More Global Cooling/Warming/Change hoax.

[Jim Craik]

Well, if we could adjust climate change to select out liberals for elimination that really would be something to cheer about:2thumbsup:

Posted by Steve

Steve

In a couple of weeks, watch the Chinese Grand Prix, that brown air is what you would have if conservateves made all the choices.


Bloomberg News:

As China’s top officials pledge to declare war on smog, a World Health Organization report said 40 percent of the 7 million people killed by air pollution globally in 2012 were in China.

Without those "Liberals" you would have none of that troublesome smog control, oil rigs in SF bay, fracking everwhere, something you can really cheer that!

For a group that claims to care deeply about the economy we leave our Grand childeren, actually care very little about what we leave them!

 

[Steve]

Posted by Steve

Steve

In a couple of weeks, watch the Chinese Grand Prix, that brown air is what you would have if conservateves made all the choices.


Bloomberg News:

As China’s top officials pledge to declare war on smog, a World Health Organization report said 40 percent of the 7 million people killed by air pollution globally in 2012 were in China.

Without those "Liberals" you would have none of that troublesome smog control, oil rigs in SF bay, fracking everwhere, something you can really cheer that!

For a group that claims to care deeply about the economy we leave our Grand childeren, actually care very little about what we leave them!

Ahhh, sure Jim.

The EPA was created by Richard Nixon. Not exactly a liberal but hey, you keep living in your alternate universe where liberals do no wrong...

 

[Jim Craik]

Gee Steve,

This is from FOX entertainment, they say Nixon was a "LIBERAL"

Richard Nixon -- the last great liberal


As we celebrate Richard Nixon’s 100th birthday, there is so much more to reflect on than the Watergate scandal. Nixon is many things to many people, but 40 years after his crushing 1972 reelection victory, it becomes clearer that he is also something few would have imagined: America’s last liberal.

That may sound like more than a bit of a stretch, a misunderstanding of Nixon’s presidency and his policies. But I would counter that if we look back over the last 45 some-odd years in American history, we have ample evidence that Nixon’s credentials would put him starkly at odds with today’s Republican Party.

Though Nixon, and other Republicans in the 1970s, would never have expressed it in this way, our 37th president was a pro-big government, pro-public spending, and pro-social safety net president.

**********

Richard Nixon and Universal Health Care

"Turning now to the rest of the agenda for 1974, the time is at hand this year to bring comprehensive, high quality health care within the reach of every American. I shall propose a sweeping new program that will assure comprehensive health insurance protection to millions of Americans who cannot now obtain it or afford it, with vastly improved protection against catastrophic illnesses." (Richard Nixon, January 30, 1974)


****************

Steve neither Nixon or Reagan could possably win the Republican nomination today, they both were way too "LIBRERAL"

 

[Jim Craik]

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan passed a bill called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA.
See, up until 1986, hospitals and doctors could turn people away if they didn’t have the money. So could emergency rooms.
Let’s repeat that.
Up until 1986, in the USA, hospitals could turn a dying person away at the door if they didn’t have money, or refuse to treat.
As you can imagine, costs were kept down.
In 1986, Republicans passed EMTALA. What did EMTALA do? It socialized healthcare and made emergency rooms just like police, or firemen, or roads. It said people showing up on a door step of an ER dying *could not be refused* treatment.

 

[Steve]

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan passed a bill called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA.
See, up until 1986, hospitals and doctors could turn people away if they didn’t have the money. So could emergency rooms.
Let’s repeat that.
Up until 1986, in the USA, hospitals could turn a dying person away at the door if they didn’t have money, or refuse to treat.
As you can imagine, costs were kept down.
In 1986, Republicans passed EMTALA. What did EMTALA do? It socialized healthcare and made emergency rooms just like police, or firemen, or roads. It said people showing up on a door step of an ER dying *could not be refused* treatment.

Ahh, so Reagan was a liberal too. You really do live in an alternate universe where you (and only you) beliveve your version of reality.

I'm a physician, Jim, I do understand EMTALA quite well and it didn't socialize healthcare. That's beyond a stretch. It did mandate that hospitals and physicians work for free (not socialized, and not compensated via a salary like police and firemen) but it was primarily intending to prevent hospitals from dumping nonpaying patients onto other hospitals via inappropriate transfers.

 

[Cliff Beer]

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

I think there's still a few intelligent people around who deny global climate change associated with human impact is real....I believe there's one guy in Canada, one guy in Ethiopia, and maybe another guy somewhere in Sweden.

Good to see it's down to just three nut heads now.

Al Gore must be pleased to be vindicated here. Nobody likes being called a "green profiteer".....especially when you're a person who has actually lifted a finger to do something positive rather than just bitch and disparage.

 

[Jack]

Maylasian flight 370 crasced into the South pole wreaking havoc upon untold
iceburgs and incurring the phenomenon now known as the anti-polar vortex
thus negating global warming.

 

[Doug S.]

Well, if we could adjust climate change to select out liberals for elimination that really would be something to cheer about:2thumbsup:

LMAO, Steve, and not just me!!! My better half had a good laugh, too :shocked:

Thanks!!!

CHEERS!

Doug

 

[Steve]

LMAO, Steve, and not just me!!! My better half had a good laugh, too :shocked:

Thanks!!!

CHEERS!

Doug

We aim to please

 

[Larry L.]

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

I think there's still a few intelligent people around who deny global climate change associated with human impact is real....I believe there's one guy in Canada, one guy in Ethiopia, and maybe another guy somewhere in Sweden.

Good to see it's down to just three nut heads now.

Uuuuuuh huh...as usual, those who refuse to swallow all the "global warming" b.s. are automatically referred to as "nut-heads", "flat-earthers", etc., etc., etc.

Al Gore must be pleased to be vindicated here. Nobody likes being called a "green profiteer".....especially when you're a person who has actually lifted a finger to do something positive rather than just bitch and disparage.

You know the old saying, "Follow the money"? Well, follow the money with regard to "global warming". WHO'S MAKING ALL THE MONEY ON IT AND STANDS TO MAKE A LOT MORE if the 'warming fraud is pushed down our throats the way Obamacare was? Is it Al Gore and the boys...or those who stand against it?

Just one example: the "gas guzzler" tax. Please tell me what good THAT does with regard to increasing the gas mileage/decreasing the pollution of any given car? All it really does is transfer M-O-N-E-Y from the car owner's pocket into GOVERNMENT'S pocket. PERIOD. It performs NO other function/purpose - real or imagined. None.

 

[Cliff Beer]

Larry,

I was just being a bit tongue-in-cheek...I'm really not looking to insult anyone, apologies if that's what it seems like. Personally, I just think it's hard to deny the real-world effects of global climate change...man-made or not....and it's time to stop debating whether it's real (or not) and to get on with trying to do something about it. That's just me.

I'm like you....I follow the money trail and most of the time that's really what's pulling the strings in the background. But I honestly don't think the UN (who issued the report) is looking to make a profit or aggrandize itself....it's just a topic which falls within their charter and mission.....and potentially has a dramatic upon all nations...so they're really just doing their job getting some more attention on the topic.

Honest, the gas guzzler tax DID do something....guess what? It made cars with crappy gas mileage more expensive! This discouraged the sale of low-mileage cars through the natural effects of supply and demand. Fewer cars on the road with crappy gas mileage, less consumption of gas, less pollution, etc. I call that something at least...maybe not the most elegant solution, but it's been my experience that people don't really change much about themselves or their habits until it hits their wallet. Crude but effective. And, yup, that did put some more dollars into the hands of undeserving politicians....an unfortunate side effect.

 

[Doug S.]

We aim to please

Reminds me of a couple of signs in the mens' room of the Brass Rail, my least favorite college bar hangout. One of the signs was on the condom machine and read "This Goddamn Gum Tastes Like Rubber!!"

The other was over the urinal...had this printed above an arrow pointing at the drain in the urinal:

"We aim to please!
You aim, too....please."

Strange how a memory for crap like that survived the mental abuses of the 60s, 70s and even the 80s, no?

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

Larry,

I was just being a bit tongue-in-cheek...I'm really not looking to insult anyone, apologies if that's what it seems like. Personally, I just think it's hard to deny the real-world effects of global climate change...man-made or not....and it's time to stop debating whether it's real (or not) and to get on with trying to do something about it. That's just me.

Not just you, Cliff...anyone ever see the Bruce Dern movie "Silent Running"?

Silent Running - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Great sci-fi, a bit oriented toward the tree-huggers, but all-in-all perhaps a great prediction of where we're heading if we don't all open our eyes and read the writing on the wall.

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Keith]

Yes but......

I loved the little robots. Was there a point to the film then?

Anyway:

BBC News - MPs criticise BBC over climate change reporting

 

[Larry L.]

Larry,

I was just being a bit tongue-in-cheek...I'm really not looking to insult anyone, apologies if that's what it seems like. Personally, I just think it's hard to deny the real-world effects of global climate change...man-made or not....and it's time to stop debating whether it's real (or not) and to get on with trying to do something about it. That's just me.

I'm like you....I follow the money trail and most of the time that's really what's pulling the strings in the background. But I honestly don't think the UN (who issued the report) is looking to make a profit or aggrandize itself....it's just a topic which falls within their charter and mission.....and potentially has a dramatic upon all nations...so they're really just doing their job getting some more attention on the topic.

Honest, the gas guzzler tax DID do something....guess what? It made cars with crappy gas mileage more expensive! This discouraged the sale of low-mileage cars through the natural effects of supply and demand. Fewer cars on the road with crappy gas mileage, less consumption of gas, less pollution, etc. I call that something at least...maybe not the most elegant solution, but it's been my experience that people don't really change much about themselves or their habits until it hits their wallet. Crude but effective. And, yup, that did put some more dollars into the hands of undeserving politicians....an unfortunate side effect.

My point, Cliff, was that all the EPA C-R-A-P has its basis in $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ plain and simple. There IS NO other motive when push comes to shove. The "green" in being "green" is all ABOUT $$$$.

As far as the "guzzler" tax having any effect on the sale of "guzzler" cars - BULL PUCKY! If you 'Google" the sale of exotics for instance, it's had NO effect - at all. NOR SHOULD IT. The REALITY is that the average exotic - for the most part - isn't driven enough miles per year to even WORRY ABOUT from a gas consumption/pollution/"global warming" standpoint! 'Dead serious here, sir.

In my own case, I drove my Ford GT supercar a total of about 700 miles (give or take) in the 1.5 years I owned it. IT'S IMPACT ON THE INVIORNMENT WAS Z-E-R-O. NADA! ZIPOLA! N-O-T-H-I-N-G!!!! And yet I had to pay a $2,200.00 "gas guzzler" tax for the 'priviege' of owning it!!! Are you KIDDIN' ME????????? A CITY TRANSIT BUS PUKES MORE CRAP INTO THE AIR IN A DAY THAN MY FGT DID IN A DADGUM Y-E-A-R!!!!!!!!!!!!

The EPA/"GREENIE"/"GOLBAL WARMING" H-Y-P-E is nothing but a $$$ generating, complete and total fraud.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Agree totally Larry, from the crazy denier who lives in the land of Oz.

 

[Keith]

Britain's Carbon Trust, a non profit organisation that administers all things Carbon in your footprints has issued a new & fairly uncompromising Guideline:

"Adapt or Die"

Yes, that is what it is called.

No room for misunderstanding there then.

 

[Doug S.]

Yes but......

I loved the little robots. Was there a point to the film then?

Well, IMHO yes, there was. Among all the cute robots and Bruce Dern's mental decline into homicide was not only a (poorly hidden) warning regarding where we are heading if we do not recognize and take environmentally responsible action, but also a more blatant warning that if we listen to those who utilize our planet's resources for commercial gain without regard for renewability we may be more lost than we as a species realize.

...well, that and man's inhumanity to man, if you are so inclined to believe in that. :stunned:

Cheers!!!

Doug

 

[Keith]

But I really liked the little robots.

They did survive didn't they?

 

[Larry L.]

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

"In April, Working Group III will address how GOVERNMENTS CAN WORK TO MITIGATE CLIMATE CHANGE."



And there you have what the whole "climate change" thing is really all about, 'innit'...more govt control and tax, tax, tax (govt's two "solutions" for everything)...not to mention 'fines' and 'penalties'.

So, tell me, U.N., just how will "governments" adjust the odd shift in the tilt of the earth's axis? How do you propose they control the amount and intensity of "sun spot" activity on the sun? Or are those two things neither here-nor-there as factors in climate change according to your "report"?

(Edit: And again, pray tell, what happened to the new ICE AGE "science" warned us was on the way in the 1970s unless we acted now, now, NOW [this past winter not withstanding!]? How did govts manage to avert THAT?)