Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Funny how you never argue the science.. Afraid you've already lost that argument? The denialist answer seems to be, "we don't care; we just want to root out commies". AGW and communism are not mutually inclusive. That's just propaganda.Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see the downfall of capitalism.IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution schemeyou haven't proven that proponents of AGW are communists or wish the downfall of capitalism.
6. How will Obama's promises to raid America's treasury and pass it on to the globalists attack capitalism?
Where do you suppose he'll get the money?
Effectively, the global warming scam is an international version of Coward-Piven:
a. "TheCloward–Piven strategyis a political strategy outlined in 1966 byAmericansociologists and political activistsRichard Clowardand Frances Fox Piventhat called for overloading theU.S. public welfare systemin order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual incomeand thus an end to poverty." Cloward–Piven strategy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
b. ".... the demand arose from developing countries that the economically advanced countries had permanently impaired the under-developed countries and that the $100 billion compensation fund that President Obama had promised to raise for the less-advanced countries was completely inadequate,..." How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun
c. "Three years ago, President Obama helped create a United Nations Green Slush Fund that would redistribute over $100 billion from developed countries to developing countries. While he has been racking up huge deficits and talking up tax increases, [Obama] has already sent billions of American taxpayer dollars to the United Nations –..."
Obama Quietly Funnels BILLIONS To UN For ‘Global Warming’
Bankrupting the system is the aim.
The free-market system.
While both facts may be true, neither answers my question.CO2 makes up .039% of the atmosphere. It was at that same level millions of years ago. You are a victim of left wing lies and data manipulation.If you expect me to believe that, you're going to have a natural explanation for where the increased CO2 in the atmosphere is coming from.the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, it will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now, the acts of humans have never had anything to do with it.
I am anticipating him joining the UN in some capacity where he can really do damage. Imagine, him being made head of the UN?There is money to be made by Obama and friends of green energy when Obama leaves office.
I'm sure Obama will end up being connected to some climate change company that
benefits from a democrat in the WH pushing Climate change and taxpayer $ to Obama's firm.
I am anticipating him joining the UN in some capacity where he can really do damage. Imagine, him being made head of the UN?There is money to be made by Obama and friends of green energy when Obama leaves office.
I'm sure Obama will end up being connected to some climate change company that
benefits from a democrat in the WH pushing Climate change and taxpayer $ to Obama's firm.
Not possible? I think that is more probable than impossible.
Climate-Change advocates want to accomplish 3 primary goals:Students of geo-political history know why.
Here, the prologue to this story:
1. In the Iron Curtain countries, where there were no constitutional democracies and no private property rights, the central planning ethic could be fully realized; the results have been shown to be catastrophic.
The principles of the American republic produced prosperity based on private property and individualism, and constitutional restrictions on the power of the government.
The principles behind both environmentalism, and of the former Soviet Union are based on ending private property rights, and making the collective all powerful, what Robespierre would call ‘the general will.’
Which actually advances the greater good?
a. "Collectivization (1929-33) was the opening and defining phase of Stalin's untrammelled power: it was the first thing he did the moment his hands were free. As a crime against humanity it eclipses the Great Terror,...During Collectivization Stalin is reckoned to have killed about 4 million children. For the man himself, though, and for the man's psychology, the most salient feature of Collectivization was the abysmal depth, and gigantic reach, of its failure.....
Martin Amis, "Koba, The Dread"
b. "...the State 'has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State... for the right of the world spirit is above all special privileges.'" Author/historian William Shirer, quoting Georg Hegel in his The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1959, page 144)
2. When the Soviet Union fell, many fellow travelers migrated to the environmental movement. So much so, that the movement is often referred to as the ‘Watermelon Movement:" green on the outside, red on the inside.
a. It is no accident that April 22, Earth Day, is also the birth date of Vladimir Lenin, an acolyte of Karl Marx, the lunatic who invented communism as an alternative to capitalism. Earth Day is naked communism. To begin, it substitutes a worship of the Earth, Gaia, for the worship of God, creator of the universe and the instructor of moral behavior for mankind. The Earth does not demand a moral code of personal behavior. While America was established to ensure “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, environmentalism exists to exert more and more control over our lives by limiting our choices, our liberty.
Warning Signs: The Naked Communism of Earth Day
Warning Signs: The Naked Communism of Earth Day
3. Communism is international socialism. And so is the United Nations: it was the brain-child of Joseph Stalin. He used his influence over Franklin Roosevelt, and his spy, Alger Hiss to set it in motion.
"A young American diplomat wasthe leading force in the designing of the United Nations. He was secretary of the Dumbarten Oaks Conversations from August to October of 1944 where most of the preliminaryplanning for the U.N.was done.
He wasRoosevelt's right-hand man in February of 1945 at Yalta where the postwar boundaries of Europe were drawn(Roosevelt was a dying man at the time. His death came only ten weeks later).
At Yalta it was agreed that theSoviet Union would have three votes (one each for Russia, Ukraine, and Byelorussia) in the U.N. General Assembly, even though the United States had only one.At Yalta much of Europe was placed under the iron heel of communist rule. At Yalta, Churchill, Roosevelt, andStalin appointed this young diplomatic shining star to be the first Secretary-general of the U.N.for the founding conference held in San Francisco,April/June of 1945.
All of this seemed well and good until three years later.Alger Hisswas exposed as a communist spy...."
What The U.N. Doesn't Want You To Know
What The U.N. Doesn't Want You To Know
And the force behind Global Warming today? The United Nations.
While both facts may be true, neither answers my question.CO2 makes up .039% of the atmosphere. It was at that same level millions of years ago. You are a victim of left wing lies and data manipulation.If you expect me to believe that, you're going to have a natural explanation for where the increased CO2 in the atmosphere is coming from.the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, it will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now, the acts of humans have never had anything to do with it.
I am anticipating him joining the UN in some capacity where he can really do damage. Imagine, him being made head of the UN?There is money to be made by Obama and friends of green energy when Obama leaves office.
I'm sure Obama will end up being connected to some climate change company that
benefits from a democrat in the WH pushing Climate change and taxpayer $ to Obama's firm.
Not possible? I think that is more probable than impossible.
While both facts may be true, neither answers my question.CO2 makes up .039% of the atmosphere. It was at that same level millions of years ago. You are a victim of left wing lies and data manipulation.If you expect me to believe that, you're going to have a natural explanation for where the increased CO2 in the atmosphere is coming from.the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, it will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now, the acts of humans have never had anything to do with it.
Saying it was that way in the past isn't sufficient. You have to tell us WHY it has increased. Just because there was one cause in the past, doesn't mean we couldn't have a different cause now. The sun does have a major effect on the climate, but it's not the only contributor.the answer to your question is that there isn't an increase in CO2 as a result of the actions of humans. Do you understand that its the same today as millions of years ago? The climate of planet earth is controlled by the sun, the tilt of earth's axis, and ocean current variations. Man has nothing to do with it, never has, never will.
Saying it was that way in the past isn't sufficient. You have to tell us WHY it has increased. Just because there was one cause in the past, doesn't mean we couldn't have a different cause now. The sun does have a major effect on the climate, but it's not the only contributor.the answer to your question is that there isn't an increase in CO2 as a result of the actions of humans. Do you understand that its the same today as millions of years ago? The climate of planet earth is controlled by the sun, the tilt of earth's axis, and ocean current variations. Man has nothing to do with it, never has, never will.
What does that have to do with whether AGW is real or not. Have you given up discussing the science? Why is that? Your analysis of the political controversy has nothing whatsoever to do with the underlying questions. You can connect all the dots you want to "prove" your political point, but it's all moot if you can't explain why we're seeing a rise in GHGs and explain how we escape the Law of Conservation of Energy.OK, fine, lets use a different angle...................how many countries in the world are representative republics like we are? Got that number, do you? Now then, how many nations are in the UN? Of those nations in the UN, what % of them are socialist, or democratic socialist societies? And Socialism most closely resembles what kind of government? And there you have it, we are being controlled by Mercedes Marxists calling themselves Socialists, AKA enviro fanatics!
at least now we know it was always a liberal cause (trojan horse).
i'm concerned good people are afraid to voice their opinions, because they are in fear of being ridiculed or labeled.
One more time. You're in DENIAL. It's a basic tenet that even skeptics accept. The questions among honest skeptics are: is it enough to make a difference and how long will it take to see a really measurable effect?OK, one more time. The level of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere has NOT increased. They are lying to you.
What does that have to do with whether AGW is real or not. Have you given up discussing the science? Why is that? Your analysis of the political controversy has nothing whatsoever to do with the underlying questions. You can connect all the dots you want to "prove" your political point, but it's all moot if you can't explain why we're seeing a rise in GHGs and explain how we escape the Law of Conservation of Energy.OK, fine, lets use a different angle...................how many countries in the world are representative republics like we are? Got that number, do you? Now then, how many nations are in the UN? Of those nations in the UN, what % of them are socialist, or democratic socialist societies? And Socialism most closely resembles what kind of government? And there you have it, we are being controlled by Mercedes Marxists calling themselves Socialists, AKA enviro fanatics!
One more time. You're in DENIAL. It's a basic tenet that even skeptics accept. The questions among honest skeptics are: is it enough to make a difference and how long will it take to see a really measurable effect?OK, one more time. The level of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere has NOT increased. They are lying to you.
One more time. You're in DENIAL. It's a basic tenet that even skeptics accept. The questions among honest skeptics are: is it enough to make a difference and how long will it take to see a really measurable effect?OK, one more time. The level of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere has NOT increased. They are lying to you.
the climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, it will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now, the acts of humans have never had anything to do with it.
If you libs need a cause to rally behind, take on pollution. That's a real problem the needs to be addressed.
BTW, pollution does not cause climate change, pollution causes polluted air and water.
i respectfully disagree, no one tells me what to do. which i like a lot about America. can't have that anywhere else... maybe canada....... (not quebec).....All governments control their citizens to some extent. That doesn't make them communistic.wanting to control the actions of citizens is a communist doctrine. The end result of the AGW cult is control of human activity.Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see the downfall of capitalism.IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme
i think thethe climate of planet earth has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, it will be changing hundreds of millions of years from now, the acts of humans have never had anything to do with it.
If you libs need a cause to rally behind, take on pollution. That's a real problem the needs to be addressed.
BTW, pollution does not cause climate change, pollution causes polluted air and water.
i respectfully disagree, no one tells me what to do.All governments control their citizens to some extent. That doesn't make them communistic.wanting to control the actions of citizens is a communist doctrine. The end result of the AGW cult is control of human activity.Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see the downfall of capitalism.IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme
One more time. You're in DENIAL. It's a basic tenet that even skeptics accept. The questions among honest skeptics are: is it enough to make a difference and how long will it take to see a really measurable effect?OK, one more time. The level of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere has NOT increased. They are lying to you.
the prophet Algore said that the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014 and that florida would be under water. Hmmmmmmm, but you still believe him, right? Fla really is under water and its just a right wing conspiracy saying it is not.
One more time. You're in DENIAL. It's a basic tenet that even skeptics accept. The questions among honest skeptics are: is it enough to make a difference and how long will it take to see a really measurable effect?OK, one more time. The level of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere has NOT increased. They are lying to you.
the prophet Algore said that the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014 and that florida would be under water. Hmmmmmmm, but you still believe him, right? Fla really is under water and its just a right wing conspiracy saying it is not.
