Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

Skeptics claim stolen emails prove global warming a hoax (35 posts)

  1. truthmod
    Administrator

    http://rawstory.com/2009/11/skeptics-claim-stolen-...

    Skeptics claim stolen emails prove global warming a hoaxAlthough arguments continue as to how much of recent climate change is natural and how much is man-made, only a few diehard skeptics doubt that the warming of the last few decades is real. Now, however, those skeptics can barely contain their glee at the release of a cache of stolen emails that they believe prove global warming is nothing but a colossal hoax.


    One email from 1999, for example, says "I've just completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." Another complains, "The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate."


    Perhaps the final word on the matter has already been offered by a spokesperson for Greenpeace, who told the Guardian, "If you looked through any organisation's emails from the last 10 years you'd find something that would raise a few eyebrows. Contrary to what the sceptics claim, the Royal Society, the US National Academy of Sciences, Nasa and the world's leading atmospheric scientists are not the agents of a clandestine global movement against the truth. This stuff might drive some web traffic, but so does David Icke."

    Posted 14 years ago #
  2. ObiWanKenobi
    Member
  3. christs4sale
    Administrator

    Climate change emails profoundly disappointing:

    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_con...

    Hacked climate change email furor:

    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_con...

    Posted 14 years ago #
  4. truthmod
    Administrator

    Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Em...

    Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

    An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

    The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.


    Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

    Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

    The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  5. ObiWanKenobi
    Member

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...

    Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is blaming Climategate on a fiendish Russian plot. Well he would, wouldn’t he?

    “It’s very common for hackers in Russia to be paid for their services,” he told The Times.

    “If you look at that mass of emails a lot of work was done, not only to download the data but it’s a carefully made selection of emails and documents that’s not random at all.

    “This is 13 years of data and it’s not a job of amateurs.”

    And why would van Ypersele’s chief suspects the Russian secret service want to do such things? To stop honest, decent, never-hide-evidence-or-fiddle-with-raw-data scientists getting on with their job, that’s why.

    Mr van Ypersele said the expose was making it more difficult to persuade the 192 countries going to Copenhagen of the need to cut carbon emissions.

    “One effect of this is to make scientists lose lots of time checking things. We are spending a lot of useless time discussing this rather than spending time preparing information for the negotiators,” he said.

    Richard North has another theory: the story is utter bilge.

    First, he argues, there is absolutely no significance that the leaked Climatic Research Unit (CRU) files were deposited on a server in the Siberian city of Tomsk.

    From the very start, then, the crucial issue is that this is a publicly-accessible server which can be reached from anywhere in the world. Furthermore, Russian servers are particularly attractive to people who wish to lodge material on the internet anonymously, as the Russian authorities are distinctly unhelpful when it comes to revealing the addresses of computers used to upload material onto servers in their territory.

    Thus, the fact that the material was placed on a Russian server gives no clue whatsoever as to the identity of the person (or persons) who uploaded the material, or of their location.

    Second, North believes – as do most people who have been following this story closely – that the “hack” is much more likely to have been an inside job: a leak by someone at the University of East Anglia sick to the craw of the scheming and incompetence and dishonesty of the activist-scientists pushing AGW.

    For sure, the material is very selective. But it would have needed someone to know what they were doing to pick such a careful and relevant selection of material. And so carefully to select the material over such a time-span would have taken weeks of work (not necessarily by one person). That almost rules out a hacker – a hacker could hadly get the period of extensive, uninterrupted access needed to access and pull together all the files.

    Given the name of the folder (FOI2009), the speculation is that the files had been gathered by the University of East Anglia itself, in response to a Freedom of Information exercise, which had not been released.

    In other words the story about the Russian Connection is a glorious red herring, designed both to impugn the motives of the people who leaked the CRU files and to distract from the significance of the files’ contents.

    Of course the leak of the files was timed so as to derail Copenhagen. Nobody is disputing that. But the fact that Climategate was tactically planned and politically motivated doesn’t suddenly make it a spy-story, or a crime-story, or – as the IPCC would so dearly love to pretend, a non-story.

    We shall see a lot more of this in the coming weeks: desperate attempts by various interested parties to pretend that Climategate is something that it is not. So let’s not allow ourselves to be distracted and keep our eyes on the main prize: our right as free, sentient citizens not to have $45 trillion worth of economy-destroying taxes and regulations imposed on us by big government in the name of a problem that quite likely doesn’t exist.

    That’s why Climategate matters. Built into its outcome is the entire future of Western civilisation.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  6. truthmod
    Administrator
  7. truthmod
    Administrator

    Wow, the Saudis trust is shaken? Yeah, why would the poor Saudis have to make sacrifices to their economies based on scientists who lie and mislead. I mean--the Saudis, the straight-shooting, democracy-loving, extended Bush family Saudis!? I align myself with the house of Saud, Senator James Inhofe, Exxon-Mobil, and every reactionary, privileged corporate interest in the world. I'm an ignorant libertarian dunce-pawn. I've got indignation but not compassion. I'm not really interested in the truth; I just want to point fingers. Oh yeah, and go out and buy your own health care and fend for yourself you fucking hippies. Corporations are here to help us, they've just been restricted by the creeping socialism of our government. What--corporations are our government, they run our government, this is what it's like when you accept and allow unfettered greed and competitiveness? Shut up you stupid communist! Capitalism forever!

    ‘Climategate’ shakes trust in scientists: Saudi Arabia

    http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climategate-shakes-tru...

    Saudia Arabia told global warming talks on Monday that trust in climate science had been "shaken" by leaked emails among experts and called for an international probe.

    "The level of trust is definitely shaken, especially now that we are about to conclude an agreement that ... is going to mean sacrifices for our economies," said Mohammed al-Sabban, the kingdom's top climate negotiator, told delegates at the opening of December 7-18 UN talks.

    Al-Sabban called for an "independent" international investigation, but said that the UN climate science body was unqualified to carry it out.

    "The IPCC, which is the authority accused, is not going to be able to conduct the investigation," he said, referring to the Nobel-winning UN Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC).

    Posted 14 years ago #
  8. truthmod
    Administrator

    Climategate spells end to the false science of climate change

    Alex Jones' strange bedfellows:

    Hosting Lord Christopher Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/climategate-spells-end...

    http://www.globalwarmingheartland.com/expert.cfm?e...
    (yes, the Heartland Institute likes him, take a glance at their front page:) http://www.globalwarmingheartland.com/index.cfm

    In 1979, he became the editor of the Catholic newspaper, The Universe, and then a managing editor of The Sunday Telegraph’s Magazine in 1981. In 1982 he returned to the Conservative offices again, this time as UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s policy advisor, where he served from 1982 to 1986.

    Alex Jones popped champagne when the emails were confirmed as real.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  9. Victronix
    Member

    I haven't been following it much but Jim says the WSJ has really been playing the emails up. And now that there is a rebuttal, there's no sign of that on WSJ, but NYT has it as the top "World" story --

    In Face of Skeptics, Experts Affirm Climate Peril

    The WSJ still only has --

    U.N. to Probe Climate Data The head of a U.N. panel said it will investigate claims that scientists manipulated data about global warming, days before climate-change talks in Copenhagen.

    No rebuttal apparently exists for them. In fact from yesterday there's this --

    Climate of Uncertainty Heats Up Bloggers peer review a scientific 'consensus.' More details will come out as the leaked documents get fully parsed, but already one certainty is the end of certainty. The one-sidedness of the views of the most influential scientists had led many to believe in the gospel of global warming. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487043...

    Same with the MSM news last night -- they report only the emails, not the response to them.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  10. truthmod
    Administrator

    Everyone, please take the Heartland Institute's Global Warming Test! I learned that I've been totally wrong about Global Warming. Thank god these good people cleared everything up for me.

    http://www.globalwarmingheartland.com/GWQuiz/Testi...

    Posted 14 years ago #
  11. JohnA
    Member

    Wow, the Saudis trust is shaken? Yeah, why would the poor Saudis have to make sacrifices to their economies based on scientists who lie and mislead. I mean--the Saudis, the straight-shooting, democracy-loving, extended Bush family Saudis!? I align myself with the house of Saud, Senator James Inhofe, Exxon-Mobil, and every reactionary, privileged corporate interest in the world. I'm an ignorant libertarian dunce-pawn. I've got indignation but not compassion. I'm not really interested in the truth; I just want to point fingers. Oh yeah, and go out and buy your own health care and fend for yourself you fucking hippies. Corporations are here to help us, they've just been restricted by the creeping socialism of our government. What--corporations are our government, they run our government, this is what it's like when you accept and allow unfettered greed and competitiveness? Shut up you stupid communist! Capitalism forever!

    lol I like when you become unhinged.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  12. Victronix
    Member

    What Global Warming?

    Look at the arguments the skeptics make—and how believers respond.

    When we recently ran an article about ideas on ways to cool the planet, we were swamped with emails from people who were impassioned in their belief that global warming is a myth. It was striking that so many people held views at odds with what is apparently the consensus among climate scientists, as well as policy makers.

    So, what do the skeptics say? In a nutshell, they argue that the warming in the past century has been modest and that human activities' contribution to the warming has been minimal; there is no crisis. Here are some of their major points—and the response by those who believe in global warming. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487038...

    Posted 14 years ago #
  13. ObiWanKenobi
    Member

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2009/11/clim...

    Very busy with forecast duties right now, but I do intend to write a blog regarding the UK Climate research centre (CRU) being hacked into, and the possible implications of this very serious affair.

    I will add comment on this page as soon as I can free up some time. But I will in the meantime answer the question regarding the chain of e-mails which you have been commenting about on my blog, which can be seen here, and whether they are genuine or part of an elaborate hoax.

    I was forwarded the chain of e-mails on the 12th October, which are comments from some of the worlds leading climate scientists written as a direct result of my article 'whatever happened to global warming'. The e-mails released on the internet as a result of CRU being hacked into are identical to the ones I was forwarded and read at the time and so, as far as l can see, they are authentic.

    More later.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  14. truthmod
    Administrator

    Oh shit. BBC confirms the emails are authentic!? Damn, I guess if the emails aren't a hoax then global warming is a hoax. ObiWan, thanks for pressing us so hard on this issue and making us face the truth. If you want to rewrite our global warming page to reflect this amazing new paradigm shift, we would be honored.

    Once again, thank you for your persistent dedication to rational logic. I know we've been stubborn so far, but I think we all really "get it" now.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  15. ObiWanKenobi
    Member

    Oh shit. BBC confirms the emails are authentic!? Damn, I guess if the emails aren't a hoax then global warming is a hoax. ObiWan, thanks for pressing us so hard on this issue and making us face the truth. If you want to rewrite our global warming page to reflect this amazing new paradigm shift, we would be honored. Once again, thank you for your persistent dedication to rational logic. I know we've been stubborn so far, but I think we all really "get it" now.

    Do please get off your high-horse for a second please?

    I was merely adding additional information that shows the emails weren't new when they 'officially' broke. Does that really stick in your craw that much you'd continue your sarcastic chest beating?

    I've admitted my flaw; I'm a virus.

    Global warming isn't a hoax, it's part and parcel of this planet's climatic cycle. Climate change is real too.

    I wouldn't change anything on your website. It clearly demonstrates that TruthMove is 100% correct and any differentiating opinions, albeit from sceptical peer-reviewed scientists, are in a vast right-wing conspiracy in league with the Oil companies.

    Despite some forum members admitting that indeed the eco-movement could be compromised by the very conspirators you accuse sceptics of favouring it seems to me that your intent on pinning the proverbial donkey tale on the gravy train favourite; Capitalist right-wingers.

    Perhaps you should look around and see that both left & right a) Disagree with the science of man-made climate change and b) Can profit from Oil & Carbon trading.

    I see the capitalist system holders (Bankers, Industrialists, Energy dynasties, Politicians) not capitalism itself, as the corrupt, murderous cabal that they are.

    If not capitalism, what would be your proposal as a replacement? I'm willing to learn, in all honesty.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  16. truthmod
    Administrator

    http://www.truthmove.org/content/environmental-dis...

    I see the capitalist system holders (Bankers, Industrialists, Energy dynasties, Politicians) not capitalism itself, as the corrupt, murderous cabal that they are.

    If not capitalism, what would be your proposal as a replacement? I'm willing to learn, in all honesty.

    If you really are "willing to learn," please indicate that you have actually looked at and considered some of the information I've pointed to. So far, I don't think I've seen that from you.

    You express a very generic attitude/opinion that is typically associated with people who follow the Alex Jones/WeAreChange wing of the "truth movement." You guys are always talking about the cabals. You're always indignant, your always pointing fingers. You have a very obvious aversion to questioning yourself or your own complicity in certain harmful modes of thinking and living. To you, that's liberal pussy talk; we just have to go out and destroy the evil ones. Many of you are angry, insecure/macho, young men. Many of you seem almost like militia types and have a hint of violence about you. You seem to like the rigid authoritarian structure of Alex Jones or other leaders dictating your perspective. You like to say you think for yourself, but you don't actually like to do it.

    Capitalism has no room for compassion and thus no room for truth. Self-interest is a basic human/organic trait. But unlike animals, humans have developed the ability to eat, waste, and destroy on an essentially god-like scale. Most of our species still operates with brains programmed to hoard as much as possible without any concern for other humans or other species or the environment that sustains us. Luckily, we have flexible brains that can evolve within our lifetimes. But it is a hard and painful process that most people resist with all their might. In the capitalist system, the incentive of selfishness is taken as a given. Capitalism is all about cabals and classes, all about deception, all about manipulation, and exploitation. We don't need a system where everyone is fighting everyone else for as big a piece of the pie as they can get. We need a system where we have enlightened people who realize that we have only so many pies left and each pie is only so big, so we shouldn't reproduce uncontrollably and we should only eat as much as we need so that all can eat and live in dignity.

    If you don't demonstrate an ability to think, my response to your future posts will be this:

    http://www.truthmove.org/content/environmental-dis...

    Posted 14 years ago #
  17. ObiWanKenobi
    Member

    Now see, doesn't that seem like a more critically constructive post?

    I've read the Eco-disinfo page and it reads like a vast right-wing conspiracy duping 'truth activist' into their cause of anti-environmentalism through funding from corporate / vested interests. Any scepticism of the science of man-made climate change should be met immediately with the assumption that the person is either libertarian, conservative, world-government conspiracy theorist, capitalist, Alex Jones fan.

    You definitely need to break beyond the belief that this is just a wingnut agenda to plunder, pollute and profit. I no longer (As of 2004) see much difference in policy between left / right these days.

    So I see that both left / right have a hand in propagandising the issue of climate change. There are vested interests in both Oil & Carbon Trading. A portion of the Eco-Movement prides itself in fear-mongering and emotional blackmail of the contentious issue of supposed man-made climate change as their core focus and neglect de-forestation, habitat destruction, toxic waste, species extinction, waterways etc.

    All I'm seeing on this page is how the right-wing is funded and backed by sceptical groups with ties to Oil companies. I know for a fact that fake left organisations are exactly the same. Their interests aren't environmental but financial and a lust for control. I would make a suggestion that fake left groups be added as well, there's always a balance when it comes to power, corruption and money.

    I see that you really didn't offer much of an alternative to Capitalism other than a 'We don't need, we need' list.

    Capitalism is all about cabals and classes, all about deception, all about manipulation, and exploitation. We don't need a system where everyone is fighting everyone else for as big a piece of the pie as they can get.

    Agreed, but isn't that much like collectivism too? Where the middle class and poor are decieved into believing it is a system that will value their contribution to society but ends up just like Capitalism with a small minority at the top squeezing their workers dry?

    Surely we cannot expect any alternative to be free of exploitation and corruption? The lesser of two-evils is arguably an excuse if I were to choose Capitalism but what alternative system would work with the goals you believe are necessary for society to function properly?

    So we shouldn't reproduce uncontrollably

    Exactly how do you achieve population control?

    Posted 14 years ago #
  18. truthmod
    Administrator

    Exactly how do you achieve population control?

    Oh, just all the standard practices that those who are concerned about overpopulation endorse:

    Mandatory sterilization. UN-sponsored death camps staffed by fascist progressives. An efficient, targeted pandemic. Infanticide.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  19. truthmod
    Administrator

    So we shouldn't reproduce uncontrollably

    Exactly how do you achieve population control?

    As I wrote that line I knew that you would probably point it out. How did I know this? Because everything you've said so far, your entire perspective is perfectly in line with the Alex Jones, libertarian, WeAreChange platform. This platform, or agenda, or brainwashing program uses the issue of overpopulation rhetorically not rationally to rail against environmental activists or those who want to bring the world population to a sustainable level, by scaring people with the concept of "mass culling." These con artists don't tell you anything about the legitimacy or the facts of overpopulation, they just use the concept to manipulate you.

    Save your anger and indignation. You know what you should really be scared of?

    This fucking graph:

    img

    Posted 14 years ago #
  20. JohnA
    Member

    Obiwan

    I think the thing I find most offensive about your oh-so-ernest indignation is your complete refusal to address the science itself. We see all the typical rhetoric about politics and the UN and IMF and cabals etc etc yawn.

    But conspicuously missing from all your posts is the actual science

    U give us political reasons why global warming is a hoax - yet to appear unable to put your money where your mouth is and provide credible research to support your thesis. So YES you appear to be espousing political dreck.

    And I think I know why.

    Your conspiracy theories are seductive and may strike a dramatic POSE but clearly the overwhelming scientific data points directly at co2 An inconvenient truth for the shallow backwater rhetoric of libertarian armchair environmentalists.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  21. truthmover
    Administrator

    It's reminds me of a particularly tragic form of learned helplessness in which the subject believes that they think independently when in fact critical thinking has been replaced by mere parroted argumentation. Lots of people like that on both the left and the right. It's easier to remember talking points than to read a book.

    Now ObiWan appears to be more savvy than that. But then, he is wrong and not likely to change his mind, whatever the reason.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  22. ObiWanKenobi
    Member

    Oh, just all the standard practices that those who are concerned about overpopulation endorse: Mandatory sterilization. UN-sponsored death camps staffed by fascist progressives. An efficient, targeted pandemic. Infanticide.

    Yeah well since I was being sincere in my questioning because of your fearfulness of population explosion, I wanted to hear your solutions which seem to be very generalised and not all that specific with a large touch of sarcasm to hide that fact.

    U give us political reasons why global warming is a hoax

    Bzzz wrong. Global warming isn't a hoax... The mainstream media are good at those sorts of disingenuous statements such as "Do you believe climate change is happening?" "Climate change is affecting coastal towns".

    The globe warms & cools and the climate always changes. You conveniently misplaced the words man-made and even then I do not believe man-made climate change is a hoax. I question the extent humans have on the climate... It's a long way from "U Give us political reasons why global warming is a hoax". You use the emotionally laden word "hoax", I do not.

    You know what JohnA and Truthmover...

    No matter what I show, say or do, it will not conform to your mould of a perfect human being and member of the TruthMove forum.

    I'll show you a graph "Oh that's from so and so, he's in league with the Oil companies".

    I'll show you a peer reviewed scientific report "That's anti-environmentalist dogma"

    I'm sceptical of the science of man-made climate change "You capitalist wingnut useless eating virus, Alex Jones, Alex Jones, Alex Jones". I hear more about Alex Jones here than I would if I lived in Texas.

    But if you want something to moan about, here's a video your probably aware of:

    Hockey stick observed in NOAA ice core data http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFbUVBYIPlI / http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3553

    You know, I know it, it's fire Vs. fire.

    Your resistance to even utter a resemblance of 'left' groups who are profiteering, fearmongering and emotionalising the debate on man-made climate change shows that indeed you are unwilling to look outside your political glass house paradigm. The world is no longer Liberal Vs. Conservative.

    The left is as susceptible to corruption, coercion, infiltration, diversion, manipulation and propaganda as the right are.

    Just look at 350.org for crying out loud. Simple research links it back to an Oil family. That's not conspiracy, it's factual.

    Now ObiWan appears to be more savvy than that. But then, he is wrong and not likely to change his mind, whatever the reason.

    Your pitfalls are that your also unwilling to budge from your perch. You however see that as an advantage and a tool to counter critics by continually labelling any criticism or scepticism as misinformed, somewhat mentally deficient and an unwillingness to conform to the standards you see a human being should be.

    You'd do wonders at an NGO pushing public policy for your vague solutions to counter capitalism's negative impact on the world and the population bubble.

    Gentlemen if you want me gone, I'd be happy to oblige.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  23. JohnA
    Member

    again:

    The globe warms & cools and the climate always changes. You conveniently misplaced the words man-made and even then I do not believe man-made climate change is a hoax. I question the extent humans have on the climate....

    fine

    do you have any specific research you want to present that counters the very substantial and diverse scientific evidence that seems to overwhelmingly support the man-made thesis? or is this something you just feel in your gut?

    here's a graph showing atmospheric co2 since 1955.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mauna_Loa_Carbon...

    The longest such record exists at Mauna Loa, but these measurements have been independently confirmed at many other sites around the world.

    so - clearly CO2 is rising.

    and then you have this:

    Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the average amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by nearly 40 percent from an estimated 280 to more than 380 ppmv percent. This increase in CO2’s share of the atmosphere is mostly due to anthropogenic (man-induced) factors, such as burning fossil fuels, deforestation and industrial production.

    do you dispute this? how? where do you think all of the TONS of CO2 we have been pumping in to the atmosphere is going? is the atmosphere infinite or finite?

    in math - if you keep adding a positive number to another positive number - hmmm... don't you get a bigger and bigger positive number?

    its really a simple question. is man adding co2 to the atmosphere? at what levels? can you demonstrate that the levels since the beginning of the industrial revolution are negligable amounts?

    and lastly - do you dispute that global temperatures and CO2 are directly related? i think the science is pretty iron-clad there too - although (giggle) some of the kooks out there appear to want to dispute that one also.

    exactly WHERE does your doubt reside? in what nook or cranny of the scientific evidence are you hanging your hat?

    instead of continuing to shovel all of this bullshit indignation - and insulting the moderators here for sitting on 'their high horses' from their elitist 'perches' - why don't you prove them wrong?

    go ahead - here's your chance - prove them wrong.

    so me the money

    Posted 14 years ago #
  24. truthmod
    Administrator

    Well, we're not getting anywhere with you and you're not getting anywhere with us. But thanks for your extra inspiration to finally start writing the Environmental Disinformation page.

    Yeah well since I was being sincere in my questioning because of your fearfulness of population explosion, I wanted to hear your solutions which seem to be very generalised and not all that specific with a large touch of sarcasm to hide that fact.

    Your attitude and mode of communication calls for severe sarcasm. You don't respond to logic. There are a lot of very obvious solutions to overpopulation that only the most brainwashed people can't see:
    1. EDUCATION
    2. AVAILABILITY OF CONTRACEPTION AND ACCESS TO ABORTION
    3. ENCOURAGEMENT TO HAVE LESS CHILDREN THROUGH TAX CREDITS, ETC.

    Do you believe that corporations and governments should continue to be able to spew pollution into the atmosphere without any cost or drawbacks?

    I'm sceptical of the science of man-made climate change "You capitalist wingnut useless eating virus, Alex Jones, Alex Jones, Alex Jones". I hear more about Alex Jones here than I would if I lived in Texas.

    Like it or not, but you're spouting Alex Jones talking points and if you can't admit it, you're being dishonest with yourself.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  25. christs4sale
    Administrator

    Yeah well since I was being sincere in my questioning because of your fearfulness of population explosion, I wanted to hear your solutions which seem to be very generalised and not all that specific with a large touch of sarcasm to hide that fact.

    This is the best video that I have found that explains how overpopulation is a very legitimate and natural problem:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

    (this is the first of eight parts)

    You have to admit that any closed environmental system, earth included, has a carrying capacity for humans or any species. The human population cannot grow infinitely and reaching carrying capacity is simply a question of when rather than if.

    Posted 14 years ago #

Reply »

You must log in to post.