Global Warming is over.

[mrsleeve]

Thanks nando

and No I dont frequent the heartland, I just question impartiality of anything tied to Soros in anyway.

[rwh11385]

Thanks nando

and No I dont frequent the heartland, I just question impartiality of anything tied to Soros in anyway.

Well, you yourself are far from impartial due to the fact that you work in oil and gas. Do you really think that green tech companies really have that much clout or money to corrupt the world with biased information compared to 8 of the 11 largest companies in the world by revenues are all oil and gas...

You might not frequent heartland, but the many of George's contributions are from them - whether he realizes he is posting their articles from Forbes or not.

As biased as media matters may be, it's not like they were paid to conduct "scientific research" to prove that second hand smoke was not harmful. Hence, people making fun of your statement that a more biased organization did not exist. Even if you don't frequent Heartland, your bold claim was inaccurate.

[mrsleeve]

While there may be equally biased sources from opposing view points, calling anything at all tied to Mr Soros as credible is about as accurate as calling the heartland unbiased as well. And if you dont think there is not clout and money behind the green move movement please rethink that.

Yes I work in the oil and gas sector, I can apply my trade in many many other industries other than that though, from manufacturing to bridge building. Oil and gas companies are our biggest customers, and where the money is for us right now though.

[rwh11385]

as to your last question, its a bit of a catch 22, no?
outlaw developing countries from using fossil fuel based electricity, and the flip side is permanent poverty, disease and pollution. how does the UN/USA/IPCC morally condemn millions to that future? how do you tell obama's brother that he can't have a light bulb?

Actually, the best thing the world can do for the developing world is make them a sustainable toilet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/facts.../en/index.html

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs330/en/index.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/16/business/la-fi-tn-bill-gates-reinvent-the-toilet-save-the-world-20120815

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/15/us-gatesfoundation-toilets-idUSBRE87E01K20120815

His foundation announced $3.4 million in new funding on Tuesday for toilet projects being worked on by various organizations, bringing total investment in its "Reinvent the Toilet Challenge" to about $6.5 million.

About 2.6 billion people, or 40 percent of world's population -- mostly in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia -- lack access to safe sanitation and are forced to defecate in the open, according to Gates.

Likewise, the best thing for developing countries electricity-wise is to have renewable energy that can enable them to have light even if they don't have access to the grid because, well, it doesn't exist. It is very unhealthy for Africans to use kerosene lamps in enclosed places and it is very costly, so a sustainable light that is solar, or even gravity powered, can help them be healthy and grow and develop much more than copying our third-world infrastructure and basing their future on finite resources that will grow in price over time instead of basing it on resources that are free and infinite.

http://www.fastcoexist.com/1681067/a-5-light-for-the-developing-world-with-an-ingenious-fuel-gravity

But you can keep on making poor arguments based on ignorance, because that's the only thing you have done thus far, but it doesn't mean that burning fossils is the road to development in the third world.

Micro-financing solar panels is growing in India, but really, toilets are probably the most crucial thing for the third world as far as health and disease going... and this also would cut the need for water if the system was closed and sustainable.

The close-minded nature of yourself that using all these uneducated assumptions and arguments to defend the industries that lobby your political leaning is not what is going to help these people.

[rwh11385]

While there may be equally biased sources from opposing view points, calling anything at all tied to Mr Soros as credible is about as accurate as calling the heartland unbiased as well. And if you dont think there is not clout and money behind the green move movement please rethink that.

Yes I work in the oil and gas sector, I can apply my trade in many many other industries other than that though, from manufacturing to bridge building. Oil and gas companies are our biggest customers, and where the money is for us right now though.

So why did you try to make the claim that media matters is vastly more biased than heartland? Both shouldn't be used as sources. That's the point.

I didn't say green movement, I said green tech companies. There is quite a difference.

Regardless of other industries you could work, it is in your best interest to defend oil and gas, and their interpretation of facts and science.

[Cliche Guevara]

While there may be equally biased sources from opposing view points, calling anything at all tied to Mr Soros as credible is about as accurate as calling the heartland unbiased as well. And if you dont think there is not clout and money behind the green move movement please rethink that.

You cannot compare the link I posted (which popped up on reddit) to the institutions behind the "scientific" studies that deny climate change. They're simply in a completely different realm.

[mrsleeve]

You have no idea how correct you are

[gwb72tii]

You cannot compare the link I posted (which popped up on reddit) to the institutions behind the "scientific" studies that deny climate change. They're simply in a completely different realm.

this post shows your ignorance of the money and politics behind anthropogenic global warming
ROFL

hint
do some reddit or google soros and the tides foundation. what you're going to find, if you care to be objective, is eye opening.

[cale]

As someone who provides some of the most questionable and laughable links this site has ever seen you'd be better off sitting this one out. Or do you enjoy condemning someone for doing the exact same thing you do?

[mrsleeve]

So we are in agreement on the Cuban revolutionary then

[cale]

I didn't even look at his link, I just don't think gwb has any ground to stand on to make fun of someone's link for it being of questionable bias.

[Cliche Guevara]

this post shows your ignorance of the money and politics behind anthropogenic global warming
ROFL

Alright, let me explain to you how they're different. My article examines the cash flow of the climate change deniers and comes from a liberal source that agrees with anthropogenic climate change. They are not involved with the scientific content in any way. The studies it refers to are funded by institutions that have a financial stake in whether or not humans are causing climate change. You see the difference? One is a liberal pointing out a problem with climate change deniers and the other is a conservative funding research with the intent of getting results that benefits them financially. Huge. Fucking. Difference.

hint
do some reddit or google soros and the tides foundation. what you're going to find, if you care to be objective, is eye opening.

I'm a bit confused. I've never payed any attention to George Soros and just assumed he was a rich, crazy liberal with some dubious connections I should be concerned about. That's all I hear about him from conservatives, anyway, and I've never been bother to learn anything else about him. After reading his wiki page it appears that he made a bunch of money in the financial sector, has donated billions of it to fight poverty in Africa, help with education, and to various liberal groups, and that he played a pivotal role in helping Hungary transition from communism to capitalism. He seems like a rich liberal who donates a shit-ton of money to a lot of causes, some of which being liberal institutions. Tell me what I'm missing.

[Cliche Guevara]

I didn't even look at his link, I just don't think gwb has any ground to stand on to make fun of someone's link for it being of questionable bias.

The thing is, if I'm looking to post something related to the science of global warming I would never go to places like Media Matters. The only thing that pertained to was the nefarious ties that deniers have. The problem for them is that the only place they have to go for studies that deny climate change are conservative institutions funded by businesses that have a financial state in anthropogenic climate change being false.

[mrsleeve]

And the warmistis have just as many seedy and nefarious ties (if not more so) and agenda as well, this is a case of Pot meet Kettle

Alright, let me explain to you how they're different. My article examines the cash flow of the climate change deniers and comes from a liberal source that agrees with anthropogenic climate change. They are not involved with the scientific content in any way. The studies it refers to are funded by institutions that have a financial stake in whether or not humans are causing climate change. You see the difference? One is a liberal pointing out a problem with climate change deniers and the other is a conservative funding research with the intent of getting results that benefits them financially. Huge. Fucking. Difference.


I'm a bit confused. I've never payed any attention to George Soros and just assumed he was a rich, crazy liberal with some dubious connections I should be concerned about. That's all I hear about him from conservatives, anyway, and I've never been bother to learn anything else about him. After reading his wiki page it appears that he made a bunch of money in the financial sector, has donated billions of it to fight poverty in Africa, help with education, and to various liberal groups, and that he played a pivotal role in helping Hungary transition from communism to capitalism. He seems like a rich liberal who donates a shit-ton of money to a lot of causes, some of which being liberal institutions. Tell me what I'm missing.

Ummm We are using wiki as a source ?? You need to do way more digging and watch is his interviews on 60min and IIRC in the mid to late 90s on a simialr Canadian program.

Few of the high points Jewish Nazi Collaborator, that feels no remorse for his deeds (his words not mine)

has a self described god complex (again his words not mine)

and while your learning, why dont you find out why hes known as the Destroyer of Nations, The UK and couple of SE asian nations will clue you in, some even want him in prison for economic terrorism. Remember the god complex he gets his rocks off on destroying countries.

[cale]

And the warmistis have just as many seedy and nefarious ties (if not more so) and agenda as well, this is a case of Pot meet Kettle

Care to share these with us? I'd love to see more recycled content that's already been debunked