UN Embarrassed by Forecast on Climate Refugees for 2010

[GreecePwns]

Just in case you think I am taking this topic seriously, this is all a big political tool, IMHO. Don't know if it's true, but I have heard that any significant volcanic eruption has release more CO2 than all of man kind in history.

Natural sources of carbon dioxide are more than 20 times greater than sources due to human activity,

source cited: http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/climate/

It's 20 times greater because, well, they've been around just a bit longer.

[Mr_Adams]

It's an annual statistic, not overall.

[radiojake]

Wealth redistribution? What is the poor getting from a cap on greenhouse gas emissions?

Rich nations who have polluted more than their fair share of pollution have to send money to third world countries since we have irreparably harmed them. That's wealth redistribution.

Nightstrike, if I read your crap on about wealth redistribution one more time I think I am going to have some sort of seizure. I can not explain how much of a moron you are, and you are clearly a deluded fuckstick with little knowledge of the power structures of the economy and just where exactly much of the wealth is first produced.

Most of the developing world has had their resources exploited and appropriated by Western Countries - This has been going on for centuries - Using the earliest example that I can think of, more than 25,000,000 tonnes of silver has been shipped from South America to Europe since the 16th century. This was on the back of Indian and African slave labour and then South America did not see one cent of that wealth, the European conquerors took that wealth.

All power and wealth is mired in a history of exploitation - Rich does not exist without the existence of poor. This above example is just the first and earliest example I could think of at this stage. You have been duped by some fucked up conspiracy about wealth redistribution is all about taking your money and giving it to lazy bums elsewhere. McCarthy would have loved having you as his little bitch to re-spout his scare mongering.

While I don't agree with much of Scotty's ideas and posts, atleast he isn't a fucking moron dueche bag flapping on about inane shit that you do so constantly.

[Night Strike]

Until the liberal politicians quit saying the rich have to pay their "fair share" of taxes while 45% of the country pays $0 in taxes, I will continue to spout my "inane shit" because it's demonstrably NOT inane. I'm sorry that I don't buy into your beliefs that everyone must have equal amounts of money and to have everyone else provide anything else they need. This country was founded on the complete opposite of that principle, and I choose to stand by that principle.

[Mr_Adams]

This country was founded on the complete opposite of that principle, and I choose to stand by that principle.

Now, in all fairness, one of the original puritan colonies attempted to form a commune... and gave up on the idea when it failed. Religious zealots couldn't make it work, what makes people think a country with no external, supernatural, motivator can?

[john9blue]

All power and wealth is mired in a history of exploitation - Rich does not exist without the existence of poor.

or

OR

rich and poor are relative terms, since modern middle class people live lives about as comfortable as those of the ancient ruling class, maybe even moreso.

so the question becomes, which economic system allows for the greatest advancements of technology and overall standard of living? do you think the answer to that is wealth distribution as well?

[john9blue]

Good god, you are stupid.

so logical! so reasonable! all posters should aspire to make eloquent, informed arguments like this, and not instantly rage at others whenever their preconceived biases are called into question by science.

[Neoteny]

Good god, you are stupid.

so logical! so reasonable! all posters should aspire to make eloquent, informed arguments like this, and not instantly rage at others whenever their preconceived biases are called into question by science.

Yes, because my history of arguing with you lunatics while you make shit up and flail about into batshitcrazyville with your spun out perceptions of reality means I can't dismiss out of hand whatever fuzzy, random, and nonsensical nuggets of pseudoscience and distortion you have and always will tout as blatant facts. I'm not going to constantly treat your bankrupt meanderings as worth my time just because you have come up with a novel way to shit on human progress. Until you mooks can demonstrate you have the intellectual capacity to operate on at least an nineteenth century mindset, I'm not going to waste my time yelling at the brick wall that is the modern conservative movement.

f*ck.

[InkL0sed]

All you do, john9blue, is bitch about how everyone who disagrees with you is always either hypocritical, idiotic, illogical, or somehow intellectually dishonest, while contrasting them with yourself: you, who are Intelligent, Reasonable, and Logical.

And yet I can't remember ever seeing you debate a point yourself without dismissing the people who disagree with you. I can't remember you ever actually debating a point with real facts.

Ever.

[Army of GOD]

[radiojake]

I'm sorry that I don't buy into your beliefs that everyone must have equal amounts of money and to have everyone else provide anything else they need. This country was founded on the complete opposite of that principle, and I choose to stand by that principle.

Your country (as was mine) was also founded with the explicit use of slave labour, upsurption of indigenous lands and the creation of an underclass - What I am trying to say is that the current distribution of wealth has not been spread through 'level' or 'free' means, despite the catch cries of what the 'free' market provides.

I don't think that everyone should have 'equal amounts' of money - I am just asking for a recognition of the fact that current accumalations of wealth have been built on exploitation of others; First through outright slavery, then through 'economic slavery', where the labourer is forced to sell his/her time/effort to live, while the capital owner accumalates more wealth off the back of that labour.

I can understand why you would be so 'pro-capitalism' because we (in the first world) are more often than not on the 'winning side' of the exploitation, to the point (like johnblue pointed out) that our middle classes would pass for the elite in poorer countries. We've been duped into apathy by gadgets that seduce and distract, while our relative opulence is based on the back of others hard work.

I guess we are breaking down in communication for the most part because we swap between domestic and international politics. Your point about the US taxation system has nothing to do with me and I don't pretend to know enough about that. But I first responded to your 'wealth redistribution' remark in regards to a world wide context.

I have a problem with capitalism not only because of the disparity of wealth within our own countries (although it is there) but more so on a world wide context -

[Iliad]

Until the liberal politicians quit saying the rich have to pay their "fair share" of taxes while 45% of the country pays $0 in taxes, I will continue to spout my "inane shit" because it's demonstrably NOT inane. I'm sorry that I don't buy into your beliefs that everyone must have equal amounts of money and to have everyone else provide anything else they need. This country was founded on the complete opposite of that principle, and I choose to stand by that principle.

Firstly you know full well that is political spin. The 45% do not pay anything in federal income tax, but as you so much love to complain there are plenty more taxes. Also you know you're turning a blind eye to the fact that the rich have an exorbinant amount of money.

Look at that bottom 40 percent. It has maybe 5% of the wealth.

Also nice strawman, but progressive taxes is not the same as communism and the rich are still not paying their fair share of taxes. Since about the 70's the income and wealth of the rich ahs been escalating, as the income of the middle class remained the same and the middle class was eroded.

You will shriek about class warfare when instructed to, but the truth is the class warfare hs been easily won by the rich. The wealth distribution you so much love to disparage is always happening, and it's very much mostly happening up.

[rdsrds2120]

I love how we're still talking about the UN and Global Warming . Warms me heart. If you fellas want to talk about political stuff, at least try to relate it to the topic.

-rd

[Night Strike]

I love how we're still talking about the UN and Global Warming . Warms me heart. If you fellas want to talk about political stuff, at least try to relate it to the topic.

-rd

We are, as the UN's policies on global warming are designed to push money around, not to actually help the environment.

[joe snuffy]

Global Warming is nothing but a cash cow for the green movement.

[Mr_Adams]

This is an off topic post, just for Night Strike.

[GreecePwns]

Until the liberal politicians quit saying the rich have to pay their "fair share" of taxes while 45% of the country pays $0 in taxes, I will continue to spout my "inane shit" because it's demonstrably NOT inane. I'm sorry that I don't buy into your beliefs that everyone must have equal amounts of money and to have everyone else provide anything else they need. This country was founded on the complete opposite of that principle, and I choose to stand by that principle.

This has nothing to do with anything we've talked about and is, as demonstrated by Iliad, false.

List me, my friend, these principles, since apparently they're relevant to environmental protection, or, in your speak, hippie leftist overthrow of capitalism altogether.

You know, Marx wants you to have this knee jerk reaction toward communism. It only makes his argument stronger.

[natty dread]

Global warming? It's not happening! It's not! No no no no no!

[john9blue]

All you do, john9blue, is bitch about how everyone who disagrees with you is always either hypocritical, idiotic, illogical, or somehow intellectually dishonest, while contrasting them with yourself: you, who are Intelligent, Reasonable, and Logical.

And yet I can't remember ever seeing you debate a point yourself without dismissing the people who disagree with you. I can't remember you ever actually debating a point with real facts.

Ever.

...except i believe in global warming bro, so there's no disagreement, and if there was you can bet that i would actually try to make a reasonable argument. most people would ignore it, of course, which is why i make less and less of an effort nowadays.

i simply called neo out (in a passive-aggressive way) for being an irrational jerk.

Good god, you are stupid.

so logical! so reasonable! all posters should aspire to make eloquent, informed arguments like this, and not instantly rage at others whenever their preconceived biases are called into question by science.

Yes, because my history of arguing with you lunatics while you make shit up and flail about into batshitcrazyville with your spun out perceptions of reality means I can't dismiss out of hand whatever fuzzy, random, and nonsensical nuggets of pseudoscience and distortion you have and always will tout as blatant facts. I'm not going to constantly treat your bankrupt meanderings as worth my time just because you have come up with a novel way to shit on human progress. Until you mooks can demonstrate you have the intellectual capacity to operate on at least an nineteenth century mindset, I'm not going to waste my time yelling at the brick wall that is the modern conservative movement.

f*ck.

you jumped to a conclusion pretty quickly there. how's it feel to have everyone on the forum sorted into two convenient categories, so you know whether to automatically agree or disagree with them regardless of post content? man, i wish my worldview was that simple. must be nice.

[firsal901]

they were wrong


The UN made a wrong forecast

[Neoteny]

All you do, john9blue, is bitch about how everyone who disagrees with you is always either hypocritical, idiotic, illogical, or somehow intellectually dishonest, while contrasting them with yourself: you, who are Intelligent, Reasonable, and Logical.

And yet I can't remember ever seeing you debate a point yourself without dismissing the people who disagree with you. I can't remember you ever actually debating a point with real facts.

Ever.

...except i believe in global warming bro, so there's no disagreement, and if there was you can bet that i would actually try to make a reasonable argument. most people would ignore it, of course, which is why i make less and less of an effort nowadays.

i simply called neo out (in a passive-aggressive way) for doing the exact same thing I'm doing.

I bet you think it makes you a centrist too.

you jumped to a conclusion pretty quickly there. how's it feel to have everyone on the forum sorted into two convenient categories, so you know whether to automatically agree or disagree with them regardless of post content? man, i wish my worldview was that simple. must be nice.

Three types, actually. People who have demonstrated capacity for rational thought (tgd, for example), people willing to say anything to convince others they are wrong, and people too new to file into those two categories. They're rather broad categories, so they're pretty inclusive. People outside of those are treated accordingly. When someone actually has something new to say, I will consider it, but there's a whole lot of the same old shit going on in this thread, especially your holier-than-you whining.

[john9blue]

well i'm probably never going to change your mind about that regardless of what i do. i will usually contribute to a thread if i have something "new" to say, but people like you who have preconceived notions about me will hardly even care as long as i'm the person saying it.

and you say "centrist" like it's a bad thing, when have i ever bragged about being a centrist? lol

i'm not sure where you guys are getting this image of me being a stuck-up know-it-all... i will never start troll-responding to someone who wants to have a serious discussion (like you and many others with your worldview do). whatever label you have to give me to avoid the issues, though.

[Phatscotty]

Thing is, oil companies have spent huge amounts of money to spread misinformation about global warming, like that it doesn't exist or can't be proven. They have bribed and bought numerous scientists, covered up information, etc. The whole global warming thing is bad PR for them, so of course they try to downplay it as much as they can - hey, who cares what happens to the planet, as long as the company can make some more quick money?

Therefore, every time you speak against global warming, you're perpetuating the lies spread by oil companies. You're in fact acting as their sock puppet, knowingly or unknowingly.

it seems to me that the prediction of 50 million climate refugees in 2010 turned out to be the misinformation.....no?

[Phatscotty]

Global "Warming" and "Cooling" are starting to become outdated terms. It's being replaced with "Climate Change". Anywho, on another note, Phatscotty, saying that the UN being wrong about a prediction discredits a whole concept is inaccurate. For example, if I predicted that raining made everyone in my neighborhood go inside, but some or all stayed out, that wouldn't mean I had lied about the fact that it's raining.

-rd

I understand that the name of the theory being pumped needs to be changed, but not because of incorrect information!

facts have a way of making theories "outdated"

[Phatscotty]

Wealth redistribution? What is the poor getting from a cap on greenhouse gas emissions?

Rich nations who have polluted more than their fair share of pollution have to send money to third world countries since we have irreparably harmed them. That's wealth redistribution.

Nightstrike, if I read your crap on about wealth redistribution one more time I think I am going to have some sort of seizure. I can not explain how much of a moron you are, and you are clearly a deluded fuckstick with little knowledge of the power structures of the economy and just where exactly much of the wealth is first produced.

Most of the developing world has had their resources exploited and appropriated by Western Countries - This has been going on for centuries - Using the earliest example that I can think of, more than 25,000,000 tonnes of silver has been shipped from South America to Europe since the 16th century. This was on the back of Indian and African slave labour and then South America did not see one cent of that wealth, the European conquerors took that wealth.

All power and wealth is mired in a history of exploitation - Rich does not exist without the existence of poor. This above example is just the first and earliest example I could think of at this stage. You have been duped by some fucked up conspiracy about wealth redistribution is all about taking your money and giving it to lazy bums elsewhere. McCarthy would have loved having you as his little bitch to re-spout his scare mongering.

While I don't agree with much of Scotty's ideas and posts, atleast he isn't a fucking moron dueche bag flapping on about inane shit that you do so constantly.

Keep what ya earn