Ian Plimer: Global warming a damp squib

[†Craig†]

Ian Plimer: Global warming a damp squib | The Australian

[mcclane]

"So what really does Greenpeace want? A habitable environment with no humans left to inhabit it? Destruction of the major economies for .07C change?"

That is a point I've made, and I strongly believe that is the ultimate agenda/goal for environmentalists, erradication of the human species to preserve the earth. We can all see the signs, banning DDT, high food prices, and blaming obese people for global warming.

And that 2nd point, that is how they are destroying society, by claiming a change in temps (+/-) is totally bad for the earth, and we are seeing the consequences of that, riots and people starving to death.

[†Craig†]

Ian Plimer is a lecturer of one of my best friends at the University of Adelaide...one of the big 5 (the 5 most prominent, oldest and richest universities in Australia!)

[AEGeneral]

You know....this statement is brilliant in its simplicity:

"Greenpeace, contrary to scientific data, implies a static planet."

So where exactly is this "perfect planet?" Where is that perfect state where the climate is exactly where Greenpeace et al think it should be?

I'll tell you where it is: it's at the perfect temperature to lie naked in a daisy field, smoke pot & listen to Jimi Hendrix.

More accurately, it's the perfect "climate" for a world-wide Woodstock Festival at all latitudes and longitudes.

Read between the lines of all of this for a moment. Does the idea of a "static planet" -- one where all climatic conditions are perfect -- resemble something familiar? Something like, I don't know....the political objectives of communists world-wide?

The idea of a static planet -- an environmental utopia -- bears a striking resemblance to the idea of political utopia that communists hold dear to their hearts. It's an idealistic world with no class system, no work, an all-powerful and yet generous state that provides for the needs of all, while all of us are in full harmony with nature (or Mary Jane, in most cases).

So while communists always wished for the coming of a political messiah to make right all that is wrong, environmentalists wait for the same.

If Al Gore is all they've got, they're in for a rude awakening. Maybe they've got their hopes pinned on someone else to be their "green messiah."

[mcclane]

Originally Posted by AEGeneral

You know....this statement is brilliant in its simplicity:

"Greenpeace, contrary to scientific data, implies a static planet."

So where exactly is this "perfect planet?" Where is that perfect state where the climate is exactly where Greenpeace et al think it should be?

I'll tell you where it is: it's at the perfect temperature to lie naked in a daisy field, smoke pot & listen to Jimi Hendrix.

More accurately, it's the perfect "climate" for a world-wide Woodstock Festival at all latitudes and longitudes.

Read between the lines of all of this for a moment. Does the idea of a "static planet" -- one where all climatic conditions are perfect -- resemble something familiar? Something like, I don't know....the political objectives of communists world-wide?

The idea of a static planet -- an environmental utopia -- bears a striking resemblance to the idea of political utopia that communists hold dear to their hearts. It's an idealistic world with no class system, no work, an all-powerful and yet generous state that provides for the needs of all, while all of us are in full harmony with nature (or Mary Jane, in most cases).

So while communists always wished for the coming of a political messiah to make right all that is wrong, environmentalists wait for the same.

If Al Gore is all they've got, they're in for a rude awakening. Maybe they've got their hopes pinned on someone else to be their "green messiah."

man oh man, if the environmentalists are hoping for something like that, I suggest they put their clothes back on and give up that stuff they're smoking.

[†Craig†]

The Reds are back it seems, I knew hey were hiding.