"we redistribute the world's wealth by climate policy"

The things they admit when they don't think you are paying attention.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/u-n-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-by-climate-policy/

More at the link.

Damn, that's a hell of a slip. Explains the CRU business, too.

Like I've always said, they may be green on the outside, but they're red to the core.

The type of faith needed to trust the government and the environmentalists is the same as any other religion. Especially when one considers the realization that data was fraudulent. How can anyone determine what is accurate or a lie?

I don't see how it's our fault if they don't or can't use available natural resources.

Maybe we should be giving them a percentage of every fish our fisherman catch? Or give dry a countries a water rebate for the unfair portion of rain that falls on ours?

Just think...if we ALL lived like that, we could just sit back and let the wealth from others come rolling in. Oh, wait...

Just wait, they'll claim it's "taken out of context" -- as if there even COULD BE a context that makes that statement mean anything other than what it sounds like.

Here it is in context and there is no other way to look at it:

Most statements that are that bald-faced fall into that territory. There just isn't any context which puts a different light on a statement that's that clear -- and that's why people who have those kinds of objectives usually don't make such clear statements.

The error lies in acting as if because one person supports a policy with a specific goal in mind, all people who support that policy have the same goal.

If the Aryan Nation advocates ending affirmative action as a preliminary step toward expelling all black people from the country, do you assume that everyone who wants to end affirmative action shares the same reason?

All you have to do to see the truth in this is look at the policies and the money schemes associated with what they've pulled or tried to pull so far.

I'm sure average Americans supporting this shit simply believe the lies they have been spoonfed and really mean well...but the IPCC and places like it...they know exactly what they are doing.

When it's a quote from someone in a position of leadership in regards to that movement, there is no error. Skin doesn't mind hitting the button here, but your line of reasoning would also hold that just because one Nazi wanted to exterminate Jews, that didn't mean that the Nazi Party didn't have exterminating Jews as one of their objectives -- conveniently overlooking the fact that that one Nazi was Adolf Hitler.

This guy isn't some tie-dyed t-shirt wearing activist chanting on a street corner.

It was vetrymuch in context and not entirely wrong. In the context of the sentence:

He's quite right.

How on earth would you deal with a situation where the rich nations are doing so much of the damage without the rich nations ending up carrying most of the burden?

The problem isn't an un-equal distribution of capital, but rather one of an un-equal distribution of capitalism.

On the plus side:

And this:
http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2010/11/03/3056199.htm

Basically it goes over media coverage of climate change, and why the news stories aren't being run with frequency any more - because people change the channel or click another story instead. Many editors believe climate change is a dead topic.

Many of the major scientific institutions have abandoned the 'science is settled' argument, such as the Royal Society, which has changed it's position to a more nuanced interpretation where they list things which there is a wide consensus vs those that aren't, and even those things that are not currently understood. Just having that last category shows that we don't know everything there is to know on the topic - not that Liet will acknowledge that.

A whole heckuva lot of people do just that thing. It is wrong but in this case, in many ways, the policy is the goal.

For people to say they believe in global warming, for instance, and then use it to say it pushes a clean environment is shockingly disingenous. Push a clean environment for its own sake.

Don't make up some bogus horror story to support a perfectly reasonably position.

Being caught in the lie makes everything that's being pushed for bad by association.

November 22, Chicago IL, current temperature - 70 degrees fahrenheit.

It doesn't matter if global climate change is man-made or natural. Things are changing. We have the technology to avoid an extinction level event - unlike the dinasours. If we don't act now to ensure the survival of humanity, we deserve to be reduced to footnotes in the annals of cosmic history.

I think it's time to "Get your ass to Mars!"

Cut me a break. That isn't any evidence of "global warming". It's a natural variation in temperatures. Weird temperature variations are nothing new.

edit

Current temperature in Chicago IL is 62.

http://www.weather.com/weather/today/USIL0225

I'm not worried about Global Warming.

But I am concerned about a massive solar flare or even the inevitable pole shift. Now those would be disasters of biblical proportions.

You might want to find a new brain trust. The comment above is one the stupidest things I have seen you post.

Global Warming, climate change whatever it's latest name is has been based off of fraudulent data. All conclusions are out the window because of that.

Anything the government doesn't now regarding "climate change " is nothing more than a power grab.

It's 68 in Pittsburgh. It'll be 48 on Wed. Is it time to start panicking yet?

Indeed! Panick!

Is that a new song?

So what exactly is the correct temperature we're aiming for anyways?

On the other hand, it's 59 degrees in Arizona. Ohhhh, yes. Terrifying warming trend.

Of course not.

Solved problems don't get taxpayer money thrown at them. This will never be "fixed" as long as it's funded.

And it's snowing in Portland's Tualatin Mountains (highest peak, 1100'), with snow expected on Portland's east side tonight. What's your point, besides confusing weather and climate?

I'm not confusing the two. The climate is changing. The weather is warmer throughout fall and colder longer into the spring months.

It's been changing that way for the last 4 or 5 years.

Don't forget the power angle, though. More and more laws, each one stricter than the last, until only the elite are so much as allowed to own internal combustion powered motor vehicles, while the rest of us are restricted to bicycles, rickshaws and publicly-funded, government-run rail transportation between cities or states.