let's just begin with the beginning and go from there. The roots of this whole Global Warming hoax:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/social/papers/paper_townsend.pdf
behold a document drafted by the UN itself in 2001 which explicitly warns that it not even be quoted without permission.
The document itself discusses options for financing the UN's global anti poverty initiatives which have been grossly underfunded because wealthy nations won't bother to contribute, despite public pledges. It basically reads like "what do we do?"
Scroll down to page 3.
The Zedillo Report.
The Zedillo Report was the product of a UN panel set up under Kofi Anon to identify options to the voluntary financing schemes that had thus far proven inadequate. And it's conclusions were that the UN's anti poverty programs could be financed either by effecting a Tobin Tax on global transactions or a carbon tax.
The Carbon Tax was the preferred option (page 4) because it was considered "politically more realistic" and because it could be justified as "making polluters pay".
NO MENTION OF GLOBAL WARMING. Efforts to commence the carbon tax are still underway in the form of the Kyoto, Doha, Paris agreements and amendments.
As the campaign to convince wealthy nations to contribute to the UN's war on poverty programs the UN ramped up the IPCC to build a scientific case for applying this tax (for poverty relief) to carbon consumers who were aggrevating alleged global warming.
The IPCC, as everybody knows is a UN body and is the primary driver of global warming study and hysteria.
Are you serious or are you trolling?
Quote from: Freeky on September 18, 2017, 11:21:22 PM
Are you serious or are you trolling?
dead serious, but motivated by the fact that this serious and important discussion has optimized troll value.
You?
Okay so if you're trolling, why are you doing it here? What are you trying to accomplish? I'm trying to understand.
Hi Ron.
You can fuck off again now.
Quote from: Freeky on September 18, 2017, 11:27:22 PM
Okay so if you're trolling, why are you doing it here? What are you trying to accomplish? I'm trying to understand.
Like I said, i'm not trolling. I am dead serious about the topic.
I just happen to enjoy the optimization of troll value the topic rallies.
Right place, right topic, right time.
You?
More alt-right garbage. :yawn:
Quote from: Junkenstein on September 18, 2017, 11:50:29 PM
Hi Ron.
You can fuck off again now.
As far as I can tell, it's not Ron.
It's just another dumbass. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting one, these days.
:retard:
Next up CORAL BLEACHING: ecological disaster? More like new global fashion statement!
Go home.
You're extra dim.
(https://www.istreetwatch.co.uk/assets/pledge-logo-fda0e0e97694b802d602e437f4ca77d94b95cdf837c395182d69786bdf2efc0a.jpg)
Quote from: Freeky on September 19, 2017, 01:45:40 AM
(https://www.istreetwatch.co.uk/assets/pledge-logo-fda0e0e97694b802d602e437f4ca77d94b95cdf837c395182d69786bdf2efc0a.jpg)
:lulz:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 19, 2017, 01:35:03 AM
Quote from: Junkenstein on September 18, 2017, 11:50:29 PM
Hi Ron.
You can fuck off again now.
As far as I can tell, it's not Ron.
It's just another dumbass. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting one, these days.
Roger,
I note your reply above and suggest that your answer pales into irrelevance in the face of larger, more pertinent questions. Naturally, I, as your Docktor, Confessor, Gardener, indefinite alibi, Finanical Adviser, Unrequited Lover, Bookie, Banjo Repairman, Real Estate Agent, Vizier and Legal Woo consultant, have to take you to task for some of these.
Firstly, WHY the fuck is this kind of idiocy spreading so quickly in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence. Have we reached the point where trivial things like "Proof" genuinely no longer matter? It appears so. When we agreed to put a little something in the water supply way back when, I thought we were both talking about saltpeter not whatever the fuck has spawned these legions of children that are intellectually sub-par even when compared to those with the most severe cases of foetal alcohol syndrome. For this, I am ambivalent whether to hold ye in highest contempt or commission a statute. I may go with both just to "Hussein" it. I'm sure you'll see that as equitable middle ground.
Secondly, I again recall a long and detailed conversation with you in which you proposed to show me "The funniest fucking thing I've ever seen". Then you explained half the joke and for the second half I'm staring at an orange loon waiting for him to start Afghanistan 2 - Korean Boogaloo. Mainly because the aforementioned cretins are unware why there is North Korea to begin with but they know a land war there is bad. So Nuke it! Nuke all the things! And yet your stooge keeps his finger from the button and golfs. Control your client sir, this is starting to feel like a personal slight.
Thirdly, I was at your house all last night if anyone asks. We watched sports. Give no more details than this to anyone who may inquire. Standard cautionary procedures apply. *%%55522!B.
Fourthly, I have sent you a classic hilarious "Scouse" wig. It's kind of like this :
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51PK5EP6%2B%2BL._SY355_.jpg)
I expect this to be worn at all future meetings, both social and business. In fact, just leave it on until I tell you to take it off.
Fifthly, I have still not had last weeks agendas minutes and I can't recall the full list of people who are currently designated "Shitbag". Please advise.
Sixthly, Upon studying the provided diagrams of meth addiction and voting patterns, I am seeing that plan "OHGODSMYSKINISWRIGGLING" is coming to the suggested turning point. Inform Suppy and distribution accordingly to maximise future Krokodil profits. Or just shove any shit in your sheds into bags and jars. People are quite past the point of giving a fuck and we may as well make a few quid out of this capitalism thing before the current bronze age ends.
Seventhly, end of the bronze age. Worth a read up on. SEA PEOPLE. And failures in centralised systems. Which are totally not replicated in current modern business practises. System Collapse theory I'm sure you'll find amusing.
Eigththly, Beyond our current vendettas, I must say that it's too DAMN NICE around here. I've seen threads where people were being fucking CIVIL to each other. Cordial even. This cannot stand. I am absolutely fucking furious with every single one of you. Where is the hate? The subtle snide remark? The open and outright disdain for what the other person is and how everything they believe in and stand for is astoundingly stupid to it's core? When was your last scream of self righteousness? Not fucking recent enough.(And that's generalised, not actually, directly to you, Roger.)
Ninthly, And Finally, I must note with some large measure of satisfaction that the old "Flaming bag" trick is considerably approved with a small addition of the discussed substance. 4/5, will be doing that again.
:aaa:!!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 19, 2017, 01:32:19 AM
More alt-right garbage. :yawn:
Bullshit. The arguments in favor of GW alarmism/hysteria are paper thin and easily demolished.
If you have to balls to see the truth for yourself.
Quote from: Junkenstein on September 19, 2017, 02:59:02 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 19, 2017, 01:35:03 AM
Quote from: Junkenstein on September 18, 2017, 11:50:29 PM
Hi Ron.
You can fuck off again now.
As far as I can tell, it's not Ron.
It's just another dumbass. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting one, these days.
Roger,
I note your reply above and suggest that your answer pales into irrelevance in the face of larger, more pertinent questions. Naturally, I, as your Docktor, Confessor, Gardener, indefinite alibi, Finanical Adviser, Unrequited Lover, Bookie, Banjo Repairman, Real Estate Agent, Vizier and Legal Woo consultant, have to take you to task for some of these.
Firstly, WHY the fuck is this kind of idiocy spreading so quickly in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence.
There is no counter evidence, there is only the prevailing wind of Ice Age denial.
We have already established via the UN's own publications that the scam of taxing the planet via carbon taxes was conceived entirely independent of and prior to the advent of global warming hysteria/scientism/fake news. With entirely different justifications.
That's step 1 in a 20 step program to disabuse you of the cwazy silly notion that GW is settled science.
Quote from: freshmeat on September 19, 2017, 03:52:01 AM
We have already established via the UN's own publications that the scam of taxing the planet via carbon taxes was conceived entirely independent of and prior to the advent of global warming hysteria/scientism/fake news. With entirely different justifications.
No, you haven't. You have just made a totally unsubstantiated assertion.
Quote from: freshmeat on September 19, 2017, 03:52:01 AM
That's step 1 in a 20 step program to disabuse you of the cwazy silly notion that GW is settled science.
If you want to play at armchair scientist you might at least do a bit of research. Maybe Wiki it or something?
I would suggest you start with "History of climate change science"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science
#First_calculations_of_human-induced_climate_change.2C_1896QuoteHögbom found that estimated carbon production from industrial sources in the 1890s (mainly coal burning) was comparable with the natural sources.[19] Arrhenius saw that this human emission of carbon would eventually lead to warming. However, because of the relatively low rate of CO2 production in 1896, Arrhenius thought the warming would take thousands of years, and he expected it would be beneficial to humanity
So it is an old and well established science.
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
okay, i'm calling it,
(http://www.mpscleaning.co.uk/user/products/large/240-0040-PCD.jpg)
He's been banned, for a variety of reasons (multiple accounts among them) so no need to worry.
Building a Better Coral Reef https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/climate/coral-great-barrier-reef.html
I saw this today where they want to rebuild the Great Barrier Reef through what they called, "assisted evolution"
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
https://www.facebook.com/unify/videos/10155046569752909/
Also this one describes how whales also reduce CO2 .... So cool
Quote from: Bu☆ns on September 20, 2017, 03:30:39 PM
Building a Better Coral Reef https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/climate/coral-great-barrier-reef.html
I saw this today where they want to rebuild the Great Barrier Reef through what they called, "assisted evolution"
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
I REALLY hope that this will work out. The reefs are super important for bio diversity and the food chain.
Quote from: Cain on September 20, 2017, 01:44:49 PM
He's been banned, for a variety of reasons (multiple accounts among them) so no need to worry.
Who else was the little twerp?
Quote from: Cain on September 20, 2017, 01:44:49 PM
He's been banned, for a variety of reasons (multiple accounts among them) so no need to worry.
Having multiple accounts (Including comedic puppets) is a bannable offense? Or is that in reference only to creating another account to bypass a ban/deceive administration?
Also, I spent about 10 minutes searching the forum for the rules and can't find them. But I could be retarded. :lulz:
There are no rules but the retarded thing is not mutually exclusive so I'd maybe still get that checked :umad:
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on September 21, 2017, 05:28:28 PM
There are no rules but the retarded thing is not mutually exclusive so I'd maybe still get that checked :umad:
:argh!: :lulz:
Quote from: PoFP on September 21, 2017, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 20, 2017, 01:44:49 PM
He's been banned, for a variety of reasons (multiple accounts among them) so no need to worry.
Having multiple accounts (Including comedic puppets) is a bannable offense? Or is that in reference only to creating another account to bypass a ban/deceive administration?
Also, I spent about 10 minutes searching the forum for the rules and can't find them. But I could be retarded. :lulz:
They are in the registration screen.
Having multiple accounts is in fact one of ECH's few rules. Funny alts are tolerated as long as they are funny and not used as a passive-aggressive Hugh thing. Until they're not.
But lining up several accounts and then using them to evade bans is in fact a bannible offense.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 21, 2017, 11:31:25 PM
Quote from: PoFP on September 21, 2017, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 20, 2017, 01:44:49 PM
He's been banned, for a variety of reasons (multiple accounts among them) so no need to worry.
Having multiple accounts (Including comedic puppets) is a bannable offense? Or is that in reference only to creating another account to bypass a ban/deceive administration?
Also, I spent about 10 minutes searching the forum for the rules and can't find them. But I could be retarded. :lulz:
They are in the registration screen.
Having multiple accounts is in fact one of ECH's few rules. Funny alts are tolerated as long as they are funny and not used as a passive-aggressive Hugh thing. Until they're not.
But lining up several accounts and then using them to evade bans is in fact a bannible offense.
Ohh okay. That's what I figured the policy was, but didn't know for sure. Thanks!
Quote from: freshmeat on September 18, 2017, 11:16:07 PM
let's just begin with the beginning and go from there. The roots of this whole Global Warming hoax:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/social/papers/paper_townsend.pdf
behold a document drafted by the UN itself in 2001 which explicitly warns that it not even be quoted without permission.
The document itself discusses options for financing the UN's global anti poverty initiatives which have been grossly underfunded because wealthy nations won't bother to contribute, despite public pledges. It basically reads like "what do we do?"
Scroll down to page 3.
The Zedillo Report.
The Zedillo Report was the product of a UN panel set up under Kofi Anon to identify options to the voluntary financing schemes that had thus far proven inadequate. And it's conclusions were that the UN's anti poverty programs could be financed either by effecting a Tobin Tax on global transactions or a carbon tax.
The Carbon Tax was the preferred option (page 4) because it was considered "politically more realistic" and because it could be justified as "making polluters pay".
NO MENTION OF GLOBAL WARMING. Efforts to commence the carbon tax are still underway in the form of the Kyoto, Doha, Paris agreements and amendments.
As the campaign to convince wealthy nations to contribute to the UN's war on poverty programs the UN ramped up the IPCC to build a scientific case for applying this tax (for poverty relief) to carbon consumers who were aggrevating alleged global warming.
The IPCC, as everybody knows is a UN body and is the primary driver of global warming study and hysteria.
6/10 Work in some refrences to chemtrails, the Freemasons, ancient aliens, and Hillary Clinton
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on October 19, 2017, 11:24:17 PM
Quote from: freshmeat on September 18, 2017, 11:16:07 PM
let's just begin with the beginning and go from there. The roots of this whole Global Warming hoax:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/social/papers/paper_townsend.pdf
behold a document drafted by the UN itself in 2001 which explicitly warns that it not even be quoted without permission.
The document itself discusses options for financing the UN's global anti poverty initiatives which have been grossly underfunded because wealthy nations won't bother to contribute, despite public pledges. It basically reads like "what do we do?"
Scroll down to page 3.
The Zedillo Report.
The Zedillo Report was the product of a UN panel set up under Kofi Anon to identify options to the voluntary financing schemes that had thus far proven inadequate. And it's conclusions were that the UN's anti poverty programs could be financed either by effecting a Tobin Tax on global transactions or a carbon tax.
The Carbon Tax was the preferred option (page 4) because it was considered "politically more realistic" and because it could be justified as "making polluters pay".
NO MENTION OF GLOBAL WARMING. Efforts to commence the carbon tax are still underway in the form of the Kyoto, Doha, Paris agreements and amendments.
As the campaign to convince wealthy nations to contribute to the UN's war on poverty programs the UN ramped up the IPCC to build a scientific case for applying this tax (for poverty relief) to carbon consumers who were aggrevating alleged global warming.
The IPCC, as everybody knows is a UN body and is the primary driver of global warming study and hysteria.
6/10 Work in some refrences to chemtrails, the Freemasons, ancient aliens, and Hillary Clinton
Speaking seriously for a moment. That's hardly a smoking gun. At best it maybe establishes motive, which while admittedly better than most global warming denialist conspiracy theories is a far cry from proving or even seriously suggesting anything. In particular it offers no explanation for why the only scientists who disagree with the existence of global warming either have severe conflicts of interest or else specialize in completely unrelated fields and are thus unqualified to speak on the matter,
You can't argue with someone who has no ability or inclination to prove you wrong. You're asking the right questions to the wrong people.
If you want to know why scientists on the whole apparently believe climate change is real, you'll have to ask the scientists. Why are you asking Discordians?
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity. It's really not really a debate except on the fringes where uneducated people think they can opine hard enough to overcome mountains of actual evidence.
That said, I'm personally in favor of carbon taxes and a forced march to clean and renewable energy for reasons that would still be valid even if climate change weren't real. Political and economic power derive from control of resources, and the most important resource in the modern global economy is energy. Decentralized energy generation using renewable resources disrupts the monopoly of existing power structures. Those powers do anything that crosses their mind in order to sabotage any attempt to disrupt that monopoly, which is ethically bad, but more importantly, their activities induce widespread cultural conservatism by fostering popular thinking that new ideas are dangerous or unsound simply because they are new. That leaves human civilization in a really bad position with respect to adaptability and progress of all kinds. We should have solved all kinds of problems by now that are portrayed as "unsolvable" just because solving them doesn't make anyone rich. Capitalism may have been necessary for the Industrial Revolution, but post-Information-Revolution, it's holding us back so much that the survival of the species is at risk.
So regardless of global warming/climate change, we should be forcing the issue of clean energy because we have to undermine and ultimately disassemble all scarcity-based economic systems.
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity. It's really not really a debate except on the fringes where uneducated people think they can opine hard enough to overcome mountains of actual evidence.
That said, I'm personally in favor of carbon taxes and a forced march to clean and renewable energy for reasons that would still be valid even if climate change weren't real. Political and economic power derive from control of resources, and the most important resource in the modern global economy is energy. Decentralized energy generation using renewable resources disrupts the monopoly of existing power structures. Those powers do anything that crosses their mind in order to sabotage any attempt to disrupt that monopoly, which is ethically bad, but more importantly, their activities induce widespread cultural conservatism by fostering popular thinking that new ideas are dangerous or unsound simply because they are new. That leaves human civilization in a really bad position with respect to adaptability and progress of all kinds. We should have solved all kinds of problems by now that are portrayed as "unsolvable" just because solving them doesn't make anyone rich. Capitalism may have been necessary for the Industrial Revolution, but post-Information-Revolution, it's holding us back so much that the survival of the species is at risk.
So regardless of global warming/climate change, we should be forcing the issue of clean energy because we have to undermine and ultimately disassemble all scarcity-based economic systems.
THIS!
Quote from: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on November 12, 2017, 07:17:34 AM
You can't argue with someone who has no ability or inclination to prove you wrong. You're asking the right questions to the wrong people.
If you want to know why scientists on the whole apparently believe climate change is real, you'll have to ask the scientists. Why are you asking Discordians?
All the worlds a chessboard and all the men are pigeons.
Quote from: Faust on November 13, 2017, 09:03:08 AM
Quote from: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on November 12, 2017, 07:17:34 AM
You can't argue with someone who has no ability or inclination to prove you wrong. You're asking the right questions to the wrong people.
If you want to know why scientists on the whole apparently believe climate change is real, you'll have to ask the scientists. Why are you asking Discordians?
All the worlds a chessboard and all the men are pigeons.
Dibs on being the gorilla.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2017, 07:28:05 AM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity. It's really not really a debate except on the fringes where uneducated people think they can opine hard enough to overcome mountains of actual evidence.
That said, I'm personally in favor of carbon taxes and a forced march to clean and renewable energy for reasons that would still be valid even if climate change weren't real. Political and economic power derive from control of resources, and the most important resource in the modern global economy is energy. Decentralized energy generation using renewable resources disrupts the monopoly of existing power structures. Those powers do anything that crosses their mind in order to sabotage any attempt to disrupt that monopoly, which is ethically bad, but more importantly, their activities induce widespread cultural conservatism by fostering popular thinking that new ideas are dangerous or unsound simply because they are new. That leaves human civilization in a really bad position with respect to adaptability and progress of all kinds. We should have solved all kinds of problems by now that are portrayed as "unsolvable" just because solving them doesn't make anyone rich. Capitalism may have been necessary for the Industrial Revolution, but post-Information-Revolution, it's holding us back so much that the survival of the species is at risk.
So regardless of global warming/climate change, we should be forcing the issue of clean energy because we have to undermine and ultimately disassemble all scarcity-based economic systems.
THIS!
Also, ditto. May I yoink?
Quote from: LMNO on November 13, 2017, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2017, 07:28:05 AM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity. It's really not really a debate except on the fringes where uneducated people think they can opine hard enough to overcome mountains of actual evidence.
That said, I'm personally in favor of carbon taxes and a forced march to clean and renewable energy for reasons that would still be valid even if climate change weren't real. Political and economic power derive from control of resources, and the most important resource in the modern global economy is energy. Decentralized energy generation using renewable resources disrupts the monopoly of existing power structures. Those powers do anything that crosses their mind in order to sabotage any attempt to disrupt that monopoly, which is ethically bad, but more importantly, their activities induce widespread cultural conservatism by fostering popular thinking that new ideas are dangerous or unsound simply because they are new. That leaves human civilization in a really bad position with respect to adaptability and progress of all kinds. We should have solved all kinds of problems by now that are portrayed as "unsolvable" just because solving them doesn't make anyone rich. Capitalism may have been necessary for the Industrial Revolution, but post-Information-Revolution, it's holding us back so much that the survival of the species is at risk.
So regardless of global warming/climate change, we should be forcing the issue of clean energy because we have to undermine and ultimately disassemble all scarcity-based economic systems.
THIS!
Also, ditto. May I yoink?
yoink at your discretion, attribution not necessary
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity. It's really not really a debate except on the fringes where uneducated people think they can opine hard enough to overcome mountains of actual evidence.
That said, I'm personally in favor of carbon taxes and a forced march to clean and renewable energy for reasons that would still be valid even if climate change weren't real. Political and economic power derive from control of resources, and the most important resource in the modern global economy is energy. Decentralized energy generation using renewable resources disrupts the monopoly of existing power structures. Those powers do anything that crosses their mind in order to sabotage any attempt to disrupt that monopoly, which is ethically bad, but more importantly, their activities induce widespread cultural conservatism by fostering popular thinking that new ideas are dangerous or unsound simply because they are new. That leaves human civilization in a really bad position with respect to adaptability and progress of all kinds. We should have solved all kinds of problems by now that are portrayed as "unsolvable" just because solving them doesn't make anyone rich. Capitalism may have been necessary for the Industrial Revolution, but post-Information-Revolution, it's holding us back so much that the survival of the species is at risk.
So regardless of global warming/climate change, we should be forcing the issue of clean energy because we have to undermine and ultimately disassemble all scarcity-based economic systems.
Well thought out, and well written. Bravo!
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2017, 07:28:05 AM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity.
This is better phrased as "the scientific consensus is agreement that human activity is responsible (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change)".
Quote from: Pope Pelvis Flirtini on November 20, 2017, 11:37:06 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on November 13, 2017, 07:28:05 AM
Quote from: tyrannosaurus vex on November 12, 2017, 07:14:32 PM
Climate change is a real phenomenon that has been shown repeatedly, scientifically and mathematically, to be caused primarily by human activity.
This is better phrased as "the scientific consensus is agreement that human activity is responsible (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change)".
you're bad this.