Comments on: No real climate deal in Copenhagen, but no end to the threat of one http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/ Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:44:58 +0000 hourly 1 By: garret seinen http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2338 garret seinen Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:11:54 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2338 I agree wholeheartedly. I only know of one voice of sanity at Copenhagen, Vaclav Klaus. I know you don't need it but this is a comment I left with a columnist for the National Post. What follows is my answer to Lorne's question in his second paragraph, 'why the activists are not more unhappy with the outcome at Copenhagen'? There is a very good reason the greens are not upset about the outcome of the Copenhagen fiasco. They won. Despite overwhelming information discrediting their case for global control trough CO2 vilification, not one national leader called their bluff. As well, the major players sat quietly through the rants of Mugabe and Chavez. None even rejected the idea of global welfare scheme and global control, they just didn't put hard numbers to it. So promising nothing tangible is a 'win' for people that deserve to be told the emperor's clothes are vapor wear. Our leaders did us no favors,- they just milked us for funds and silently condoned the scam of the century. I agree wholeheartedly. I only know of one voice of sanity at Copenhagen, Vaclav Klaus. I know you don’t need it but this is a comment I left with a columnist for the National Post.
What follows is my answer to Lorne’s question in his second paragraph, ‘why the activists are not more unhappy with the outcome at Copenhagen’?
There is a very good reason the greens are not upset about the outcome of the Copenhagen fiasco. They won.
Despite overwhelming information discrediting their case for global control trough CO2 vilification, not one national leader called their bluff. As well, the major players sat quietly through the rants of Mugabe and Chavez. None even rejected the idea of global welfare scheme and global control, they just didn’t put hard numbers to it.
So promising nothing tangible is a ‘win’ for people that deserve to be told the emperor’s clothes are vapor wear. Our leaders did us no favors,- they just milked us for funds and silently condoned the scam of the century.

]]> By: Dennison http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2300 Dennison Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:02:34 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2300 Well said, and an angle that I had not considered despite it being obviously a shake-down. Thanks. Well said, and an angle that I had not considered despite it being obviously a shake-down. Thanks.

]]> By: Chris Rath http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2258 Chris Rath Fri, 25 Dec 2009 10:52:51 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2258 Will $100 billion be in real terms a million dollars after massive inflation has destroyed objective values of global currencies without the gold standard? is it a myth that scientific control of weather for the good is overlooked by the global warmists who claim man is evil for his industrialisation which changes the climate for the worse? Will $100 billion be in real terms a million dollars after massive inflation has destroyed objective values of global currencies without the gold standard? is it a myth that scientific control of weather for the good is overlooked by the global warmists who claim
man is evil for his industrialisation which changes the climate for the worse?

]]> By: Scotty Stevens http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2245 Scotty Stevens Tue, 22 Dec 2009 21:46:55 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2245 Here, here. Good article. We need to fight this, because the more contracts the idiots in charge of our nations sign on our behalf, the more mess we will have to deal with when we eventually take our nations back from these idiots. Here, here. Good article. We need to fight this, because the more contracts the idiots in charge of our nations sign on our behalf, the more mess we will have to deal with when we eventually take our nations back from these idiots.

]]> By: Lionell Griffith http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2244 Lionell Griffith Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:16:29 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2244 If you ask me, the world is like a cartoon in which the coyote is tricked by the road runner to run past the edge of the cliff. He remains suspended in mid air until he realizes he is not standing on solid earth. Then and only then does he fall. The coyote survives the fall. It is an open question that the peoples of the earth will survive the fall. The horrifying thing is that the so called world leaders actually want the fall to happen and have no actual concern about surviving the event. They expect to survive "somehow". The edge of the cliff is behind us. There is no general realization that our current social/political/intellectual position is firmly grounded upon a centuries long fraud. The fall is in process and well advanced. Only the general recognition of the cause of that fall is in doubt. If you ask me, the world is like a cartoon in which the coyote is tricked by the road runner to run past the edge of the cliff. He remains suspended in mid air until he realizes he is not standing on solid earth. Then and only then does he fall. The coyote survives the fall. It is an open question that the peoples of the earth will survive the fall. The horrifying thing is that the so called world leaders actually want the fall to happen and have no actual concern about surviving the event. They expect to survive “somehow”.

The edge of the cliff is behind us. There is no general realization that our current social/political/intellectual position is firmly grounded upon a centuries long fraud. The fall is in process and well advanced. Only the general recognition of the cause of that fall is in doubt.

]]> By: Lou Mazza http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/no-real-climate-deal-in-copenhagen-but-no-end-to-the-threat-of-one/comment-page-1/#comment-2242 Lou Mazza Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:16:46 +0000 http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/?p=5101#comment-2242 Keith, you're spot on. I've read your articles, "Climate Vulnerability and the Indispensable Value of Industrial Capitalism" and "The Green Energy Fantasy," and I watched the video "A Critique of Climate Change Science and Policy," and I thank you for the research you've done, the effort you put into writing/creating them and the courage you have to post them. To undo almost forty years of environmentalist propaganda would be a much easier task if the dominant philosophy in America was not altruistic. Government-mandated and (ultimately) special-interest-group-created school curriculums that have indoctrinated American children and young adults since public education was established in this county are a major force in spreading this philosophy, and are, collectively, the most effective tool environmentalists could have hoped for to perpetuate their propaganda. I am 45 years old, and I still remember reading a history book in grade school in the early 1970s that espoused the virtue of President F. D. Roosevelt's New Deal, which was purported to have saved the country from economic disaster. I can only imagine what more recently-written textbooks have to say about such government-sponsored redistributions of wealth—and how they handle environmental issues. Further, public education is not designed to train minds to abstract or conceptualize; children are not taught to critically evaluate facts to form their own conclusions, but are given ready-made conclusions divorced from facts and reality (such as my previous textbook example of Roosevelt’s New Deal saving the country, which was merely the socialist author’s opinion). Rote memorization is the norm, not critical thinking. For a comparison of what a task this is, consider that 85% of Americans describe themselves as being affiliated with a religion. 15% describe themselves as not being affiliated with any religion, but only 1.6% of that 15% describe themselves as atheists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism). Believing in a supernatural power without evidence of its existence is mysticism. Mysticism is a form of irrationality, and the overwhelming majority of Americans are mystics. Before they are fully formed, young minds are stunted by guilt and fear in a society that perpetuates the monstrosity of original sin and eternal torture for those who question the existence of supernatural beings—beings who divine for humans, with their limited and impotent intelligence, to suffer through miserable, guilt-laden lives with the promise of a post-life existence in some incomprehensible paradise as compensation. Now, if such a vast majority of Americans hold to their religious beliefs in the most productive, industrialized, materialistic society on earth with the highest standard of living in the world knowing that their religions demand that they shun the desire for material possessions and material comforts as sinful, they live with a gigantic contradiction that they refuse to resolve. How can one expect to hold a rational, objective conversation with such mystics, let alone convince them that there is no scientific basis for the current claims of human-caused climate change that will lead to the end of life on earth when they don’t require scientific proof for their more fundamental beliefs? Keith, you’re spot on. I’ve read your articles, “Climate Vulnerability and the Indispensable Value of Industrial Capitalism” and “The Green Energy Fantasy,” and I watched the video “A Critique of Climate Change Science and Policy,” and I thank you for the research you’ve done, the effort you put into writing/creating them and the courage you have to post them.
To undo almost forty years of environmentalist propaganda would be a much easier task if the dominant philosophy in America was not altruistic. Government-mandated and (ultimately) special-interest-group-created school curriculums that have indoctrinated American children and young adults since public education was established in this county are a major force in spreading this philosophy, and are, collectively, the most effective tool environmentalists could have hoped for to perpetuate their propaganda. I am 45 years old, and I still remember reading a history book in grade school in the early 1970s that espoused the virtue of President F. D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, which was purported to have saved the country from economic disaster. I can only imagine what more recently-written textbooks have to say about such government-sponsored redistributions of wealth—and how they handle environmental issues. Further, public education is not designed to train minds to abstract or conceptualize; children are not taught to critically evaluate facts to form their own conclusions, but are given ready-made conclusions divorced from facts and reality (such as my previous textbook example of Roosevelt’s New Deal saving the country, which was merely the socialist author’s opinion). Rote memorization is the norm, not critical thinking.
For a comparison of what a task this is, consider that 85% of Americans describe themselves as being affiliated with a religion. 15% describe themselves as not being affiliated with any religion, but only 1.6% of that 15% describe themselves as atheists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism). Believing in a supernatural power without evidence of its existence is mysticism. Mysticism is a form of irrationality, and the overwhelming majority of Americans are mystics. Before they are fully formed, young minds are stunted by guilt and fear in a society that perpetuates the monstrosity of original sin and eternal torture for those who question the existence of supernatural beings—beings who divine for humans, with their limited and impotent intelligence, to suffer through miserable, guilt-laden lives with the promise of a post-life existence in some incomprehensible paradise as compensation. Now, if such a vast majority of Americans hold to their religious beliefs in the most productive, industrialized, materialistic society on earth with the highest standard of living in the world knowing that their religions demand that they shun the desire for material possessions and material comforts as sinful, they live with a gigantic contradiction that they refuse to resolve.
How can one expect to hold a rational, objective conversation with such mystics, let alone convince them that there is no scientific basis for the current claims of human-caused climate change that will lead to the end of life on earth when they don’t require scientific proof for their more fundamental beliefs?

]]>