Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 133. (Read 636456 times)

Global warming will bring fast, clumsy spiders
The fluid that controls their limb movement can't keep up with the high speeds that come with high temperatures, a study finds.

One major downside of global warming? Spiders. So many spiders.

Previous studies have suggested that warmer weather may mean more spiders overall (and bigger ones, at that) and may make poisonous species more common as more and more regions fit their temperature preferences.

But apparently we have to worry about them getting fast and clumsy, too. Is a fast and clumsy spider better than a slow, methodical spider? Unclear. Both sound terrible....

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/04/07/warm-up-to-bring-clumsy-spiders/

Think Progress: Culprit Causing Global Warming? “Surgical Anesthesia”…






http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/07/3643995/anesthesia-gases-contribute-to-climate-change/

It's pretty much a fact that a fair amount of money was put into figuring out how to sterilize women with vaccines in the early 90's.  The technique is moderately clever; make a woman have antibodies to a hormone necessary to sustain a pregnancy.  With a property sequenced series a woman can be made permanently sterile.

The documentation describing the research showed a fair amount of excitement at the fact that the technique showed no obvious impacts other than being unable to maintain a pregnancy.  Menstruation and such was normal.  It was not explicitly stated, but this obviously opened the possibility for the system to be employed covertly.  According to some, the UN wasted no time in putting the system into action and did some programs the Philippines and Central America.  They happened to sterilize a Filipino MD who wanted to have a kid and she figured things out.  They seem to have taken a rest for several decades, but the propensity for malevolence can only be suppressed for so long.  Fast-forward to the recent kerfuffle in Kenya.  It looks damn suspicious to me.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/mass-sterilization-kenyan-doctors-find-anti-fertility-agent-in-un-tetanus-vaccine/5431664

Now one may classify the thought that anyone would actually used the technique covertly as some sort of a wild conspiracy theory, but to believe that there was a significant effort put into something which nobody even had any expectation of ever using makes no sense.  As per the conversations of Figueres, Dalton, and a great many other 'thought leaders' in the 'sustainability' movement, tamping down the scourge of human pestilence has been a fixation for some for a long time.  And these people seem to bubble to the top of the movement somehow.

There are other reasons to limit populations in the spheres of influence.  A chief one is that we in the U.S. tend to maintain control over our resource producing holdings in Africa, Asia, and Central America by installing and supporting fairly disgusting leaderships.  A higher population means more risk that a uprising will unseat our chosen strongmen.

Eugenics is nothing especially new anywhere including here in the U.S.  The eugenicists here re-branded themselves and tuned their messenging significantly after Hitler, or more accurately our war propaganda against his regime, gave the movement a black eye.  But they certainly didn't disappear. 

Joe Sixpack, when he thinks about the issue at all, has the natural conception that eugenics would be used to select 'better' people.  Maybe back in the day this was the goal, but in reality the last thing a leadership needs is smart and strong people.  They present a significant threat and are harder to milk, manage, and put to work.  I would expect modern eugenics to mirror the paradigms used by farmers in building a herd of cattle with the appropriate size and disposition to maximize profit and minimize risk.  (A leading cause of death in my area a few generations ago were 'jersey bulls'.)  Once one is designing 'herd immunity' one might as well be doing the same for 'herd fertility' and other herd behaviors.

In fact we went through a period of relative freedom where a giant middle and upper-middle class here in the U.S. accumulated quite a lot of wealth which they now sit on.  The wealth itself a juicy prize, and those individuals (and to a lesser extent, their progeny) with the dispossession to achieve this are also not the ideal in terms of desired herd mentality.  A clever social engineer would figure out a way to reduce fertility amongt this class while separating them from their wealth at the same time.  Seems to me that the cost of education, and the cost of health care and the shear number of people getting sick happens to be achieving this.

Anyway, I think that most of the 'social justice warrior' class are complicit out of shear ignorance.  Even people elevated to the high levels of the movement are focused on their pet projects and not seeing the bigger picture.  That does not absolve them of ultimate responsibility for the actions that are occurring however.

ITT: non-scientist assclowns parroting oil industry propaganda, such as "climate change is not caused by humans, it's a natural cycle!"



Sci Show - Climate Change

Climate One founder Greg Dalton and the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) Christiana Figueres, held a discussion in 2013 on the role of women in fighting Global Warming.

During the interview Secretary Figueres stated, We should should “make every effort,” to reduce the world’s population in an effort to fight Climate Change:

DALTON: A related issue is fertility rates in population. A lot of people in energy and environmental circles don’t wanna go near that because it’s politically charged. It’s not their issue. But isn’t it true that stopping the rise of the population would be one of the biggest levers and driving the rise of green house gases?

FIGUERES: I mean we all know that we expect nine billion, right, by 2050. So, yes, obviously less people would exert less pressure on the natural resources.

DALTON: So is nine billion a forgone conclusion? That’s like baked in, done, no way to change that?

FIGUERES: Well there again, there is pressure in the system to go toward that; we can definitely change those, right? We can definitely change those numbers and really should make every effort to change those numbers because we are already, today, already exceeding the planet’s planetary carrying capacity, today. To say nothing of adding more population that is really going to overextend our capacity. So yes we should do everything possible. But we cannot fall into the very simplistic opinion of saying just by curtailing population then we’ve solved the problem. It is not either/or, it is an and/also.


http://www.progressivestoday.com/un-climate-official-we-should-make-every-effort-to-decrease-world-population-video/



------------------------------------------------------
You hear it directly from the mouth of the beast. The agenda is clear. And it does NOT include her or anyone she knows, love or work with...

But we (as in anyone she does not know exist, even the humans who agree with her) should clear up the planet by dying quickly...

We shall DENY her that "right" by breathing as long as we can, just like her.


 

White House: Global Warming ‘Deniers’ Shouldn’t Have A Say On UN Treaty

White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that senators who “deny” man-made global warming probably shouldn’t have any say over an international agreement to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

“Well these are individuals whom, many of whom at least, deny the fact that climate change even exists,” Earnest said when asked by a reporter. “So I’m not sure they would be in the best position to decide whether or not a climate change agreement is one that is worth entering into.”

http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/01/white-house-global-warming-deniers-shouldnt-have-a-say-on-un-treaty/

I spent a fair number of years in Bristol Bay, Alaska commercial fishing in the summers.  The Indigenous Peoples (tm) also have a right to be warm when they wish to be and the government brings fuel oil in by the barge full to facilitate this.

Said peoples also have a right to modern medical care which, of course, is only practical in the larger population centers hundreds or thousands of miles away.  People tend to get a pain in the elbow when they run low on supplies.  They take their shopping bags with them when they go to see the doctor.  Stopping at the doctor's office is something of a formality.

  Native: "It hurts when I do this: "
  Doc: "Don't do that.  See you in a few months."

Needless to say these provisioning of rights happens at government expense.  Alaska has a ton of money from fossil fuels so it's not like the funds come from taxpayers especially.  It's distributed throughout the userbase of fossil fuels generally.  The indigenous people's who are being such tools of the environmental movement may find themselves regretting their support when this revenue stream dries up.  When more local people see the direct impact of the various kinds of inefficiency and abuse (taxes, resource contention, etc) they may be more incline to push back a bit.

Yes that 'lady' at the UN said that much. It was never about making the planet better for everyone.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm

http://www.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-figueres-first-time-the-world-economy-is-transformed-intentionally

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/un-s-top-climate-official-goal-intentionally-transform-economic-0



Why can't the Inuits, for example, exploit all the natural resources they have on their land and become as rich as they can?

Instead you get this "Don't be like us! We are evil! Stay the way you are. Forever!" patronizing message from all of those so called green planet lovers, flying all over the world, non stop, to save Earth from ourselves...








 

Let's be clear about one thing.  There is something that the "advanced nations" are marketing to the third world, to ignorant people of the world, and undeveloped and underdeveloped nations.

The ability of the "Advanced nations" to control weather, to control the future of the world, and the type of climate a particular region will get.

Clearly, this is a message that underdeveloped nations should suck up to and heed, or face the consequences.

I would guess just looking at a bikini could be a cause of micro aggression for her and her whole culture...

 

Let me guess.

She wouldn't look good in one of those bikinis that Global Warming would bring to her villages?

Canadian Activist Claims Global Warming Violating Arctic-Dwelling Inuit’s “Right To Be Cold”…




Perhaps no Canadian has done as much for the people of the Arctic than Sheila Watt-Cloutier. In her new memoir The Right to be Cold she articulates her vision for protecting the North from the ravages of global warming. In this interview with Peter Robb she talks about the meaning behind the title of her book.

Q. What is the Right to be cold?

A. Inuit culture is based on the ice, the snow and the cold. It’s very foundation depends on the climate being cold … freezing cold. The animals and the Inuit hunting culture thrive on the cold. Therefore when the climate changes and/or warms it creates an imbalance to the cycles of nature which allow for all living things to be healthy and thriving. The ice, snow and cold in the Arctic are all about transportation and mobility. Therefore when the conditions become precarious as a result of the melting, it becomes an issue of safety and security. Then our right to culture, our right to educate our children on the land, our right to safety, our right to health all become impacted by these rapid changes. In essence our Right to exist as Inuit as we know it is impacted. As we defend our Right To Be Cold, the outgrowth of our efforts also defend the Right for all citizens of the world to have a healthy environment and a stable climate.

Q. Do you consider yourself to be an Environmentalist?

A. I do not consider myself to be an Environmentalist in the commonly known definition. I came in to this work as a elected official of the Inuit Circumpolar Council to represent our people, the Inuit of the Circumpolar world, at the international level. It was a political mandate much like a Foreign Affairs minister in a federal system would have in representing Canadians. I worked, as ICC officials work, to ensure Arctic/Inuit voices are heard at the UN level, Arctic Council level and many other forums to help negotiate international treaties. Our Indigenous organizations work as quasi-political organizations even though we are classified as NGOs.


http://ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/books/q-and-a-sheila-watt-cloutier-seeks-some-cold-comfort

Executive orders that hit peoples' pocketbooks would be resisted.

OBAMA PLANS 'EXECUTIVE ORDER' FOR UN CLIMATE RULES






http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/us/obama-to-offer-major-blueprint-on-climate-change.html

I would not be concerned with anything on the propaganda site, Grist.com, because their webpage hits are so low as to be insignificant.

Meanwhile the relatively fair and unbiased climate site,

wattsupwiththat.com

...has about a quarter million hits per month.

While I can see the point behind the statement, taking it literally obviously wouldn't make any sense. That would be like penalizing anyone who has bought processed meat for the inhumane treatment of animals - yes, it happens - no, you're not responsible for it (at least not in a macroscopic sense).

Just curious.  Aren't there thousands of those fucking bishops?

And 17 have made it to Hell Gore.

Anglican Bishops Apologize For Climate Change: “We’ve Been Complicit In A Theology Of Domination”…





Climate change is the “most urgent” moral issue facing humanity, according to a group of 17 Anglican bishops, calling on the church’s 85 million-strong followers to take action.

The bishops, from Africa, Asia, Europe, Australia and the Americas, say they have been “complicit in a theology of domination” that has seen environmental degradation ignored.

Writing ahead of the most important Christian festival of the year, Easter, they urge fellow Anglicans to push for an ambitious UN climate deal in Paris later this year.

They also commit their own dioceses to divest from fossil fuels, invest in renewable energy and take energy conservation measures in church buildings.

“In the words of St Theresa of Avila, we are God’s hands and feet on earth – now is the time for us, rooted in prayer, to step up and take action on the climate crisis,” said the archbishop of Cape Town and primate of southern Africa, Thabo Makgoba.[…]

Although climate scientists have for many years warned of the consequences of inaction there is an alarming lack of global agreement about the way forward. We believe that the problem is spiritual as well as economic, scientific and political, because the roadblock to effective action relates to basic existential issues of how human life is framed and valued: including the competing moral claims of present and future generations, human versus non-human interests, and how the lifestyle of wealthy countries is to be balanced against the basic needs of the developing world. For this reason the Church must urgently find its collective moral voice.


http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/30/anglican-bishops-lead-holy-week-call-for-global-climate-action/

The "naming of terrorist groups" and the use of those names in US propaganda seems to be very fluid right now, as Obama is operating with motives in the Middle East that have neither been stated or understood.  That is continuing.  I suspect as the media follows his path they simply make things up but have no direction from his organization.  At least it looks that way.

Most commonly the appearance of total chaos indicates that, really, there is total chaos.