elected a liberal premier, who ran ethical ads about his election platform. Attack ads say more about the ethics of the person and party who created them than the person on whom the ads are focussed.
    If you listen to the tone of speech in which climate change deniers, like Mr. West, get their message across, it speaks volumes more than the content in their blogs.
    Inukshuk
    Canada

  3. Schomer says:

    The IPCC only looked at storm data since 1970!!!!!!!!!!!! Come on people.

  4. Schomer says:

    Oh, and the IPCC said "the magnitude of anthropogenic contributions is not accessed" and "attribution is based on expert judgment rather than formal attribution studies."

  5. TedWest says:

    John,
    What I coincidence! I was just talking about you yesterday. I know you'll think I'm being facetious, but I couldn't be more delighted that you couldn't resist dropping by. Because you have some 'splainin' to do, and I won't confront you one others' blogs or even your own, because I don't want to muck it up in the way Mr. Ostrich has tried to do here.
    Now, John, you have, currently, no credibility owing to specific and erroneous points you've made here and elsewhere, so why would you think I'd accept your word on such general points as those?.And what's even more troubling is that you fancy yourself to be important enough to get away with them.
    Unless this was merely a drive-by, which is what I think it was because you already know the danger of trying to argue your feeble positions with me.
    I mean, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that the divorce rate was higher in the thirties, that Gerald Ford used commercial flights to save fuel, and now, that Malthus' issued a disclaimer. And if he did, do you think that was somehow self-enhancing for him?
    Now…
    A) You can't prove the earth is warming, and especially not that man has anything to do with it. You'd have a better chance of demonstrating that the earth has warmed, but even then, you can't prove it's unusual, since we've been warmer, much less that it will continue to escalate.
    B) The idea that warming will cause bigger storms is mere speculation and not supported by people who are far more knowledgeable than you.
    C) We were told decades ago that we'd be out of fuel by now. So what happened? OK, one can argue that we have better equipment to determine such things now – which is, ironically, the same point I make with respect to curbing any future (because there are no current) warming problems. However, since scientists and engineers keep being surprised, even expert opinion based on precision instruments can be wrong.
    Still, I'll give you some leeway – so pick any one of your three points and prove it.
    And Mr. Ostrich-i-Toronto, you might get away with that nonsense elsewhere, but do it once more here and you're gone. If you have a point to argue, you'd best get about doing it. And though you have thoroughly mischaracterized me, I have no interest in setting straight fools like you. I mean, people like John are bad enough, but at least he knows things. He just has trouble knowing which things are real and which are wishful thinking.

  6. John says:

    Now, John, you have, currently, no credibility owing to specific and erroneous points you've made here and elsewhere, so why would you think I'd accept your word on such general points as those?.And what's even more troubling is that you fancy yourself to be important enough to get away with them.

    Unless this was merely a drive-by, which is what I think it was because you already know the danger of trying to argue your feeble positions with me.

    I mean, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that the divorce rate was higher in the thirties, that Gerald Ford used commercial flights to save fuel, and now, that Malthus' issued a disclaimer. And if he did, do you think that was somehow self-enhancing for him?Apparently you have forgotten that I did prove those assertions, using the data and papers of "those smarter than you". You merely chose deny both the data and the proofs because it conflicted with your fundamental assumptions.As for dropping by – you came to my neighborhood (via the Global Warming group); I did not go seeking you out.John

  7. TedWest says:

    John, John, John, you don't think too good… or even take your own advice as it turns out.
    And until now, I might be the only one who knew that?!?
    It's bad enough that your answer was utterly and wholly non-responsive, but one would have thought that you'd be smart enough to realize that a non-response to specific points when you were trying to elevate yourself at the same time is… well… slightly incongruous. Not to mention a waste of your precious time.
    So that same one might have expected you to indulge me on at least one point so as to conclusively demonstrate not only that you had made it previously, but to clearly demonstrate once and for all that your feeling of superiority isn't just a flight of fancy. I
    As it stands, a cynic (though certainly not I) might think you got nothin', and you know, this place is crawlin' with 'em..
    As to the second part, that's just silly, but it does demonstrate how illogical your thinking can be, which is to say, considerable if your former and present efforts here… and elsewhere are any indication.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s