Trophies For Everyone

Applications are now being accepted for The Cool Club. No expensive dues or actual accomplishments required, a minimalist approach will work well. A “Practice Kindness and Senseless Acts of Beauty” bumper sticker works, a cool multicolored ribbon on the lapel, a “live Strong” wrist ban or something similar, even a catchy slogan easily chanted (Black Lives Matter), all identifies you to the world as a caring individual, someone who wants a better kinder world but is not willing to sacrifice much to make it happen. And if you are a world leader (a progressive world leader who is easily swayed by fads or fearful of the PC police) then you throw wild expensive carbon emitting parties, all the while patting yourselves on the back at how enlighten and caring you are, more champagne;

Life is so much easier when things are settled, no more need to think about things, to scrutinize or weigh any more evidence, the science is settled, we did it, high fives all around. Now we can feel good about ourselves, our efforts (or lack thereof) will make our world a better place, yea for us.

OK, let the hand wringing begin.

Comments are closed.

  1. Nobody

    Cue CM to tell us how everybody on the planet, except us here on this blog and the tiny minority of rednecks who agree with us, is enlightened enough to accept this stuff, and how we look like backwards nutjobs to the rest of the world for being cynical.  Oh, and how uncaring we are for being cynical.

    Thumb up 1

  2. AlexInCT

    And if you are a world leader (a progressive world leader who is easily swayed by fads or fearful of the PC police) then you throw wild expensive carbon emitting parties, 

    I disagree vehemently with this statement Hal. These scumbags are not going along with this nonsense because they want to be part of the cool crowd or are afraid of the PC police. That would imply they are just misinformed or just doing this for the wrong reasons. Nothing, and I do mean it, nothing, can be further from the truth. These scumbags know exactly what they are doing, and they are doing it because it profits them directly or indirectly in one form or another. The most important reason they are behind this junk science shit is that it allows the pseudo-fascist/marxist credentialed elite that comprise the leadership in the west to excuse their totalitarian bend by saying that they are fucking their citizens over for a noble and greater cause.

    Collectivism’s only way to create the illusion of a semi-functioning system is to resort to the authoritarian government with the elite on top and the masses as a whole as serfs, period. The credentialed elite that form the political class need to control the unwashed masses, for their own good, of course. That’s why these scumbags in charge have been hard at work destroying the existing system. The middle class is anathema to any collectivist system. Collectivism, as any incarnation of communism and/or socialism through out history eventually ends proving, prefers a society split between a master class that rules and the unwashed masses as serfs that know their place and appreciate the efforts of their betters. Even the most idiotic person would fight against those stealing their freedom if it was obvious. But cloak it all in a world ending, pseudo-religious Armageddon-like event, and a whole lot of people – be it because they actually are frightened or simply want to desperately be part of something important – will give their freedoms up without a second thought.

    The secondary reason, as Al Gore proves, is to make oodles of cash pushing an indulgence system (http://www.britannica.com/topic/indulgence) that allows the sinful to buy off their sins in one form or another. This is precisely why I keep pointing out that this is a religious movement. Whether it is carbon credits or green technology that doesn’t work as advertised, it allows the connected to get super rich while the faithful buy off their sins. That neither system really does anything of value is beside the point.

    Thumb up 0

  3. richtaylor365 *

    I disagree vehemently with this statement Hal.

    Gee, Alex does not know the difference between one of my posts and one of Hals, ouch!!!!!.

    Couldn’t deal with the last discussion, huh Rich?

    What is there to “deal” with? You are a enviro jihadist, plain and simple, and your creed aligns quite nicely with that of a Islamic jihadist, it is heresy to deny any part of the  full blown warmist orthodoxy. Sure, you guys probably don’t advocate beheadings for us non believers……….yet (although I have read that some you loons want us arrested for not walking lock step with your faith), but make no mistake, there exists the same stridency and blind faith, and yes, we are all mocking you. You know, it’s folks like you that makes us climate skeptics dig in our heels even more, we see you guys praying to the golden calf and it makes the rational folks just scratch their heads.

     

    Thumb up 0

  4. CM

    CM has pretty much proven that he’s a troll.  As if there was any doubt.

    Riiiiiiight. So you missed that the whole OP was a troll, with the last sentence added in case there was any doubt.

    What is there to “deal” with? 

    The fact that you can’t support any of your claims. The fact that you can’t be a fully paid member of the Church of Grand Climate Conspiracy and also claim to have ‘an open mind’. Etc etc.

    And yet now you’ve just read some scripture to me as if that does anything but further underline that all you guys have is surface logic.

    Thumb up 0

  5. richtaylor365 *

    The fact that you can’t support any of your claims.

    My “claim” is that your brand of Sharia is no convincing to me, what is there to support, that is my opinion.

    The fact that you can’t be a fully paid member of the Church of Grand Climate Conspiracy and also claim to have ‘an open mind’.

    Are you joking? of course you can. The Grand Climate Conspiracy is that you guys believe something that has not been proven, prove it and it’s not a conspiracy anymore, is it? Rather obvious stuff there, why the difficulty?

     

    Thumb up 0

  6. CM

    what is there to support

    I went through all that, you just ignored it.

     that is my opinion.

    It doesn’t appear to be based on anything supportable. It relies on dismissing science, and accusing professionals of being corrupt en masse.

    Are you joking?

    Nope. You very clearly want to try and have it both ways. I’m wondering why you’re bothering with the ‘open mind’ pretense.

    The Grand Climate Conspiracy is that you guys believe something that has not been proven, prove it and it’s not a conspiracy anymore, is it? Rather obvious stuff there, why the difficulty?

    Now you’re confusing science (evidence) with math (proof).

    There is no conspiracy required to follow the science. Your whole analogy doesn’t make logical sense.

    Thumb up 0

  7. richtaylor365 *

    And your brand of Sharia does not make logical sense. People like you bow down to your volcano god all the while admitting that he is real and that those not bowing down are science deniers. Settle the science, then we’ll talk.

    Thumb up 0

  8. CM

    People like you bow down to your volcano god all the while admitting that he is real

    How am I doing that? The science is telling us what is happening, via the scientific method and it’s consistent with basic scientific laws, and I’m not rejecting it based on some ideological mind-block. Your analogy doesn’t even begin to make sense. There is no mysticism, nothing that isn’t in evidence being claimed. So it’s the OPPOSITE of taking anything on faith. Religion requires faith because of a lack of evidence. This is the opposite.

    and that those not bowing down are science deniers.

    Those making accusations and claims should be able to back them up. If they can’t because they are not based on anything, then they need to consider whether they’re blind allegiance to a certain political ideology is really a good thing or not.

    Thumb up 0

  9. CM

    Settle the science, then we’ll talk.

    Again, you seem to be confusing science with math.

    What exactly do you want ‘settled’? And what does ‘settled’ mean? We have a considerable amount of evidence to indicate what is happening, and why. And it all fits, it all makes sense. What alternative theories explain what we know?

    Thumb up 0

  10. Hal_10000

    he Grand Climate Conspiracy is that you guys believe something that has not been proven, prove it and it’s not a conspiracy anymore, is it? Rather obvious stuff there, why the difficulty?

    Are we talking about whether AGW is real? Because that’s been proven, over and over and over again.  There are just some people who refuse to accept that because they think that accepting the science means agreeing with the policies.

    Thumb up 0

  11. CM

    Bingo. Dealing with is a different matter entirely. In my view it makes sense to do it collectively (because it’s a collective issue, and as Kerry noted, no country can do it by themselves). It doesn’t make sense in a risk-management sense to just wait until a technological breakthrough occurs, because it might not. It also makes sense to start making moves now in terms of mitigation/adaptation because then the costs will be lower. I don’t understand why anyone (particularly a fiscal conservative) would want this to cost more than it has to.

    Thumb up 0

  12. richtaylor365 *

     Because that’s been proven, over and over and over again.

    What’s been proven, that global warming is a man-made catastrophe ? Sorry, that has NOT been proven, what do you mean by “that”? If your claim (like CM) is that global temperatures are rising, it’s our fault, and we’re all going die because of what we have done to the planet,  then “that” has not at all been proven.

    Yes, the climate is changing, it has always changed, that is what climate does, jesus. You guys are the real climate deniers  because you can’t accept what climate does and can’t get past your temperature model with a base line established in the 70’s, I guess we never had climate or climate change before that. And for you guys to start pulling your hair out because of warmer temperatures, then extrapolating this to the end of the world, a man engineered cataclysmic catastrophe, have at it.

     

     

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    and we’re all going die because of what we have done to the planet

    Here we go AGAIN with the misrepresentation. The issues are mitigation and adaptation. The key being; how do we best cope with the changes with as little change to society (how we currently operate), and how do we do our best to ensure that we limit the extent to which effects get worse. When you start making stupid claims like “we’re all going to die” then nobody is going to take your opposition seriously.

    Yes, the climate is changing, it has always changed, that is what climate does, jesus. 

    And if you keep saying stuff like that nobody can take your opposition seriously. I mean, really? You’re still back waiting to enrol in Climate 101? Sheesh. The quick summary: yes of course it’s changed before, and we know why, which is why we know why it’s changing now, and how we know the rate of change is very fast and is largely down to us. Also, climate change in the distant past isn’t relevant to how we adapt now as we didn’t live back then like we do now.

    Your second paragraph is simply an extension of your ignorance (wilful or otherwise, I really don’t know, given where you appear to get your information).

     

    Thumb up 0

  14. Hal_10000

    Yes, the climate is changing, it has always changed, that is what climate does, jesus. You guys are the real climate deniers  because you can’t accept what climate does and can’t get past your temperature model with a base line established in the 70’s, I guess we never had climate or climate change before that. 

    Seriously? You’re going with this line of bullshit?  You’re smarter than that, Rich.

    (Just to dispense with this: no one claims the climate hasn’t changed. It changes for reasons and the only reason that explains what we’re seeing is AGW. You don’t need models. And you certainly go back way further than the 70’s. You have a dozen independent lines of evidence showing this. The basics of AGW theory are not in dispute; how bad it’s going to be and what we should do about it are.)

    Thumb up 0

  15. richtaylor365 *

    Here we go AGAIN with the misrepresentation.

    Here we go again with the blatant hollow denial, that is exactly what you guys have been trumpeting, with a little urgency and hysteria thrown in for good measure.. “Climate change is the biggest national security threat we face today”, sound familiar? No disaster should go to waste, even if the disaster is ginned up and manufactured (at least to the extent that it is being portrayed).

     and we know why

    I am reminded of what Reagan said about what you guys think you know, applies here very nicely.

    The basics of AGW theory are not in dispute; 

     

    And yet we read about disputes from eminent folks that know what they are talking about that don’t buy the party line, all of it.

     

    Thumb up 0

  16. AlexInCT

    Gee, Alex does not know the difference between one of my posts and one of Hals, ouch!!!!!.

    Mea maxima culpa Rich,

    That will teach me not to verify who wrote what before I post. And I still stand by what I said though.

    Couldn’t deal with the last discussion, huh Rich? What was that about avoid, dodge, ignore? ‘Open’ mind, right?! ;-)

    Hah hah hah! Says the acolyte of AGW that argues with the fervor of a religious fanatic and is immune to logic, facts, and truth…

    Thumb up 0