Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
Recent Comments
- dm on “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- D. Boss on The Clock Is Ticking
- William on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
Of course in 30 years’ time you can always claim you meant “holcaust”, not “holocaust” 😎
that’s super cheap.
p.
Denying the historical record. Weather is no more extreme now than at many times in the past.
you are aware that you are with this doing the same as many “real” holocaust deniers, playing down what became known as the Holocaust after 1945 by comparing it with something that is not in any way in the same league. steven, you can do better than that. just imagine what you would think if somebody from “the other side of the debate” wrote this about you.
Welcome back to Planet Earth, Peter! You must’ve been away for quite some time, otherwise you’d known already that Steven, I and anybody asking any question about AGW (heck, even AGW believers like Lomborg and Pielke Jr!), we’ve already been described time and again by “the other side of the debate” as the Scum of the Planet, the People To Blow Up, the Destroyers of the World, etc etc.
Here some examples…
I am sure if you ask around Grist or TreeHugger, they’d have to debate long and hard to decide if it is better or worse to have an AGW skeptic relative than a child molester one. And the results of any poll on the topic, I wouldn’t bet which way they’d go…
hehehe. Good Thinking.
Romm is basically a reality denier. He, like many leftists, is infatuated with the theoretical world and has no interest in that which opposes his belief system, no matter how real.
hm, not possible to reply to second order replies? well, this is a reply to Maurizio.
You have to put this into the context of the mind that is expressing it.
If you are convinced that AGW needs to be tackled because if not it will lead to disastrous consequences, threatening global civilization and countless lives over the course of at least centuries, then of course an AGW denier is much worse than a Holocaust denier: the latter is only a nuisance, and may hurt some people’s feelings, the former is responsible for taking part in a campaign destroying the future of many generations. If you are yourself convinced that AGW is rubbish, you will of course not follow that line of thinking. I have talked a lot with so-called climate “skeptics” for about a year, trying to overturn my prejudices of them, and am pretty sure that most if not all are honest persons that really believe in what they are saying. The same goes for people convinced that the current state of the science is to be trusted. We should try to keep that in mind, and thus refrain from childish games like labeling people Holocaust deniers because one word was used in a different context in 1911.
p.
Thank you Peter but – is there any other possible (civilized) reply to people that consider climate skeptics “much worse than a Holocaust denier“? Apart from subtle irony and outright mockery.
Thank you Peter but – is there any other possible (civilized) reply to people that consider climate skeptics “much worse than a Holocaust denier“? Apart from subtle irony and outright mockery. Especially considering that the definition of “climate skeptic” includes 99.9999% of humanity.
i think you need to check your numbers, and if done so, source them.
Lol, Peter, climate alarmism is uniquely a concern of first world nations. I don’t know about the 99.9999% number, but the alarmism is but a small, vocal minority even in the first world nations. It can even be broke down further to mostly English speaking nations. There are some few notable exceptions, but the gist of Maurizio’s percentage is spot on.
We can list the nations worried about this fictional difficulty on our hands. China doesn’t care. Japan has even rejected the notion. Russia? Nope. India has rejected Pachy. Is there any Muslim nation concerned about CC? What of our friends in Africa? Nope…… even eastern Europe? Sure, I can see Czechs just wrought with concern. lol,
No, if the U.S., G.B, Canada, and Australia didn’t have such a vocal minority it wouldn’t have hardly been mentioned. Through Germany into the mix, and no one would have ever heard of this mess. The rest of the world still doesn’t care, but there it is. A minority of 500,000,000 people. The world’s pop. is about 7 billion…..So, if every man, woman and child in these listed countries were an alarmist, World skepticism would be at about 93% …. 90% given the very small minority of alarmists from other nations. But, if each listed nation was equally divided, then skepticism would be about 97%. But, as Australia has shown, it turns out, most people are politely tolerant of alarmists until they go after their wallets. So, we can see that skepticism is probably more than 97% worldwide. So, Maurizio wasn’t far off.
The whole point i was making was that for anyone who is convinced we need to tackle the AGW problem (because it exists), climate “skeptics” ARE much worse, because they harm real people in the future. you may disagree with the conviction about AGW, but you should realize that within the mind frame it is a valid assessment of the situation. the same, if AGW were a hoax, you would be right in claiming that the greenies are about to ruin our future with expensive and senseless investments (well, one could argue about that, as some say switching to renewable energy etc. would be a boon even without AGW).
p.
Peter, while fiscal ruin is a very real concern regarding the CAGW hypothesis, it isn’t fiscal ruin in and of itself that many consider the problem. It is the effects of fiscal ruin that bothers most of us. And, it is occurring today.
Peter, the number one cause of death throughout the world is poverty. Poverty causes a host of difficulties from societal disruption to rampant disease epidemics. Revolutions, murder, robbery, riots, dysentery, starvation….. I could go on forever! You name it, the finger prints of poverty is all over it. It is by the grace of God, that most of us were born to a wealthy nation. Many are not. Care to venture what the difference is that makes some nations wealthy and others not? Our access to simple things such as energy and fuel!
These are the things that make first world nations a first world nation. We have fuel for our goods transport, our commute to work, and our ability to gather our food. With fuel for our automobiles, we aren’t confined to homes near a market, we can live closer to the place where we work, and we can work several miles away from our homes! Our lives are immensely better than if our access to fuel were limited or our ability to buy it was limited. And, what of the other part? The energy? Electricity is most fundamental in first world nations. Its fairly cheap, (but it isn’t staying that way, thanks to the alarmists) it is reliable, and readily available in any place where businesses exist or most people live. It keeps us warm when its cold, (although fuels such as nat gas are better at it) and keeps us cool when its hot. It allows us to store food so a daily commute to the market isn’t a constant concern. It runs the computers that we’re all on, it provides us light! Our hours of leisure and productivity are significantly lengthened by this cheap, reliable, and available energy. We learn, experience, and achieve great things with this cheap, reliable, and readily available energy!
All proposed solutions to this imaginary problem consist of throttling, in one manner or another both our fuel and energy use. The very things that made us a first world nation, people would have us abandon. They wish to increase the price on such. They wish us not to utilize the very things which make us successful!
But, much worse than that, they seek to deny other people of the same possibilities and opportunities! They have sentenced them to lives in perpetual poverty! By the policies and rules governing various types of aid to other nations, this thought has already begun to be implemented. Progress has already been thwarted in many nations. This isn’t some abstract thought about some imaginary boogy-man that will come get us all if we don’t pay proper homage to the climate god’s, this is occurring and it is occurring now. We’ve managed to even exacerbate the problem by throwing our food down our fuel tanks in search of a lower CO2 emitting fuel.
Peter, each and every CAGW advocate is indeed a holocaust denier, they are denying the holocaust they are causing today, and the holocaust they are attempting to cause us tomorrow. People don’t see it because they choose not to. But, many of us see it, and we’re disgusted and outraged.
Fortunately, the nature of man is to overcome obstacles. And posterity will note that the CAGW advocacy was simply an obstacle that mankind either stepped over, went around or went through. I’d take care that it wasn’t such an obstacle that mankind felt the necessity to stamp it out.
James Sexton
Wait a moment…I am perfectly sure about the 99.999% (or was it 99.99999%?) figure. Why? Because “alarmists” claim that Lomborg and Pielke Jr are “climate skeptics”.
If THEY are, then pretty much everybody else IS. Why? Because Lomborg and Pielke Jr believe in AGW and keep saying so, yet the fact that they also keep asking the hard questions is enough for the Romms and Schneiders of the world to label them “climate skeptic”.
I suspect that when you believe the world is heading to an unprecedented catastrophe, then the subtleties of logical thinking might get easily lost to you. As I mentioned some months ago, it’s what happened to the GIA in Algeria:
Every believer is the only true believer. Have faith, brother, and you too can be saved from 6°C(±6.44) of warming to-day!
True, when looked at that way, it has to be 99.9999% ! Sorry, I low-balled it. 🙂