The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

FYI - Climategate - How Attitudes Have Changed in the Ten Years Since Options
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 12:19:33 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
When emails of scientists of several years worth of information re climate change were hacked and cherry picked out of context to make people think the scientists had been underhanded when it was not true, it affected the Copenhagen Climate Change Convention and the attitudes of many people. However, people's views have changed and now the anti-mitigation movement is attacking the young in their climate change movement as they demand actions be taken to protect their futures. And it is perfectly reasonable that the young do it. We old people will not be around to have it affect us as greatly as it will them.

People can now see that yes climate change is happening, and yes, the scientists are correct that there are no natural factors that can account for the rapid changes.

The accusations against the scientists were proven to be false, to this day the hacker has not been caught, but unfortunately some people still use these incorrect arguments for political purposes. "Various internet rumours have it that the hack was performed or commissioned by countries keen to avoid tight constraints on greenhouse gas emissions - or by oil companies, or bloggers with demonstrable IT expertise." BBC

But battle lines and public opinions have changed since then.

It is a ten minute video. There was one unexpected humorous comment where I laughed.


So leave the young alone and stop harassing them. It is their futures.


https://www.bbc.com/news/av/science-environment-48925015/climategate-10-years-on-what-s-changed

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 1:02:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 12,204
Neurons: 511,136
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
It is unfortunate that the battle lines in this theatre have been drawn as 'young ones' v the rest - i.e., the old ones. It should be recognised that the most precious things that the old ones of this world have are the young ones. It is not true that the olds don't care about the future. In many ways we worry more about what our children and grandchildren are inheriting than they do. The lifestyles the young ones lead, and the values they share are often irresponsible, even reckless, and it is only too frequently that the olds have to bale them out of the trouble [and not just financial trouble] they get themselves into - despite sound advice from their seniors.
So it is with a healthy degree of scepticism that older folks regard the sincerity of many of the young ones who campaign for climate change. For some - probably most - it is all a bit of fun and something to put on their C.V. if it fits their career prospects or social standing.
And many olds - including this old - are quite sure that the hacker himself [its bound to be a man as women are too caring] is a 'young one'. Someone who still owes the government his student loan which he will probably never pay off and couldn't care less who picks up the tab.

I remember, therefore I am.
FounDit
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 1:22:57 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,167
Neurons: 56,794
Hope123 wrote:
When emails of scientists of several years worth of information re climate change were hacked and cherry picked out of context to make people think the scientists had been underhanded when it was not true, it affected the Copenhagen Climate Change Convention and the attitudes of many people. Really? So a lone hacker changed the mind of people, making them believe climate change was not real? How did he/she do that? How many people had their minds changed - two, a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand? I'm kind of curious how many it takes to alter the course of this global hoax.

However, people's views have changed and now the anti-mitigation movement is attacking the young in their climate change movement as they demand actions be taken to protect their futures.
Well, whatever the number, apparently it was enough to sway the children from their fears. But then, the anti-mitigation folks couldn't stand the idea of children not being frightened and so believers saved them by again convincing them to live in fear that the planet is doomed.

Apparently, folks who don't believe in climate change have no problem with "attacking the young" with a positive idea. So what do you call it when you do convince them they are all going to die with the planet? Confidence building? But then, the only reason the young would demand action is because they were convinced of the end of the world in the first place, so believing their death is imminent is a good thing from a believer's point of view?

And it is perfectly reasonable that the young do it. We old people will not be around to have it affect us as greatly as it will them.
Well, that assumes it is true, but absolutely NONE of the predictions over the last 50 years have shown any evidence of being true, since NONE of them happened.

People can now see that yes climate change is happening, and yes, the scientists are correct that there are no natural factors that can account for the rapid changes.
No natural factors influence climate? Really? So the climate has remained steady and wonderfully pleasant for all the history of the planet until we began to use fossil fuels? Umm, have you heard of geology? Paleontology? History?

The accusations against the scientists were proven to be false, to this day the hacker has not been caught, but unfortunately some people still use these incorrect arguments for political purposes. "Various internet rumours have it that the hack was performed or commissioned by countries keen to avoid tight constraints on greenhouse gas emissions - or by oil companies, or bloggers with demonstrable IT expertise." BBC
Oh, Em, Gee! Rumors are circulating? And these rumors might be by countries or -*gasp* Oil Companies!- or bloggers who don't believe? We're all doomed!

But battle lines and public opinions have changed since then.
Er, no, not really. The same two sides remain - silly people saying silly things (we only have 12 years to live!), and logical people saying sane things (don't believe it).

It is a ten minute video. There was one unexpected humorous comment where I laughed.
Just one?

So leave the young alone and stop harassing them. It is their futures.
Right. Now that we have terrified them, it's time to step out of the way and let them run wild with the idea they are doomed. Good parenting. Why not give them guns and show them videos on suicide. After all, there is no way they can change the climate in time to avoid destruction anyway, according to believers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/science-environment-48925015/climategate-10-years-on-what-s-changed


We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 2:47:11 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
FD, If you watched the video you'd see answers to all your statements trying to refute mine with your usual untrue accusations of "the sky is falling scenarios". I have talked to some of those young people and they have been taught to think for themselves and are far more critical thinkers than we give them credit for. I see them with empathy as young humans having to grow up while trying to make sense of a completely screwed up world, and not as your attitude in the last post implies - just one more form of "idiot-climate-change-believers-who-want-to-change-the-status-quo-as-that-scares-the-heck-out-of-me."

Anyhow, there is no sense me wasting my time repeating what the video offers.

Yup, I laughed only once. It was not meant as a joke of a serious subject but I laughed where the scientist, Professor Watson, mouthed "what an a*hole" right on camera about commentator Marc Morano who was trying to destroy viewers trust in science by giving credence to hackers who took out of context and chronology a few phrases from hundreds of emails. The public should know hackers can change any email to say what they want it to say to further their agenda. Since they never caught them, it is only speculation as to whose agenda it was - but SOMEBODY had an agenda. They don't know if it was a lone hacker or not, but the global media certainly picked it up and spread it with people like Marc Morano. Perhaps you might look to see where he (and others of his ilk) gets his POV and was anxious to jump on the bandwagon till the wheels came off.

It is very telling that I see no outrage from you that hackers had tried to mislead the public, did so, and although there are no statistics, just trends, as to public opinion before or after, four years afterwards the leaders managed to move ahead with the Paris Agreement when the Copenhagen Summit at the time of Climategate achieved nothing.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 3:37:51 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Jacobus, as an ex educator, my zeal to exclaim the virtues of the young does not mean that I am saying the old are not caring and some of them wise. It is not an either/or situation. It is the climate denialists who have drawn the battle lines, not me, when they switched to attacking the young because they see they are being effective and getting attention.

But the fact that can't be changed is that the young will, barring accidents and illness, live longer than those of us with more yesterdays than tomorrows, therefore their future will be more impacted, and so deserve understanding. Empathy also as young human beings. And I often feel that we don't give the young enough credit just because they are young. Often the few who do inappropriate things are given the limelight when the silent majority go on to lead lives of value, have empathy, and do good deeds even as youngsters. I wish you didn't have such a cynical view of the young and hope it is because of the media blowing up bad sensational news and ignoring all the good that goes on in life - they always do that and not just with the young.

Just because the cause that is dear to them happens to be a political football, is no reason for people with an agenda to target them now. In fact it is outrageous that any young person is vilified and bullied for ANY reason so that some of them even commit suicide. In fact it makes me angry that they can't have their say in peace. The young are more vulnerable as they grow and form their opinions and should be protected from zealots.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 10:49:55 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
The times they are a-changing whether we like it or not. In spite of the Koch brothers and those they sponsor.


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/28/generation-greta-young-climate-activists-around-world


https://medium.com/@TracyBrighten1/climate-change-activist-greta-thunberg-spiked-by-anti-green-venom-c4a0c7eab2ec



Can't get any tie closer than this that climate denial is oil and big business interest funded. The far right American agenda is pushed in the UK by the Koch brothers who fund Spiked magazine.

Koch Bros > Oil, chemicals, timber and cattle ranching industries > Spiked magazine > editor Brendan O’Neill > verbally attacks the looks and intelligence of young Swedish teenager climate change activist Greta Thunberg. Despicable venom.

"The scale of animal agriculture, greenhouse gases, antibiotics, fertilizers and pesticides is polluting the air and oceans, killing wildlife, and damaging our health."

"O’Neill tells us that we shouldn’t listen to Greta Thunberg and that the green movement challenges our progress and freedom. We’ll be miserable if we cut down on fossil fuels, factory-farmed meat, and buying stuff we don’t need. But fossil fuel, Big Ag, Big Food and Big Pharma companies no longer give us progress without harming us. People with fingers in the product supply pies want us to keep filling our faces and our homes. They don’t care if we get sick and nature disappears as long as the dollars keep rolling in."


Unfortunately even when I use the link icon, the website where I got the quotes won't bring up the article. If interested you can cut and paste the link into your search engine.

We don't need to stop living healthy fulfilling lives, but we can all do our little bit to help in various ways. Pick up litter - or stop littering. Take your reusable grocery bag and water bottle with you. Turn off the lights, use solar power where possible, even just lights in your garden if you can't go big, support your government's efforts, stop smoking, caulk your windows, upgrade your toilets, showers and appliances if you can afford it - saves money over time - walk those two blocks to the store etc. etc.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:05:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada


Teens picking up litter.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
FounDit
Posted: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:53:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,167
Neurons: 56,794
Hope123 wrote:
FD, If you watched the video you'd see answers to all your statements trying to refute mine with your usual untrue accusations of "the sky is falling scenarios". Hey, it isn't me that is claiming the sky is falling, or rather, going to poison us all.

I have talked to some of those young people and they have been taught to think for themselves and are far more critical thinkers than we give them credit for. Well, that's good. Perhaps they won't be as gullible as some of their previous generations.
I see them with empathy as young humans having to grow up while trying to make sense of a completely screwed up world, and not as your attitude in the last post implies - just one more form of "idiot-climate-change-believers-who-want-to-change-the-status-quo-as-that-scares-the-heck-out-of-me."
And who is it that is telling them the world is so screwed up and hopeless?

Anyhow, there is no sense me wasting my time repeating what the video offers.

Yup, I laughed only once. It was not meant as a joke of a serious subject but I laughed where the scientist, Professor Watson, mouthed "what an a*hole" right on camera about commentator Marc Morano who was trying to destroy viewers trust in science by giving credence to hackers who took out of context and chronology a few phrases from hundreds of emails. The public should know hackers can change any email to say what they want it to say to further their agenda. Since they never caught them, it is only speculation as to whose agenda it was - but SOMEBODY had an agenda. They don't know if it was a lone hacker or not, but the global media certainly picked it up and spread it with people like Marc Morano. Perhaps you might look to see where he (and others of his ilk) gets his POV and was anxious to jump on the bandwagon till the wheels came off.
Naw, I don't care what he thinks. I think for myself, and after listening to this bilge for 50 years, and examining the predictions/doomsday scenarios/fear mongering/no evidence claims, I came to my own conclusions.

It is very telling that I see no outrage from you that hackers had tried to mislead the public, did so, and although there are no statistics, just trends, as to public opinion before or after, four years afterwards the leaders managed to move ahead with the Paris Agreement when the Copenhagen Summit at the time of Climategate achieved nothing.

And why should I be outraged? Did it stop the movement? NO. Did it change anything? NO. I do find it curious, however, this concern for the children and their lives. It seems the Left is always so-o-o-o concerned about the children and their future, on topics like climate change and the border, but wasn't it just last week you were telling me how concerned you were that Conservatives wanted to go back to a time when women couldn't kill their children when they wanted to?

It seems odd to have such worry over the children and at the same time demand the right to kill them whenever they choose. So which way is it? Or perhaps it's just a matter of children being valuable when it serves a political purpose but fit for killing when they are an inconvenience. The hypocrisy is amazing.


We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Lotje1000
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:58:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/3/2014
Posts: 1,014
Neurons: 554,534
Location: Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
FounDit wrote:
but wasn't it just last week you were telling me how concerned you were that Conservatives wanted to go back to a time when women couldn't kill their children when they wanted to?

It seems odd to have such worry over the children and at the same time demand the right to kill them whenever they choose.


Well done. You couldn't have more aptly demonstrated how you don't actually listen to anyone's opinion but prefer to completely twist their viewpoints.
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:36:44 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Lotje1000 wrote:
FounDit wrote:
but wasn't it just last week you were telling me how concerned you were that Conservatives wanted to go back to a time when women couldn't kill their children when they wanted to?

It seems odd to have such worry over the children and at the same time demand the right to kill them whenever they choose.


Well done. You couldn't have more aptly demonstrated how you don't actually listen to anyone's opinion but prefer to completely twist their viewpoints.


Exactly, Lotje.

Baloney from FD as usual just trying to make a point, grasping at straws, when he knows he already lost the argument. People do not kill children. People with empathy care about babies and children.and work towards helping them but a commitment to the welfare of a fetus does not take precedence over a general devotion to the well being and life of the mother.

People with empathy do not actively condone human rights violations of children dying in cages, have the death penalty, or put their personal possession of a weapon above the slaughter of many in mass shootings in the US every day.


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:39:06 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Why should you be outraged FD?


Because it was WRONG. Not because it was advantageous one way or the other or had an effect (which it did in spite of your denial) - but because it was lying, cheating, and stealing.

But since you worship a man who daily does this - and much worse - it really is no surprise that you didn't see why you should have been outraged.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:31:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Hope they can get this up and running.

https://www.sciencealert.com/new-kind-of-solar-technology-could-provide-electricity-and-clean-water-to-millions

Edited to add more good news for the world: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-house-democrats-have-made-the-most-of-their-majority/2019/07/02/0ae8eb5e-9c3b-11e9-9ed4-c9089972ad5a_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f332542be2e6

But the results are clear. When Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress, they passed tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, larded more money on the Pentagon, wasted months failing to repeal the Affordable Care Act, all while the president turned his administration into a predator’s ball.


Under Democratic control, the minimum wage would rise, prescription drug prices would fall, our elections would be cleaner, investment in schools would increase and civil rights would be strengthened. The United States would once more lead the world in addressing climate change and begin to bring the endless wars to a close. Our diversity would once more be embraced as a strength rather than mocked as a way to divide us. Six months of a Democratic majority in the House has demonstrated that these outcomes and much more could be accomplished — if voters decide to defeat those standing in the way.



"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
FounDit
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 2:42:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,167
Neurons: 56,794
Hope123 wrote:
Lotje1000 wrote:
FounDit wrote:
but wasn't it just last week you were telling me how concerned you were that Conservatives wanted to go back to a time when women couldn't kill their children when they wanted to?

It seems odd to have such worry over the children and at the same time demand the right to kill them whenever they choose.


Well done. You couldn't have more aptly demonstrated how you don't actually listen to anyone's opinion but prefer to completely twist their viewpoints.


Exactly, Lotje.

Baloney from FD as usual just trying to make a point, grasping at straws, when he knows he already lost the argument. People do not kill children. People with empathy care about babies and children.and work towards helping them but a commitment to the welfare of a fetus does not take precedence over a general devotion to the well being and life of the mother.
Ah, I see. A fetus isn't a child if you don't want it. What is it - a dog, a cow, a worm? When the Virginia Legislature gave itself a standing ovation for passing a law that permitted the killing of a full term baby, was it a baby or still a fetus? When, exactly, does a fetus warrant protection in the estimation of the political Left? Apparently, not even at birth.

People with empathy do not actively condone human rights violations of children dying in cages, have the death penalty, or put their personal possession of a weapon above the slaughter of many in mass shootings in the US every day.

Dying in cages? Well, I guess from the perspective of the Left it is better to die before, or at, birth. And we certainly don't want to punish criminals, or permit people to defend their lives, or others, with guns. That wouldn't be "empathetic".

Good grief.


We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Kampong
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:51:03 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 9/30/2017
Posts: 29
Neurons: 31,421
Location: Stavanger, Rogaland, Norway
I used to be a "climate skeptic" but have changed my mind. Mainly because of occams rule: when explaining chose the simplest model, and not the more complicated.
The climate skeptic can't explain the receding glaciers in my country, the thaw on Spitzberg, and so on.

There is a general problem with scientific proof: it should pass muster of a very rigorous matter, and - the global warming does not quite pass the muster. Proving it is after a disaster, which is a bit late.
Somebody mentioned that "That smoking nicotine causes cancer of the lungs" was not yet proven scientifically. I prefer to consider it proven - and rely on finding by the anatomist Nicolas Tulp, who in the late XVII century pointed out that the amount of tar he observed in the lung of smokers could not be healthy.

Thus: We are observing a global warming. Whether it is human pollution or natural causes is of lesser importance. We have to try to find countermeasures to climate change. One of them might be reduction in CO2 emissions - I would prefer to add Methan (CH4) emission reductions.
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 5:16:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
The size of the population does have a bearing on the sustainability of the earth and the increase in human activity that causes the earth to be polluted and warming, so I will continue with the issue raised by FD.

It is " World Population Day" where they are trying to figure out how to deal with the too large population they have now. At a time when some countries are advocating planned parenthood, and at a time when there are so many unwanted refugees, in N America there is agitation to legislate even more births. There is even at least one American company scattered around the world, including in Toronto, that makes huge profits from anti-abortion agitation and activism.

I could say that anti-choice people show an inability to balance the fundamental rights of others with their own right to religious expression.

I could mention the consequences of giving a fetus person status, thus triggering murder investigations of miscarriages, and giving the fetus "a vastly expanded set of legal rights, rights available to no other class of citizen - the right to “make free, non-consensual use of another living person’s uterus and blood supply, and cause permanent, unwanted changes to another person’s body. The woman is granted fewer rights than a corpse." Quote -Sally Rooney

And how the basis is not really sanctity of life but a desire by males and complicit females for uterus control by forced birtherism. About how in the 1980s the Chief Justice of Canada wrote : "Forcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction to carry a foetus to term unless she meets a certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations, is a profound interference with a woman's body and thus a violation of her security as a person."

I could say it is nobody's business, certainly not mine nor legislators. The decision belongs to the woman, father, and doctor.

I could also say that when women get to control the purchase of Viagra, or when legislators get to legislate forced vasectomies, or when a male doesn't use a condom or male contraceptive it is aggravated assault, that then we can talk. After all, when you come right down to it, all unwanted pregnancies would not occur without penises.

But really, the best thing I could write would be to suggest you read this short story written by a doctor in Vancouver in 2012.


https://www.torontoreviewofbooks.com/2012/10/why-i-am-an-abortion-doctor-by-dr-garson-romalis/



"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 5:21:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Kampong wrote:

Thus: We are observing a global warming. Whether it is human pollution or natural causes is of lesser importance. We have to try to find countermeasures to climate change. One of them might be reduction in CO2 emissions - I would prefer to add Methan (CH4) emission reductions.


Applause Applause Applause

Hi Kampong, welcome to the Forum.

Canada too is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world. The glaciers are receding measured in kilometres, and the permafrost is melting. It is a vicious cycle with that creating even more warming, but apparently we could counter it quite a bit by planting millions of trees to replace the deforestation humans have committed.


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Romany
Posted: Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:53:34 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 15,394
Neurons: 48,365
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Hope123
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 12:53:56 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Thanks for the link re islands around Australia, Romany. I know you lived there and would be feeling awful about what is happening now.

The water is so clear and turquoise with white sandy beaches, and it looks like paradise there - the people must be devastated they are losing it.

Since Alaska is connected to Canada and Canada is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world, it is no surprise that Alaska is in big trouble too.

Nothing but good news!


https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11072019/arctic-wildfires-alaska-climate-change-heat-wave-2019-university-funding


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Romany
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 3:02:02 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 15,394
Neurons: 48,365
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

Hope - yes, The Solomons was where one went for some R & R - even from as far away as Port Moresby. It's somewhat surreal to know that the places where we played darts and went scuba diving to bring back lunch, where my friend lost her engagement ring and the whole island went looking for it and we got stuck in a patch of sea cucumbers which tangled us up in their sticky threads...and the pikinins laughed at us as they untangled us - gone.

It's difficult to convinve the mums & dads & kids who have lost not just their homes but their homeland, that climate change is part of a plot put about by the Chinese & "the Elite". The only Chinese these people know are the ones who run the trading stores on the islands; and they wouldn't recognise an "elite" if they met one swimming in the sea where their houses used to be.
Hope123
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 3:18:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Romany,

Nobody else believes that Climate Change is a Chinese hoax either. Nobody believes anything the perpetrator of this lie says. In fact one needs to have most of his speech translated into English nowadays, as it is becoming more and more unintelligible and rambling.

I actually drooled when the video opened up and I saw the water, beaches, trees, and sky, wishing I could live there. Then reality of what the inhabitants are already facing set in. You were so lucky to have been there before the water levels rose and destroyed most of it. And they are not the only islands and lowlands facing problems already. Most would not likely think of Toronto being in that list, but the Toronto islands are fighting for survival.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Romany
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 3:47:48 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 15,394
Neurons: 48,365
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Hope -

Yes, that's what "the beach" has always looked like for me. And also - I never took it for granted. I vividly remember a day when I was 26 and floating in that same pellucid water. I looked down and saw my brown body in it's orange bikini, the vivid green algae on a nearby rock and banana trees; the loves of my life - my dog and my man - black against the soft, white sand, and the scent of jungle (it has a particular smell y'know)...and it suddenly hit me that there were millions of people all over the world who could only visit such places through their tv sets, while for us it was a normal Saturday arvo! I swore never to forget that moment and have carried it around with me ever since.

Within a year I'd left PNG and, though I did go travelling around the South Pacific for the next year, I never went back to the place I'd lived in since I was 14. I'd kinda figured on that - but it never struck me for a single moment that, if I did decide to return, there'd be nothing familiar to return to; there would be so much actually missing by now that would only live on in people's memories!

I'm so grateful for that second of blinding clarity long ago.
FounDit
Posted: Friday, July 12, 2019 4:31:18 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 11,167
Neurons: 56,794
Wow. Really got you all fired up now, huh?...Dancing

Hope123 wrote:


Baloney from FD as usual just trying to make a point, grasping at straws, when he knows he already lost the argument.


What argument — that humans cannot control the climate, or change it? That human-caused climate change is a hoax? There is ample evidence of that. We can’t do anything to change the climate anywhere on the Earth. Show us the direct, undisputed evidence that we can. You can’t, because there is none. There is a hurricane about to hit the Gulf Coast and there isn't a damn thing anyone can do, or could have done, to stop it. Not now, not over the last 50 years, not ever. And our use of fossil fuels made no difference whatsoever.

Added to that is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff just admiting that her Climate Change Green New Deal was never about Climate Change, it was about taking complete control of the economy. The goal has always been about power and control over people.

Quote:
“Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti admitted recently that the true motivation behind introducing the Green New Deal is to overhaul the “entire economy.”

Chakrabarti said that addressing climate change was not Ocasio-Cortez’s top priority in proposing the Green New Deal during a meeting with Washington governor Jay Inslee.

“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” Chakrabarti said to Inslee’s climate director, Sam Ricketts, according to a Washington Post reporter who attended the meeting for a profile published Wednesday (July 10, 2019).

“Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” he added.


Or was the argument I supposedly lost the one about the hypocrisy of the Left decrying the treatment of children at the border, while at the same time demanding the right to kill unwanted children? I didn’t lose that argument either because it's still true.

Now, as I’ve said before, I can understand abortion for rape, or incest. I wouldn’t want to force any woman to have a child under those circumstances if she didn’t want to. I can also understand aborting a baby when it doesn’t develop properly, or threatens the well-being/health of the mother. I lost a grandchild to exactly those circumstances. I do, however, think it should be done within the first trimester.

But what I would like is for the Left to have the backbone to stand up with the courage of their convictions and not be two-faced about it. If abortion is demanded, and killing children is demanded as a right, and then shut up about caring about children at the border, because it isn’t believable.

But if the Left wants to be known as caring for children, then they have to shut up about demanding the right to kill them. They can’t have it both ways without being called hypocrites.

But I’m probably asking for something the Left can’t do. To paraphrase Kevin D. Williamson from an article he wrote:

“When [a person] subordinates [their] independent mind to the demands of the herd, [they cease] to perform any useful function. [They abandon] … truth-seeking for status-seeking.

And once the herd becomes frightened, it stampedes, becoming both terrifying and terrified, a directionless and hysterical moral panic on the digital hoof.

Groups do not think in any meaningful sense. People think — one at a time.”

[I would add: If they think at all when members of a panicked herd]



We should look to the past to learn from it, not destroy our future because of it — FounDit
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, July 13, 2019 12:36:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
For Freedelfians (can't remember how JJ said to spell it but... 😀):
Came across this link on Twitter yesterday and I have added the link to my "Reading List" on the iPad for future reading as it has plenty of articles for anyone interested in understanding Science, some of the research on Nature, and the welfare of the planet. From the titles I see aerosols to tornado and volcano activity to Arctic sea ice to California drought, wildfires, etc.

https://www.nature.com/npjclimatsci/articles?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=ads&utm_campaign=NPJS_2_mp_NPJs_USG_CLIMATSCI_1907_wos

"Nature is a weekly international journal publishing the finest peer-reviewed research in all fields of science and technology on the basis of its originality, importance, interdisciplinary interest, timeliness, accessibility, elegance and surprising conclusions."


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Sunday, July 14, 2019 11:47:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 12,204
Neurons: 511,136
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Hope123 wrote:
Jacobus, as an ex educator, my zeal to exclaim the virtues of the young does not mean that I am saying the old are not caring and some of them wise. It is not an either/or situation. It is the climate denialists who have drawn the battle lines, not me, when they switched to attacking the young because they see they are being effective and getting attention.

Being effective and getting attention is exactly what Mr Trump did and many would say there was a certain amount of dishonesty employed in his campaign tactics. Are we to believe that the young campaigners referred to here were all squeaky clean? I am sure they were guilty of exaggeration, bluff and barefaced lies when they thought it would be effective and they could get away with it. Yes, it would be a minority who would indulge in lying or exaggeration, but campaigns are partnerships and all partners have to share in the responsibility for what is wrong as well as for what is right. It is what is wrong that the climate denialists are exposing (quite unfairly, but fairness went out the window years ago) and not the young just because they are young and successful.

But the fact that can't be changed is that the young will, barring accidents and illness, live longer than those of us with more yesterdays than tomorrows, therefore their future will be more impacted, and so deserve understanding. Empathy also as young human beings. And I often feel that we don't give the young enough credit just because they are young. Often the few who do inappropriate things are given the limelight when the silent majority go on to lead lives of value, have empathy, and do good deeds even as youngsters. I wish you didn't have such a cynical view of the young and hope it is because of the media blowing up bad sensational news and ignoring all the good that goes on in life - they always do that and not just with the young.

I don't have a cynical view of the young, but I probably do have a cynical view of some young people. I have worked with young people for many years and am well aware of the difference between those who are well-informed, highly motivated individuals and those who are unprincipled slackers. This is down to personal experience and nothing to do with the media who are, in any case, part of the problem.

Just because the cause that is dear to them happens to be a political football, is no reason for people with an agenda to target them now. In fact it is outrageous that any young person is vilified and bullied for ANY reason so that some of them even commit suicide. In fact it makes me angry that they can't have their say in peace. The young are more vulnerable as they grow and form their opinions and should be protected from zealots.


Hope, the young do terrible things to themselves due to peer pressure and not because of the media or big business. I have known of quite a number of young people who have self-harmed or killed themselves - or just went of the rails - because of bullying by schoolmates.

I remember, therefore I am.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, July 15, 2019 11:11:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,704
Neurons: 49,892
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.