Why is Obama So Invested in 'Global Warming?

[PoliticalChic]

So, in support of an alien political philosophy, Obama plans give $ billions

But there are even some capitalists in the Democrat Party!

7. It turned out that, in a pro-America 'dead-cat bounce,' even Democrats refused to go along with the racket [agreed to at Copenhagen, 2009]:

"...the $100 billion compensation fund that President Obama had promised to raise for the less-advanced countries was completely inadequate, mere reparations instead of a serious response to a moral debt that could only be quantified in trillions of dollars.

Mr. Obama had no takers, including his own Congress, when his Democrats controlled it, for one cent of such payments."
How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun



8. "Furthermore, knowing that Obama was no more than a lying wind-bag, " Mr. Obama was unable even to get an interview with the Chinese prime minister, [*]a historic first in lack of access for a U.S. president, as the Chinese, by far the greatest carbon emitter and polluter of all countries, cheekily set themselves at the head of the G-77 countries who with cupped hands and in stentorian voice, demanded immense monetary compensation for the sins of the carbon emitters, also led by themselves."
Ibid.


[*] ?

 

[gipper]

The mere fact that many on the elite progressive Left and their followers, are pushing AGW, while many on the right do not accept it, should indicate AGW is nothing more than a political effort. One would think all Americans would consider this fact.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The mere fact that many on the elite progressive Left and their followers, are pushing AGW, while many on the right do not accept it, should indicate AGW is nothing more than a political effort. One would think all Americans would consider this fact.

And more and more are.

 

[washamericom]

you haven't proven that proponents of AGW are communists or wish the downfall of capitalism.

IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme

Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see 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.

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.

how 'bout you two people (in your avatar) argue "the science". i don't think either of you know much about the subject.

 

[washamericom]

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.

but it has the most effect, and is the biggest unknown variable. first warmalist i've heard to give the sun some overdo credit.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Steyer. Hooks him up with a bunch of greenie stuff and gets paid off after leaves office.

 

[washamericom]

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?

it's a basic tenet even skeptics accept ? what does that even mean ? why are we skeptics, if we agree ? you argue well, armed with your debate skill(s) and expertise...

 

[PoliticalChic]

you haven't proven that proponents of AGW are communists or wish the downfall of capitalism.

IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme

Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see 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.

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.

9. Time to sink your boat:


Looks like the grandiose plan for world governance is slipping away, as truth prevails:

a. " The world’s temperature has risen approximately one half of a centigrade degree, or almost one Fahrenheit degree, in 35 years. There has been minimal global warming for 18 years, though carbon emissions in the world have steadily increased throughout that period.

b. It is indisputable that the world has been warmer several times in its history than it is now, so whatever impact man may have on it, the world’s temperature is evidently subject to fluctuations for other reasons.

c. There is also legitimate disagreement about the consequences of such warming as might occur. Recent research at the University of Sussex, widely recognized for its expertise in this field, indicates that warming up to 3.5 centigrade degrees from where we are now would have no appreciable impact on anything, except a positive impact where increased volumes of carbon dioxide increase arable area and make crops more drought-resistant.

d. ... a good deal of reciprocally corroborating research in different countries by recognized experts that uniformly demonstrates that the world’s temperature is much less sensitive than had long been feared to increased carbon use.
Apocalyptic statements of imminent consequences of not reducing carbon use have been fairly thoroughly debunked. "
How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun

 

[imawhosure]

you haven't proven that proponents of AGW are communists or wish the downfall of capitalism.

IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme

Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see 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.

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.

9. Time to sink your boat:


Looks like the grandiose plan for world governance is slipping away, as truth prevails:

a. " The world’s temperature has risen approximately one half of a centigrade degree, or almost one Fahrenheit degree, in 35 years. There has been minimal global warming for 18 years, though carbon emissions in the world have steadily increased throughout that period.

b. It is indisputable that the world has been warmer several times in its history than it is now, so whatever impact man may have on it, the world’s temperature is evidently subject to fluctuations for other reasons.

c. There is also legitimate disagreement about the consequences of such warming as might occur. Recent research at the University of Sussex, widely recognized for its expertise in this field, indicates that warming up to 3.5 centigrade degrees from where we are now would have no appreciable impact on anything, except a positive impact where increased volumes of carbon dioxide increase arable area and make crops more drought-resistant.

d. ... a good deal of reciprocally corroborating research in different countries by recognized experts that uniformly demonstrates that the world’s temperature is much less sensitive than had long been feared to increased carbon use.
Apocalyptic statements of imminent consequences of not reducing carbon use have been fairly thoroughly debunked. "
How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun

PC, I am concerned that people on both sides get disagreeing facts, or studies. How can we debate something when we can't even agree upon what is actually going on in the 1st place?

Is the temperature going up? Ask that question, and every lefty on this board is going to give you a graph that says it is; and yet other studies say it is not, and in fact, is cooling. It has been totally amazing to me that the study came out that the leftists actually agreed with that global warming had stopped for over 10 years, and they couldn't figure it out.

Low and behold within 3 months, ON THIS SITE NO LESS, we had a far leftist post that the hottest year on record was 2014. That thread went on, and on, and on! Just a few months before, they were all down in the dumps because their religion was proven scientifically to be........shall we say..........phony baloney, lol. And then a few months later, there they are back proclaiming we are all burning up in 2014!

How can this happen? One extreme to the other. And, with even scientists now showing skepticism with no temp change, you would think SOME of them would ask questions themselves, but no, all still on board.

Komrade or Conrade, or whatever his name is missed the boat, and YOU got it right for sure! This debate is NOT about science, it honestly is all about politics. They can NOT prove their theory, so you have to BELIEVE in the premise, and then they can fleece you, lol. Is that why we named Obysmal messiah? Because he is like a high priest, chanting, talking, chirping, driving his minions into a frenzy, lol. Oh well, what do you expect, he was a community organizer, and that is probably why the left despises Trump so much; they see a whole bunch of getting the people moving, just like Obama did!

 

[PoliticalChic]

IPCC admitted Climate Change was a wealth redistribution scheme

Even if I accepted that statement, it still isn't communism or a wish to see 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.

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.

9. Time to sink your boat:


Looks like the grandiose plan for world governance is slipping away, as truth prevails:

a. " The world’s temperature has risen approximately one half of a centigrade degree, or almost one Fahrenheit degree, in 35 years. There has been minimal global warming for 18 years, though carbon emissions in the world have steadily increased throughout that period.

b. It is indisputable that the world has been warmer several times in its history than it is now, so whatever impact man may have on it, the world’s temperature is evidently subject to fluctuations for other reasons.

c. There is also legitimate disagreement about the consequences of such warming as might occur. Recent research at the University of Sussex, widely recognized for its expertise in this field, indicates that warming up to 3.5 centigrade degrees from where we are now would have no appreciable impact on anything, except a positive impact where increased volumes of carbon dioxide increase arable area and make crops more drought-resistant.

d. ... a good deal of reciprocally corroborating research in different countries by recognized experts that uniformly demonstrates that the world’s temperature is much less sensitive than had long been feared to increased carbon use.
Apocalyptic statements of imminent consequences of not reducing carbon use have been fairly thoroughly debunked. "
How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun

PC, I am concerned that people on both sides get disagreeing facts, or studies. How can we debate something when we can't even agree upon what is actually going on in the 1st place?

Is the temperature going up? Ask that question, and every lefty on this board is going to give you a graph that says it is; and yet other studies say it is not, and in fact, is cooling. It has been totally amazing to me that the study came out that the leftists actually agreed with that global warming had stopped for over 10 years, and they couldn't figure it out.

Low and behold within 3 months, ON THIS SITE NO LESS, we had a far leftist post that the hottest year on record was 2014. That thread went on, and on, and on! Just a few months before, they were all down in the dumps because their religion was proven scientifically to be........shall we say..........phony baloney, lol. And then a few months later, there they are back proclaiming we are all burning up in 2014!

How can this happen? One extreme to the other. And, with even scientists now showing skepticism with no temp change, you would think SOME of them would ask questions themselves, but no, all still on board.

Komrade or Conrade, or whatever his name is missed the boat, and YOU got it right for sure! This debate is NOT about science, it honestly is all about politics. They can NOT prove their theory, so you have to BELIEVE in the premise, and then they can fleece you, lol. Is that why we named Obysmal messiah? Because he is like a high priest, chanting, talking, chirping, driving his minions into a frenzy, lol. Oh well, what do you expect, he was a community organizer, and that is probably why the left despises Trump so much; they see a whole bunch of getting the people moving, just like Obama did!

You are right to be concerned.

A century of Progressivism, control of the schools and the media....
....hard to overcome.

Even in the face of absolute proof that global warming is a lie.


This sort of proof:

a. In academia, truth has fallen in priority to ideology, also known as the ‘greater truth’ of pre-formed conclusions. A case in point is climate change. Normal science discovers facts, and then constructs a theory from those facts. ‘Post-modern science’ starts with a theory that is politically sensitive, and then makes up facts to influence opinion in its favor.

b. Mike Hulme is Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia (UEA), [http://mikehulme.org/] and was good enough to reveal the truth in the Guardian, 2007:
“…this particular mode of scientific activity… has been labelled "post-normal" science. Climate change seems to fall in this category. Disputes in post-normal science focus as often on the process of science - who gets funded, who evaluates quality, who has the ear of policy - as on the facts of science…. Self-evidently dangerous climate change will not emerge from a normal scientific process of truth seeking,… scientists - and politicians - must trade (normal) truth for influence.

If scientists want to remain listened to, to bear influence on policy, they must recognise the social limits of their truth seeking and reveal fully the values and beliefs they bring to their scientific activity…. Climate change is too important to be left to scientists - least of all the normal ones.” The appliance of science.

¬ So global warming theory did not seek to establish the truth through evidence. Instead, truth had to be traded for influence: scientists presented beliefs as a basis for policy. The shame: science has been junked in the interest of promoting ideological conviction.

c. The leading proponents of ‘post-normal science,’ PNS, Funtowicz and Ravetz, have written that, in issue-driven science, ‘facts’ and ‘values’ are unified by replacing ‘truth’ by ‘quality.’
http://www.ecoeco.org/pdf/pstnormsc.pdf


¬Thus, we have a doctrine of mandated intellectual mendacity.


But we can't defeat them: it's simply too late.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And, to prove how meaningless the conference and the entire hoax is.....the biggest polluters are letting the cat out of the bag:

10. " China and India, the two most populous countries and the first and third carbon emitters, .... don’t attach the slightest credence to the alarmist comments of the more strident ecologists, other than as an excuse for demanding monetary compensation for how the economically leading countries have disadvantaged them.


The International Energy Agency estimates that the underdeveloped countries as a group, will emit 70 per cent of the carbon output of the world in the next 15 years, and will be responsible for all of the increase in carbon use over that time.



....Obama has called the Paris conference a “historic turning point,” but it isn’t, and claimed (in February) that climate change was a greater problem than terrorism. He and John Kerry (secretary of state), have several times called it the world’s greatest problem.

This is bunk.

Alternate sources of energy, such as wind and solar, are hideously more expensive and much less productive, ...." How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun

 

[imawhosure]

Well, where is our resident socialist Konradv? I want to educate him a little-)

So Konradv, what do you think of this, and there is a ton more where this came from-) EDITORIAL: Al Gore, soothsayer

Now this Vice President was the great genius on climate change. He has won great awards, heralded for his TRUTHFUL (cough-cough) movie, for which he was heralded throughout Europe, and the United States. Oh yes, it has made him filthy rich, but none of his predictions came true, lol. The only thing that went up was his bank account to the tune over 200 million bucks. He now rides in stretch limos all the time, but what the heck, right-)

Would you like me to start posting what the brilliant European scientists have predicted over the last 50 years? And you believe them, lolololol!

 

[PoliticalChic]

11. " ... the Obama administration is demanding an involuntary international verification mechanism (much more rigorous than what it settled for in the rather more urgent matter of Iranian nuclear military development), .... The developing countries, led by China and India, refuse, unless they are solemnly promised a $100 billion a year climate fund, as Obama imprudently pledged at Copenhagen.

What seems to have happened is that the international far left, having been decisively routed with the collapse of the Soviet Union and of international communism, has attached itself to the environmental movement, usurped the leading positions in it from the bird-watching, butterfly-collecting, and conservation organizations, and is carrying on its anti-capitalist and anarchist crusade behind the cover of eco-Armageddonism.



While this has been rather skillfully executed, many office-holders and aspirants, including Mr. Obama, have used dire environmental scenarios to distract their electorates from their own policy failures, much as Arab powers have long diluted anger at despotic misgovernment by harping on the red herring of Israel." How the Post-Soviet Left Latched Onto the Climate For Crusade on Capitalism - The New York Sun



Again?
"... that the international far left, having been decisively routed with the collapse of the Soviet Union and of international communism, has attached itself to the environmental movement,...."

Exactly as explained in the OP.