Can anyone doubt the religious overtones of this site?
I had the following conversation at http://suzukielders.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/were-doomed/
with another commenter name Eve.
Poor Eve, as you will read, she is experiencing considerable anxiety because of the things that AGW proponents and no doubt David Suzuki and his followers are telling her.
Eve thanks me for my words and direction to my site and feels relieved to find that at least not everyone supports David Suzuki and his followers.
However the owner of this particular site needed some prodding. At first Stan allowed me to communicate with Eve and then required some prodding to allow further comments that he personally disagreed with, and now has removed all of my comment.
So according to my promise, here is the entire conversation, with all the other comments and all my comments, except the very first and last, (addressed to Stan), intact.
Posted by Peggy Olive | 27 April, 2011, 6:21 am
Stan, I agree that I don’t see us getting back to 350 ppm, but watching this video (Martin Durkin’s The Great Global Warming Swindle, aired in the UK in 2007) might make you feel better, or maybe not. Apparently CO2 isn’t causing global warming. It’s sun activity, but there’s nothing we can do about that either.
I liked the occasional “elder” point of view in this video, but there was a lot of science to absorb. What worries me is how much politics (right and left) may drive our perceptions of the consensus on what’s causing climate change and whether we really can affect it. But even if the theory is wrong (not climate warming, but what’s causing it), it’s still right to develop clean, sustainable energy. It’s right to work to prevent oil spills and environmental contamination, and it’s right to preserve our forests, farmlands, and fresh water. And what is so terrible about having to “pay homage to the environment.” Environmentalists are called political activists in this video, denying cheap energy to the developing world, against economic growth, and attempting to use climate change to move their anti-capitalist philosophy forward. Alternatively, governments use climate change to create new wealth in investments and taxes. The video also quotes people who say that the idea of global warming is now “entrenched” and has gone beyond politics to become a new kind of morality. The story was meant to be reassuring, but I don’t feel reassured.
I’m a couple of years short of that 65 so perhaps my views are suspect. Yet I was just revising a file of climate change related articles I keep – which I had to play with as 2/3 of it vanished into the pixelverse -and agree with both previous commenters that pollution is the problem…and co2 isn’t it. Not that the likes of the blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, multiple reactor meltdown in Japan, and mountaintop mining aren’t plenty depressing enough !
Nope. It’s a hoax that is getting a lot of flack online as people realize just how ridiculous it is to say one can predict the future by predicting the past.
Not that climate isn’t changing. It always has.
Have a look
In the Topical Index find Climate in Contention. You could likely lose yourself in it for weeks sorting out the differences between those decrying ‘denying science’ and those saying ‘science would be a nice change!’
My stomach just sank…I have 4 grandchildren, 9-13 yrs old. Global Human Misery will be inflicted on them??? I shudder!! I have read alot of Doom & Gloom articles & books … this is the worst! What can be done to help them… HOW DOES ONE PREPARE THEM FOR THIS????
Posted by Roger (but later spammed)
It is all a huge porky designed to take money from all of us and make a few wealthy.
Check out my blog. http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com
The world has been hotter than this before including a number of times within history. There is no proof that we are to blame for this current warming and plenty of facts that disprove it.
Just help to make sure your grand children are well educated and able to think for themselves and they will be quite OK!
Roger-from-NewZealand…I have checked out your blog..it is re-assuring and fun to read.
Roger … Thanks for making me feel better. Yes my grandchildren will be well educated as they have great parents, (& a savy grandmother). They are very bright and the schools they are attending promote environmental causes. Since I have run the gamut of the doom & gloom authors, films, etc. I shall now look at the opposite views. Of course I will continue to do my part re pollution, etc. A family member just came back from Australia and he invested in an alternate fuel that they intend to market in the near future. According to him it does not pollute.
Posted by Roger (But later spammed)
Glad you enjoyed my blog.
Yes I absolutely agree we all should be devoted to caring for our planet and I hope that comes through clearly in my blog.
However we must be careful what we classify as a pollutant.
Although all the factual evidence I can find shows that it is unlikely that CO2 is, can or will make our planet heat up, there has been some very clever marketing/propaganda that labels CO2/carbon dioxide as a pollutant.
I do have a problem with this, as do most scientists, because CO2 is like water, it is the basis of life on earth and without it we will die.
Yes like water we can drown in it, if we get too much we will also die, but without it, ALL, life on this planet will cease.
Here are some facts which may be of interest to you.
A scientist untainted by the AGW lobby would say that a concentration of about 1,000ppmv would be beneficial to life on earth, this being the concentration that Glass House growers prefer, http://api.ning.com/files/X-APctmkiwvgEI5fT6iiGjWFvKNX*cWuzeO4qmDVbgA_/Greenhouses.CarbonDioxideInGreenhouses.pdf
Our exhaled breath is about 4500ppmv http://www.biotopics.co.uk/humans/inhaledexhaled.html
Up to 5000ppmv is acceptable for work places (American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists.).
Up to 3000ppmv for residences (Canadian exposure guideline for residential buildings)”
Medical oxygen has between 10,000 ppmv and 20,000 ppmv in it.
Currently our atmosphere has about 380 ppmv in it.
Furthermore, some scientists credit the extra CO2 in our atmosphere as the reason for our increased food production.
So my advice to you is to use whatever form of energy and food which conforms most closely with the contents of your wallet although for instance diesel vehicles that leave smoke and carbon particulates in the air that one can smell and taste, are still polluters to my way of thinking.
Stan needed a little prodding to publish the above but to his credit he did for a while. Although I did not record my next message which was addressed to him, I did appeal to his conviction, saying that if his beliefs were based on fact, any contrary views should not be a problem and his readers.
Then just to test him a little further and also test his knowledge about what he is supporting, I asked the question below.
Posted by Roger (But later spammed)
Do you know the answer to this question?
The IPCC has stated that the Greenland Icecap, if it melts completely, will cause sea levels to rise as much as 7 metres.
Can you tell me the time frame in which the IPCC suggests this event may happen?
ps yes I do know the answer and I can quote you the literature. This is just to test your knowledge.
The above proved too much for Stan and he spammed all of my comments after I prompted him to also publish the above.
I think it is natural that Eve is afraid of what is being predicted.
There is no other way to describe what Stan and the Suzuki Foundation are doing, except to call it pure and unadaulterated alarmism.
So very similar to the treatment of hell fire and damnation of yester-year.
In Eve’s case, along with much of world, she feels that her children and grandchildren are threatened and she is partly to blame.
I think that is one step up from hell fire and damnation actually! At least hell fire and damnation is directed primarily at the individual, not at the loved ones.
We have learned that once again, a site that could only be described as alarmist (in my opinion of the very worst kind), cannot stand a dissenting comment on his site. Neither is he able to find an answer for the question I gave him to test his knowledge and understanding of the IPCC conclusions. By spamming both of these comments, Stan has shown that he not only has no answer for facts that contradict what he believes and preaches, (and I agree there is no answer to verifiable facts anyway) but he cannot even look up the answer to a question tha,t at worst, would take a few minutes of googling IPCC documents.
Stan’s answer is to simply delete these from his blog and ignore the facts.
Hence once again I believe this shows that AGW IS becoming a religion.
To ignore facts, means that you must rely on “FAITH”.
From my early religious training I know that the word faith means to believe something without supporting facts, or in the face of facts which contradict the belief.
I am tolerant for peoples “faith” to a point, but when this “faith” starts translating to political activism and influencing politicians to also follow the dictates of the faith, which in turn translates not only to irresponsible use of our tax money , but to almost certain cataclysmic economic depression, I draw a very firm line.
Faith will not decide if the world is in danger from Anthropogenic Global Warming, rather it is likely to be the CAUSE OF ANY DANGER WE FACE!
Politicians will simply do whatever brings them their vote. It is up to us , the normal people, to act rationally and instruct our politicians in the correct course of action.
Eve if you see this, please feel free to comment and ask any further questions you may have.
By the way, the answer to the question I posed Stan above, can be found at http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-projections-of.html#table-spm-3
The IPCC, once one wades through the obscure language, says that it will take “millenia” for the Greenland ice cap to melt completely.
According to The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary millenia is the plural of millenium and therefore refers to a time of MORE than 2,000 years.
In otherwords the IPCC simply are guessing. Maybe it will take 5,000 years?
I leave the reader to do the arithmetic.
Either way it is difficult to take seriously that the IPCC really thinks that we are in any real danger from this source.