The universe revolves around CO2, which is ultimately the cause of all phenomena, particularly bad events.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Climate Engineering
- The World’s Worst Scientists
- “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- A Real Hockey Stick
- A Real Hockey Stick
- Doubling Energy Costs
- Doubling Energy Costs
- “You Can’t Hide Your Lying Eyes”
- Australia Permanent Drought Update
- Let Them Burn Wood
- “New computer modeling”
- Climate Destroying Shrimp
- What’s At Stake?
- Too Hot To Live
- What’s At Stake?
- “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- “Climate change is a myth”
- Racist Gas
- RFK Jr. Discusses The Green New Deal And Climate
- “world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns”
- Ivy Echo Chamber
- Climate Homicide
- Much Ado About Nothing
- Homophobic Gas
- World Bank Expectations
Recent Comments
- Richard E Fritz on The World’s Worst Scientists
- Gordon Vigurs on Climate Engineering
- Ivan G Wainwright on Climate Engineering
- Russell Cook on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Bruce of Newcastle on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Conrad Ziefle on The World’s Worst Scientists
- arn on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Francis Barnett on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- arn on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Steve Cooksey on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
Good one………………
The Alarmist’s Creed:
I believe in AGW, the Mother of all apocalypse, destroyer of heaven and earth.
I believe in Al Gore, his only Movie, ‘An Inconvenient truth’, which was conceived by the Holy Alarmists, born of the fascist left, suffered under scrutiny, was panned, died, and was buried, it descended to the discount aisle. On an absurd day it rose again; it ascended into legend, it is in the DVD players of the faithful, and it will come to judge the deniers, and the evil oil companies.
I believe in the Unholy molecule, the holy IPCC Church, the communion of grantologists, the forgiveness of carbon, the resurrection of communism, and the lie everlasting.
Amen.
Excellent!
That atomic structure doesn’t exist in nature. Perhaps that is why we have the pause.
“One of these days your sense of humor . . .
Seriously, is the conflict between Catholicism and Communism just for public consumption?
Yeah, I remember standing next to Oppenheimer at Alamogordo and hearing him say, “I am become See Oh Tu, the destroyer of worlds…”
Oppenheimer failed to see that the force of destruction is the force of creation.
Standing in the ruins of Hiroshima in August 1946, P. K. Kuroda correctly realized, “the birth of the world may have been just like this.”
Birth and death are two sides of the same coin.
Hey, they or maybe you got this one wrong.
The CO2, because of its double bonding is a straight molecule.
(I am sure you know that, but maybe not everybody does)
The water molecule is angular. about as
illustrated in the caricature above.
Because the water molecule is angular, it has many more internal vibrations
Therefore it can absorb many more IR wavelengths in harmony with those vibrations
As a result, water vapor is a much greater greenhouse gas than CO2
I know the illustration was meant to portray a God like Carbon on top
‘The carbon pollution God’
The universe revolves around CO2, which is ultimately the cause of all phenomena…
CO2 is the God Particle, it is omnipotent.
CO2 is definitely one of the main Life molecules.
Together with H2O, it is the main building block of all life on Earth.
Robert Bauvals book reveals how the largest Sun Temple in the world, built according to Hermetic principles, is located at one of Christianity’s holiest sites: the Vatican
https://youtu.be/y9GHcI7AXhM
The author of this “scientific investigation,” Robert Bauval, had the final word: “You are lured into entering a quest, a system of learning and, ultimately, you will be initiated into the belief system that this pyramid represents.”
While easy to dismiss, programs propagating pseudoarchaeological speculations–the mystical powers of pyramids, ancient astronauts, Atlantis’ role in human development, etc.–air on an increasingly regular basis not only on the niche cable channels (Discovery, The Learning Channel [TLC], and The History Channel) but also occasionally on the networks (ABC, NBC, and especially Fox). “Hybrid” productions are also quite common, where good information is freely mixed with pseudoscience.
http://archive.archaeology.org/0305/abstracts/tv.html
Pseudoarchaeology — also known as alternative archaeology, fringe archaeology, fantastic archaeology, or cult archaeology — refers to interpretations of the past from outside of the archaeological science community, which reject the accepted datagathering and analytical methods of the discipline. These pseudoscientific interpretations involve the use of artifacts, sites or materials to construct scientifically insubstantial theories to supplement the pseudoarchaeologists’ claims. Methods include exaggeration of evidence, dramatic or romanticized conclusions, and fabrication of evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoarchaeology
Pseudoarchaeology are those who have problems with what 97 % of those in the archaeological field think is the real story of mankind.
sounds familiar
People like Immanuel Velikovsky or Robert Schoch.
https://youtu.be/OHwOvx43eFU
Strawman Robert. The 97% claim in climate science is bogus, whereas there is agreement amongst archeologists that people lie Robert Bauval do not know what they are talking about.
A new paper in Nature Climate Change asserts that 3 out of every 4 very hot days is fueled by CO2. They didn’t speculate about how many pleasantly warm days might be fueled by CO2.
Lead author Erich Fischer, a climate scientist at ETH Zurich, a Swiss university, and colleague Reto Knutti examined just the hottest of hot days, the hottest one-tenth of one percent. Using 25 different computer models, Fischer and Knutti simulated a world without human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and found those hot days happened once every three years.
http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2015/Human-caused-global-warming-is-responsible-for-3-out-of-4-super-hot-days-new-study-calculates/id-eb57f82186644726b30862ef2baf4d6e
ROTFLMAO!!!
How to Deal with a Dead Horse
-Buy a heavier whip
-Change riders
-Threaten the horse with termination
-Appoint a committee to study the horse
-Arrange to visit other sites to see how they ride dead horses
-Appoint a project team to re-animate the dead horse
-Create training to increase the rider’s load share
-Change the form to read: “This horse is not dead.”
-Hire outside contractors to ride the dead horse
-Harness several dead horses together for increased speed
-Increase funding to help the horses performance
-Do a time management study to see if lighter riders would improve productivity
-Purchase an after-market product to make dead horses run faster
-Declare that a dead horse has lower overhead and therefore performs better
-Form a quality focus group to find profitable uses for dead horses
-Rewrite the performance requirements for horses
-Hire a consulting firm to perform a strategic study of best practices in continuous improvement in utilizing dead horses
-Promote the dead horse to supervisory position
Are epicycles anything like encyclicals?
Because the Catholic Church has had such stunning success in the past when it gets involved in science …
“The relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and science is a widely debated subject. The church has been called “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history.” It has founded schools and universities and conducted medical and other scientific research over many centuries. Catholic scientists, both clergymen and religious sisters as well as lay people, have led scientific discovery in many fields. In his 1996 encyclical Fides et Ratio Pope John Paul II wrote that “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth.” Conversely, the conflict thesis, was developed in the United States in the 19th century and retains some pop-culture currency. It proposed an intrinsic intellectual conflict between the Church and science.
Even before the development of modern scientific method, Catholic theology did not insist on a literal interpretation of biblical text that might, as St Augustine wrote in the 5th century, contradict what can be established by science or reason, thus Catholicism has been able to reinterpret scripture in light of scientific discovery.
The Catholic contribution to the development of the sciences has been formidable. From ancient times, Christian emphasis on practical charity gave rise to the development of systematic nursing and hospitals and the Church remains the single greatest private provider of medical care and research facilities in the world. Following the Fall of Rome, monasteries and convents remained the last bastions of scholarship in Western Europe. During the Middle Ages, the Church founded a well integrated international network of Cathedral schools and Europe’s first universities, producing a fine array of scholars like Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon and Thomas Aquinas who helped establish scientific method. During this period, the Church was also a great patron of engineering for the construction of elaborate cathedral architecture.
Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists (many of them clergymen) have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields – including physics (Galileo), acoustics (Mersenne), mineralogy (Agricola), modern chemistry (Lavoisier), modern anatomy (Vesalius), stratigraphy (Steno), bacteriology (Kircher and Pasteur), genetics (Mendel), analytical geometry (Descartes), heliocentric cosmology (Copernicus) atomic theory (Boškovi?) and the Big Bang Theory on the origins of the universe (Lemaître). Jesuits devised modern lunar nomenclature and stellar classification and some 35 craters of the moon are named after Jesuits, among whose great scientific polymaths were Francesco Grimaldi and Giambattista Riccioli. The Jesuits also introduced Western science to India and China and translated local texts to be sent to Europe for study. Missionaries contributed significantly to the fields of anthropology, zoology and botany during Europe’s Age of Discovery. The Church’s patronage of sciences continues through elite institutions like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Vatican Observatory.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science
The Catholic Church. From Ptolemaic Geocentrism, to United Nations CO2-centrism – pushing extracurricular church dogma for centuries.
See above.
Yes. besides the Church’s longstanding promotion the 1400 year old Ptolemaic belief that the sun revolved around the earth, branding scientists as heretics who dared buck that dogma, besides not accepting Copernicus’ and Galieo’s theory of a solar system not until after Galieo the heretic’s death, and besides jumping in bed with the United Nations lately, yes, the Church has also done plenty of other things to advance science. None of which makes their present and past dogmatic insanity any less insane or less dogmatic.
See above.
You’re repeating yourself.
Apparently I need to…
The church has been called “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history.”
Wallace, William A. (1984). Prelude, Galileo and his Sources. The Heritage of the Collegio Romano in Galileo’s Science. N.J.: Princeton University Press.
You are spewing anti-Christian talking points that have little merit, or basis in fact.
“Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists (many of them clergymen) have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields – including physics (Galileo),….”
Galileo was credited posthumously.
While alive, he was branded a heretic by the Catholic Church, placed under house arrest for teaching Copernican theory, was not allowed to teach the heliocentric theory of the solar system. Pressured by the Church, Galileo denied the theory of Copernican heliocentrism, and died a public denier of his updated version Copernican theory.
I’m an equal opportunity critic of Church dogma. The Protestants ridiculed Kepler’s heliocentric theory also.
Hopefully CO2-centrism won’t last 1400 years.
We can choose to destroy what is good in this world with a few cherry picked illustrations, or we can fight real evil. The current Pope is going against the long standing tradition of the church, and we need not beat on the church for a few misguided fools.
You and I have been through this before.
If the Catholic Church hadn’t retained the ancient Greek and Roman knowledge, Copernicus, Galileo, and countless others would have started from a much lower level, making it very unlikely they would have achieved what they did. Beyond that, the Muslims conquered very large chunks of Europe. France may have been able to hold them off on their own, but Austria most assuredly would have fallen if the Church hadn’t compelled other countries to help. Would science have progressed at the same pace with Muslims in control of Europe? I would guess not.
I have plenty of problems with the Catholic Church. But give credit where it’s due.
“You are spewing anti-Christian talking points that have little merit, or basis in fact.”
Gator, simmer down. You couldn’t be any more wrong. I’m not an anti-Christian. See above
I did not say you are anti-Christian. What I did say is that you are spewing anti-Christian talikg points.
There is a difference.
Gator, I don’t do “anti-Christian talking points.” I’m a Christian. I was raised in the Church. The Church has been a large part of my life. SMH
My post was not an indictment of your wikipedia post on the scientific advancements by Church clergy. IF you thought that was what my post was in response to you, it wasn’t.
This thread is about past Church dogma during the Dark Ages, correlating it to today’s dogma. I was agreeing with Steve, and others, recognizing the Church did Copernicus and Galileo wrong. The Church was not advancing science at that time; it is not now.
If you’d like to imply CO2-phobia skeptics like Steve, me and others would be “anti-Christian” for pointing out that the Church getting on the latest CO2-centric bandwagon smells of the geo-centric Church dogma during the dark ages – which made Copernicus and Galileo heretics for having the audacity to teach that the earth revolves around the sun – you knock yourself out. You’re only showing your hair trigger. And you’re losing my respect.
I’ll repeat something I said that you overlooked above, before you said I was making “anti-Church talking points: “Yes, the Church has also done plenty…to advance science.” But the Church hasn’t always been about “scientific advancement. If you don’t like it, that’s too bad.
Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
See above.
Gator said, “We need to attack real and contemporary threats, and stop fighting amongst ourselves.”
I guess that’s why you chided me about needing to “get the language” concerning the meaning of “liberal” last week.
Gator said, “Then stick to attacking individuals, and entities that are problems, and stop spewing anti-Christian talking points. We all know about Galileo.”
Telling someone what they should to stick to is an effort to censor them and steer the conversation. Continuing with your absurd claim that I’m “spewing anti-Christian talking points” is no better than the preposterous low belt tactics of dishonest progressives and warmists; it is akin to calling skeptics “science deniers” (or, to be perfectly correct, “spewing science denier talking points”). SMH
You still don’t seem to get that I made a humorous anecdote, directly related to Steve’s thread here on that topic, about Catholic Church dogma during the Dark Ages, correlating it to the present dark ages of AGW and the Church’s present endorsement of AGW.
Gator said, “I’m sick of the senseless infighting.”
See above. Appeals to end fighting when preceded and followed by peevish insults is empty rhetoric. Bullies kick sand in others faces and then say, “but he started it.” Your behavior shows you rather enjoy starting trouble where there is none.
———————————————
Lastly, Gator, on the weekend after Gail stepped in, you posted again, and made a false claim, but in the interest of peace, I let slide. Now that you’ve decided to take off the gloves, I might as well call you on it. We both know your Libertarian qualifier was a later add-on, in a later post – after you had already made (and repeated) your categorical claim that all conservatives are statists — your “and I’ll show you a Libertarian” qualifier was a later-interjected, add-on. As pops used to say, “I got your number.”
You just don’t know when to quit.
Firstly, the last time we had a back and forth I stated from the beginning, “Show me a conservative who is not a statist, and I will show you a Libertarian”. You answered “Ron Paul”, who ran for POTUS as a Libertarian.
Last night you spewed anti-Chrictian talking points, then accused me of saying you were ant-Christian, which I did not. Trying to twist my words to win an argument is beneath you.
And just like last time, in the end it appears we agree, but you just cannot let it go. You tell me you are a Christian and someone who loves liberty, so I find it incredible that you attack both, and me.
Gator said, “We need to attack real and contemporary threats, and stop fighting amongst ourselves.”
I guess that’s why you chided me about needing to “get the language” concerning the meaning of “liberal” last week.
Yep! Because when we attack real Liberals by grouping them with Progressives, we turn them away. So yes, it is important that we get the language straight.
Telling someone what they should to stick to is an effort to censor them…
No, it is an attempt at a correction, I have no abilty to censor you. You can continue to attack the church and people who love liberty.
You still don’t seem to get that I made a humorous anecdote, directly related to Steve’s thread here on that topic, about Catholic Church dogma during the Dark Ages…
The post at the top of this thread is about the current Pope and Vatican. And this was your “joke”?
The Catholic Church. From Ptolemaic Geocentrism, to United Nations CO2-centrism – pushing extracurricular church dogma for centuries.
Posted right under a detailed explanation that the church is, “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history.” Which was in response to the same kind of “joke” that you felt compelled to repeat.
Let it go, but only if you agree that the church is “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history”, and you do indeed love liberty.
“You just don’t know when to quit.”
That’s known as projection.
“Firstly, the last time we had a back and forth I stated from the beginning, “Show me a conservative who is not a statist, and I will show you a Libertarian”.
You first made your (repeated) categorical claim that ALL conservatives are statists BEFORE you threw in your johnny-come-lately “and I will show you a Libertarian” tag in a later post.
“You answered “Ron Paul”, who ran for POTUS as a Libertarian.”
That doesn’t prove or disprove anything. He ran on the Republican ticket many times (which also doesn’t prove whether someone is a libertarian or a statist). He is a self-avowed conservative (as well as a libertarian), and that proves your categorical, repeated, claim that “all conservatives… are statists” was a categorical fallacy.
“Last night you spewed anti-Chrictian [sic] talking points, then accused me of saying you were ant-Christian, which I did not. Trying to twist my words to win an argument is beneath you.”
More projection, and you’re twisting yourself into knots with that thin, hair-splitting BS. You accused me of being anti-Christian (by “spewing anti-Christian talking points”), when all I did was make a rhetorical attaboy to Steve’s metaphor. You made a mountain out of a mole hill. “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” 😉
“And just like last time, in the end it appears we agree, but you just cannot let it go.”
Again, you project. Yes we agree on some things, but your apparent need continue correcting and ridiculing is indicative of someone who is disagreeable, and of one who cannot let things go very easily. Ironic.
“You tell me you are a Christian and someone who loves liberty, so I find it incredible that you attack both, and me.”
You’re very confused. Criticism of the Catholic Church is neither “anti-Christian”, nor is it anti-liberty. I suppose you think the way you try to bully others is an example of being “Christian” and liberty loving.
“Because when we attack real Liberals by grouping them with Progressives, we turn them away. So yes, it is important that we get the language straight.”
I have attacked neither “real Liberals” (libertarians), or proggies, who stole the name “liberal” nearly a century ago. Today, “real Liberals” refer to themselves as libertarians. Get the language. 😉 But If you wish to refer to yourself as a “real Liberal”, knock yourself out – 99% of the population will think you’re calling yourself a proggy.
Quote of me: “Telling someone what they should to stick to is an effort to censor them…”
“No, it is an attempt at a correction, I have no abilty [sic] to censor you.
You’re right – you’re powerless at censoring me. But that doesn’t mean you don’t attempt to censor others. Berating me about making “anti-Christian talking points” crossed the line and went beyond an attempt at correction into an attempt to shut down dialogue, just as “fossil fueled talking points” is a lame attempt by warmists to shut down dialogue.
“You can continue to attack the church and people who love liberty.”
More dishonest hyperbole. I haven’t attacked anyone who loves liberty. This is a thread that used simile between the Dark ages and the modern dark ages. I expressed agreement – I was critical of the church. That hardly qualifies as “anti-Christian talking points”, nor did it call for any lame “attempt at a correction” by gator the gatekeeper.
Quoting me: “You still don’t seem to get that I made a humorous anecdote, directly related to Steve’s thread here on that topic, about Catholic Church dogma during the Dark Ages…”
“The post at the top of this thread is about the current Pope and Vatican.”
Look again, gator. Steve’s post above is replete with a large, 450 year-old, full-color illustration of the Ptolemaic geocentric heavens. The metaphor was clear.
“, but only if you agree that the church is “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history”, and you do indeed love liberty.”
Your “love liberty” tag at the end is ironic, because my post was in reference to periods when liberties were being suppressed and not allowed. My post was self-explanatory and didn’t require any educational “correction” from you, or any direction to your earlier wikipedia cut-and-paste.
Let it go…”
Instead of trying to censor/instruct/educate me about what you think is “correct”, I think you could stand to follow your own advice.
Have a nice day.
What a rant! 😆
Just cannot admit you were wrong.
The Catholic Church. From Ptolemaic Geocentrism, to United Nations CO2-centrism – pushing extracurricular church dogma for centuries.
… besides the Church’s longstanding promotion the 1400 year old Ptolemaic belief that the sun revolved around the earth, branding scientists as heretics who dared buck that dogma, besides not accepting Copernicus’ and Galieo’s theory of a solar system not until after Galieo the heretic’s death, and besides jumping in bed with the United Nations lately,
While alive, he was branded a heretic by the Catholic Church, placed under house arrest for teaching Copernican theory, was not allowed to teach the heliocentric theory of the solar system. Pressured by the Church, Galileo denied the theory of Copernican heliocentrism, and died a public denier of his updated version Copernican theory.
I’m an equal opportunity critic of Church dogma. The Protestants ridiculed Kepler’s heliocentric theory also.
Church dogma during the dark ages – which made Copernicus and Galileo heretics for having the audacity to teach that the earth revolves around the sun
Wow! That’s quite a rant against Catholics and Protestants. I especially like the “1400 year old Ptolemaic belief” nonsense. Ptolemy’s theory was accepted for over a thousand years…
In 1543, the geocentric system met its first serious challenge with the publication of Copernicus’ De revolutionibus orbium coelestium…
The position of the curia evolved slowly over the centuries towards permitting the heliocentric view. In 1757, during the papacy of Benedict XIV, the Congregation of the Index withdrew the decree which prohibited all books teaching the earth’s motion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model#Geocentrism_and_rival_systems
So why the “1400 year” talking point”? Hmmmm?
Apparently it took about 200 years for the church, and others, to accept that the1400 year precedent was incorrect. How many theories can you list that were accepted for over a thousand years? And we are not talking about today, when the church recognized the thousand year standard was in question, there were no astronauts.
The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia from 1993 to 1999, Ibn Baz also promoted the geocentric view between 1966 and 1985.
And again…
The church has been called “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history.”
-Wallace, William A. (1984). Prelude, Galileo and his Sources. The Heritage of the Collegio Romano in Galileo’s Science. N.J.: Princeton University Press.
But Ted said it well…
If the Catholic Church hadn’t retained the ancient Greek and Roman knowledge, Copernicus, Galileo, and countless others would have started from a much lower level, making it very unlikely they would have achieved what they did. Beyond that, the Muslims conquered very large chunks of Europe. France may have been able to hold them off on their own, but Austria most assuredly would have fallen if the Church hadn’t compelled other countries to help. Would science have progressed at the same pace with Muslims in control of Europe? I would guess not.
I have plenty of problems with the Catholic Church. But give credit where it’s due.
Get over it already.
Disillusioned and Gator,
I think we can all agree that the Church (and Christianinty) is composed of men and men are fallible. There are going to be times that can be pointed to when the Church was in the wrong but on the whole Civilization has immensily benefited from the Church (and Christianinty)
Please note I worked in Boston at a mostly Catholic company when certain splinter groups in Boston were buying bullets for the IRA. That includes some of my co-workers. I do not consider those years a high point for the Catholic Church nor do I call the present time a high point.
Then stick to attacking individuals, and entities that are problems, and stop spewing anti-Christian talking points.
We all know about Galileo.
Sorry Gail! I am working off my iPhone and thought you were Disillusioned.
We need to attack real and contemporary threats, and stop fighting amongst ourselves.
I’m sick of the senseless infighting.
Gator, If you have individualists you are going to get infighting. It is the BORG that marches in lock-step.
Since the Catholic Church (and Christianity) is composed of men you will have high and low points. There is no way to get around that.
That said Christianity is a force on the side of good. Even my atheist husband is very pro-christianity for that reason. Heck his family is atheist but made sure all the kids went to church for moral training. Hubby even went to Wooster (Ohio) a church college.
Attacking longstanding allies is a waste of time and effort, and only aids our real enemies. United we stand is not just a slogan, it is a winning strategy. we can have our differences of opinions and beliefs without resorting to suicidal bomb throwing. The borg have intentionally spread falsehoods to divide us, and when we stupidly repeat them, we are only serving the borg.
The new Pope is at best a dope, and attacking the church and Christians as a whole will only turn away those whom we should be courting. I do not care which religion you choose, as long as you leave me be, and support me when I am fighting for our rights. I went off on a fellow Christian for attacking Atheists this past week, explaining that he was doing more harm than good, and not following the teachings of Christ. We can demonize any group we choose by repeating the cherry picked talking points of the borg, but it will ultimately only lead to our own enslavement.
One only need look to what is happening in Baltimore to see how destructive leftist talking points actually are. The people of that city cut off their own nose to spite their face when their puppet masters told them to, and they did so zealously. They are railing against the police for a few bad actors, supporting those who are actually bringing them down, and crapping all over their own homes thinking that will make things better because they bought the borg lies. That is not who we are.
I just watched a Nation of Islam leader being interviewed, and he blamed all of Baltimore’s blacks’ problems on the police. He was then asked what he thought would happen to Baltimore’s blacks if the police just went away, and it was the first time I have ever seen one of those goons left speechless.
As you pointed out Gail, the borg are moving as one. One massive army that is focused on destroying everything we hold dear. I will stand with anyone who is serious about defending individual liberties, and I will not attack them or their core beliefs, as doing so only serves the borg and undermines my own liberties. I will also not stand by idly while borg lies are spread, lies of commission or omission, by either side. It is fine to mention Galileo’s plight, as long as you also mention that the church has been possibly the greatest promoter of science in history.
Either stand together for truth and liberty, or be prepared to be shackled.
Gator,
Our biggest problem is we are fed so much propaganda it is hard to figure out what the actual facts are. The second problem is the discussions are on the net for all to see and pick apart and use as AMMO. I am thinking of WUWTs attacks on tony and Tallbloke as prime examples. I have no doubt the same type of hot discussions happen behind closed doors during the time of our Founding Fathers. Otherwise Benjamin Franklin would never have said: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” I do agree we need to heed that advice. It was the reason I was so angry with WUWT.
Speaking of the Pope and the Borg, I wonder if the Borg got to the Church? Maurice Strong started out working for YMCA international. His ranch is a religious fusion center. Also Italy has the West’s Biggest Communist Party, and we can never forget that CAGW is just a tool for instaling Communism/Fabian Socialism world wide.
Italian Journalist Antonio Socci: Ratzinger Resignation “May Not Be Valid”
Yes, Gail, men are fallible.
I noted you separated “the Church (and Christianity). You are a wise, level-headed person. I don’t consider the period now for the Catholic Church or during the dark ages, high points for the Church either. I get Steve’s dark ages geo-centrism analogy, which he has used many times. I agree with him.
The only goal of those in power is to stay in power. How is irrelevant.
The Elites goal is to stay in power but they have been refining the ‘HOW’ for centuries. As I have said before, I think the French Revolution scared the living daylights out of them. That is why they hide and use puppets like Obummer. We see the second tier. People like Soros, and the Rockefellers and such but I do not think we have the slightest idea of who the people at the very top are. The ones who attend the Bilderburg confrences are not the top dogs.
I saw “the ground cut from under him and the markets shut against him” happen to Robert Blair of Novacor. He crossed Shell Oil and BP and they took him down.
Those who corrupt the public mind are just as evil as those who steal from the public purse. Adlai E. Stevenson ( CAGW prophets are guilty of both )
…
The top dogs pulling the strings over this CC Scam:: As with Profiteering from past Wars, we needn’t look any further than the major Banks! It’s a win, win situation, being a War without an enemy… When the Banks say jump ; the President asks, “how high” ?
…
What the major Banks achieved by absorbing the small Banks with subprime dealings,,, at the expense of the general public ; is a telling point as to what they’re capable of!
Marsh,
Below is a very very long article that names names. However these are the second tier worker bees and not the top dogs in MHO.
I think the top tier are the owners of Shell Oil. See my comment HERE
The article goes on to illustrate other offenses where these top dogs are immune from the law and to name the Universities that educated the boards of directors and gives a short bio of each.
Marsh, I worked for a major bank up until 2013, and I have worked in the financial field most of my life. Banks are as a rule risk averse, and were forced into the sub prime business. Barney Frank was a major player in this, claiming that banks were racists for not going into poor neighborhoods and loaning to high risk individuals. Banks were threatened with losing licenses if they did not comply. So what did the banks do? They lobbied to find a way to make a highly risky business profitable, for awhile.
It is government intervention that is at the root of this garbage, if banks had been left to do what banks do best, this never would have happened.
Also, if banks truly ran the government, the Dodd-Frank Act would have never been passed. Dodd- Frank is the most anti-bank legislation I have ever seen, and is still crippling banks to this day with unlimited regulations being written by a committee with zero oversight.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB) is an independent agency of the United States government responsible for consumer protection in the financial sector. Its jurisdiction includes banks, credit unions, securities firms, payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, foreclosure relief services, debt collectors, other financial companies operating in the United States, and virtual currencies.
The CFPB’s creation was authorized by the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, whose passage in 2010 was a legislative response to the financial crisis of 2007–08 and the subsequent Great Recession.
I thought our CEO was lying to me when he told me they were getting new regulations handed down two years after the act had been passed, and when I saw the big shots having meetings late into the night virtually every day for weeks, I knew I needed to look into this. In July 2011 the CFPB was given full powers to do whatever they pleased and they have ever since, burying banks in red tape, and costing them money and jobs.
After the passage of Dodd-Frank I watched entire departments, that had been highly profitable for the bank, disappear. And new departments full of nothing but auditors and compliance personnel sprang up, both of those jobs are costly to banks, and do not turn a profit. Near the end, my department had two auditors for each actual worker. Then I left.
The CFPB has made it harder for not only financial institutions to do busines, but harder for individual borrowers too. A contractor I know was puzzled because he could no longer find moderate to high risk loans for his customers, and I explained it was because of Dodd-Frank.
My nearest neighbor lost his home due to Dodd-Frank, and the bank lost money on the deal as as well, all because of this heinous anti-bank and anti-consumer act. Last week I had the local seed company come out and treat my lawn, one of the guys saw my old bank jersey and asked me if I could help him with a bank issue. Apparently his cousin lost a truck to the bank. When I queried him about the situation, it became apparent that it was the same issue as my neighbor, and I explained there was nothing he could do.
Are there bankers who are corrupt? Sure. Just like their are corrupt cops. But where do we find institutional corruption? Government.
Blame Big Brother. Blame indivuals. Focus on the real enemies.
BTW – I would recommend everyone do business with a local bank, and stay away from the major banks as they are the most defiled by the Dodd-Frank and the CFPB.
The Vatican joined opposition to the discovery that started the scientific revolution:
In 1542 Copernicus discovered Earth orbits the Sun, the center of the solar system!
Poor Galileo lived under house arrest for telling the people about Copernicus’ discovery.
Today the Vatican still seeks to ignore the Sun’s dominant control of Earth’s climate.
Gail & Gator… Wow, what a deep range of issues & information ; certainly throws light on the complexity of the situation and potential corporate subterfuge that underpins CAGW fraud.
…
I take the point, the Banks may well be the meat in the middle of the sandwich being subject to the pressures from above. From what you’ve shown, the high end Corporation top dogs are party to a cartel in the overarching system ; banks could possibly be in that mix.
…
Yes, I was aware of the mass money in the Corporate World but we need to look at the motive; Shell or any Petoleum base Company supporting CC- CAGW appears to be counterproductive.
The intent maybe to destabilize or leverage the market but its unlikely they would want – say Agenda 21 or similar UN Charter,,, of course the intent may involve something very different.
…
The scale of the drivers for CC corruption, obviously goes beyond just the money, it’s to gain power & control at a terrible cost to society ; that’s morally bankrupt . Do you think that the corporate elite have compatibility with Fabian or World Socialism ? That’s maybe a stretch too far as it counters their market philosophy…
…
Obviously, for a President of the United States to be so totally embracing CAGW at a time of
contrary evidence, is indicative of persuasive levers behind the scenes. It’s easy to see those
that gain at ground level such as Universities, NASA plus the IPCC extremists but what’s the golden fleece ; the motive at the top end.
…
I don’t believe it’s about World domination ; this CAGW is going to fall over in a matter of a few years…
Hey Marsh! It is all about wrongheaded God complex do-goodery…
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may
be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than
under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes
sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for
our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of
their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same
time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with
intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which
we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet
reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants,
imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
– C.S. Lewis
Yes Gator , what a most fitting statement by C.S. Lewis. Even this writer, would not have foreseen the scale of CAGW, but it exemplifies how many have been subject to this doctrine. In truth, I have always seen this trait within mainstream preachers of CAGW and this was probably core to the early years but now it’s become very mercenary.
…
The wrongheaded God complex & do-goodery persons, do remind me of the Green movement in politics. Whilst some of their ideas are well meaning, they are impractical
or naive as to the real consequence if implemented. I certainly see this similarity but
the money & power involving CAGW is now moving beyond a Religious belief wouldn’t you agree; then again, some Organised Religions have amassed fortunes too…
That too. Although Rosa Koire is a bit more scathing:
The picture she paints is a slave beehive. Unfortunately you can see the bits and pieces being put in place if you pay attention.
Marsh read E.M Smith’s “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism” in a word Corporations are anti-Capatalism (who wants a competitor?) and Pro – Government/corporate collusion.
The Oil companies like CAGW because it drives out their chief competitor COAL. Also the picked up on the cheap Wind and solar companies.
SEE my comments: Banks, Shell oil and CAGW
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/a-kook-classic/#comment-333708
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/proof-that-us-warming-is-mann-made-part-2/#comment-401533
Representative Grijalva should make some public disclosures himself, such as his investments in Royal Dutch Shell and Embridge Energy Partners…..
Ok Gail , I see there is an absolute connection with Shell, Enron & BP etc… being part of the driving force towards CAGW initiatives. The fact that many of the bigger shareholders are not even in the United States makes it intriguing to say the least… it’s Global for sure.
…
It’s true, one has to look outside the box because the situation involves skullduggery ways of
riding on the Global Warming premise . Yeah, it’s used as a trojan horse of sorts to bring down competitors to win over a greater market share. We see this on a smaller scale with Supermarkets killing off opposition shops… likewise , they are being allowed to get away with it…your’e right.
Marsh,
Glad you took the time to read my LOOooong comments.
We really do need to know where the source of the danger is.