Climate Change VI - Warmists and their Demise


"think of environmental issues as human vs or with earth, not as class struggle. " [/quote]

Bullshit. It is a class struggle full of left-leaning myopic, suburban, spoiled idiots that have damaged most of their brain cells by too much dope, booze, and first year political science courses from shitty liberal academics. These ass hats are propped up by trust fund idiots that couldn’t piss straight without mommy and daddy holding it up for them. :smiley: :smiley:

Moore is absolutely right when he describes most environmentalists as being anti-forestry. Most of these outside protestors come from ultra-rich Marin county, East Coast, or similar backgrounds.

You look at people that oppose the forestry or pulp/paper mills or who are the strongest global warming alarmists, and it is often famous musicians, US actors or trouble maker US activists such as RFK Jr. [who obviously should have been taking care of his late wife rather than poking his nose in other peoples’ business].

Instead of supporting industry providing good jobs to working families (jobs that are often $20 to $40 dollars an hour), these idiots are NIMBY (not in my backyard) exclusionists that hold protest concerts against any kind of development and would rather have low paying service jobs in their communities that totally cater to their narcissism. :laughing:[/quote]

Well, I’ve met thousands of greenies in BC and they don’t fit your description very well. I do agree that many of them are a bit flaky. But the idea of class struggle was something I never heard much of, except that it was “Big Business” that didn’t want eco regulation. I mean that has a distant ring of class struggle, I guess, but what I heard more was “we have to live in balance with nature”.

A lot of these greenies had real jobs too: engineers, business-people etc.


Yeah… we will just leave that as it is then… Yeah… okay then… yup… sure… I really must try harder to appeal to people of logic… Is this the new speak… people OF something? I am laughing but … to you … it may appear as something else… perhaps a rant? a hissy fit? I will let you interpret this in any fashion that you see fit… as a person of um… abundant feelings… and as a person of intensely subjective Sartrian perceptions… Yes… here I am again… ranting… or it that a hissy fit? :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:


[quote]As Moore sees it, the composition of Greenpeace has changed dramatically since his heyday. He says the fall of communism brought an influx of
anti-corporate extremism
to the environmental movement because, "suddenly, the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their
eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments

“A lot of those in the peace movement were
and, to an extent,
. By virtue of their anti-Americanism, they tended to sometimes
favor the communist approach
. A lot of those people, a lot of those social activists, moved into the environmental movement once the peace movement was no longer relevant.” Social activists, he suggests, "are now [color=#8080FF]
using the rhetoric of environmentalism to promote other collectivist agendas, such as class struggle
[/color]-- which I personally believe is a legitimate area, but I don’t believe it’s legitimate to mix it up with environmentalism[/quote]

Hmmmmm motivations… where to find motivations… gosh… very difficult for me to pick out the motivations in the above two paragraphs… Um… gosh… still not quite seeing it… feeling a rant… perhaps a hissy fit coming on… gosh… golly… gee… um… still not quite there… um… yeah… not seeing it… don’t get it… er… anyone offer some help here in solving my dilemma?

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:


For CF Images… … 261.x/full


So a guy who left the eco movement and gets paid to criticize it happens to be an authoratative source on motivations because, like you, he makes broadly based and somewhat paranoid sounding claims without giving any real evidence. But he agrees with you so he must be an expert?

Where is the evidence?

Where is the compelling argument?

Nowhere to be found.


Makes it sound like just any old guy. This is the cofounder and president of one of the most important environmental NGOs on the planet. Or would you argue that it is not?

sorry, I missed that… where is the “paid” part in all of this?

Well, why does one have ex-ambassadors and ex-politicians and ex-government workers comment on oh ongoing military of foreign policy crises? and why do ex athletes become sports news casters? and why is it that ex CEOs are often interviewed to discuss their respective sectors? Hmmmm, dont’ know… can’t quite figure this out… because people of “employment” are generally knowledgeable kinda sorta of their respective employment fields sometimes… maybe kinda sorta?

Not specific enough for you? in your view then, does he need to examine the motivations of each and every person who joined the environmental movement? or as the leader of one of the most important NGOs dealing with environmental issues, would he maybe kinda sorta be positioned to talk about trends? and then shall our president and CEOs henceforth cease and desist talking about political and economic trends because they are “broadly based?”

Hmmm apparently your deficiencies extend to definitions… has he suggested that the people who joined the environmental movement are out to get him? or is he observing their motivations? the ones that you cannot quite figure out, kinda sorta well gosh golly gee… how did he draw that conclusion?

Well, gee golly gosh Big John… we had a fascinating discussion several months back about Occupy Wall Street. How’s that working out for you?

No because he was the former leader of a very important environmental NGO. This does not mean that our views will always be in sync but I quoted him because MY MOTIVATION (get it? get it?) is to show that many (not ALL! not ALL!) of the environmental activists are concerned less with environmental issues and more with economic redistribution. And lo and behold, I found someone on the internet who agreed with me and I chose to choose (haha) him because of these reasons and to buttress my views by finding someone from industry or the specific field in question who agreed with me… as I was asked to do earlier by a certain someone who cannot seem to read very well and who needs everything in all bold and extra super large sized letters before he can read and digest those views…

I am satisfied. And like I said… you like to demand quite a lot but if I were to go through any of your posts, how many links and how much evidence would I find to support any of your views.

Gosh golly gee Big John… I don’t know… if you cannot see it, then clear it is not there… kinda sorta how this took a while before you finally saw the light and stopped posting on the Occupy Wall Street motivations? Gee golly gosh… isn’t that the exact same sorta kinda discussion we had six months ago where gee golly gosh you could not see how my assertions were correct? but then… gee golly gosh Big John… why ain’t you posting on the wonderful Occupy Wall Street protesters movement thingy sorta thread any more? Huh? Something happen? What’s up with that?

Now, global warming and climate change may be serious issues… when we as CF Images finally notes “conduct sufficient scientific enquiry” to determine what exactly is going on. Is it only I who finds it so amusing that the global warming alarmists are now the ones demanding more time for scientific research? as they hedge their comments with “but we still do not know exactly what is happening.” Does this sound like the same overconfident group that came marching (haha) out before to state unequivocally that the science was settled and that urgent action was needed? My my my… I could almost sorta kinda yes, hell, I will go on and say it.



Hey Big John… Be sure and come back with something extra awfully intelligent like. I would suggest the use of People OF something again… That has me still heaving with laugther to the point of tears… Seriously, you are the BEST. I LOVE you. I really do.


more lunacy from warmists, and leftist extremists: … ctic-edge/


Fred, you don’t know that Moore is a PR consultant for industry?

Anyway, we can joust for ever, to no effect.

You are just ranting away like a necon on coke with clothes pins on his nipples.

But still, no evidence or compelling argument.


Well, then, why don’t you just provide that link and show in what capacity he is being paid for what work… Might not be quite the same when and if we find out what he is doing… Of course, in the entire history of our discussions, I cannot recall you EVER providing a link to anything to buttress your allegations… Certainly, I have no expectation that you will do the same this time… You simply don’t have the intellectual strength to do so.

Joust? Did you suddenly grow a steed or gain a spear? This isn’t jousting… This is outreach to the local kindergarten for job day. Now, drink your milk and get ready for your nap.

Ew. That was awfully weird… I mean you have been lazy and stupid to date but never weird like this. Jesus man… you have enough less than desirables… let’s not go down this road… kindergarteners should not have such thoughts… it is like watching little girls maxed out on the makeup for seven-year old pageants… Stop. Just stop. I could pass this kind of sick and twisted language over to whatever kindergarten you are teaching at… might not want to keep you hired after that… Nap time… not such a good idea… You may be forced to have a monitor…

Yeah… you keep repeating that… and I suggest that you do so with your fingers in your ears… It seems to work better that way OR you could step up to the plate and post a link or information on anything… Yeah… better stick to sticking your fingers in your ears while saying… lalalalalalalala I can’t hear you lalalalaalalalalal I can’t hear you… lalalalalalal I can’t hear you…

Just out of curiosity… have you ever taken an IQ test?


[quote]Well, I’ve met thousands of greenies in BC and they don’t fit your description very well. I do agree that many of them are a bit flaky. But the idea of class struggle was something I never heard much of, except that it was “Big Business” that didn’t want eco regulation. I mean that has a distant ring of class struggle, I guess, but what I heard more was “we have to live in balance with nature”.

A lot of these greenies had real jobs too: engineers, business-people etc.[/quote]

Hey Chewy… meet me in the PM section… remember that laugh we had a couple of months ago… There’s more… I feel as if I have done 1,000 situps… my stomach is killing me from laughing my ass off…


Big John:

Let me get your words straight… You are saying, are you not, that Moore is a paid consultant for industry and that his views are in reality nothing more than a sellout of his cause for cash…

Naturally, we would like to see a link or any evidence that Moore is working for industry and in what capacity.

Failure to provide said information will in your own words be trolling…



And then there is this… also from a certain “Big John.”

[quote]MODERATOR’S NOTE: Nobody has said that all posts need to be backed up by links. But repeatedly posting large, detailed posts that make allegations that are outside of conventional knowledge
without satisfying legitimate requests for sources
distorts the thread. It takes it off topic, creates animosity with other posters (who nevertheless should avoid getting personal)
and is, in the end, a form of spamming
.[/quote] … 0&t=106179

Let me know whether you need me to turn the words green so that you can understand…


Lengthy detailed allegations? No.

Are you a moderator? No. If you want to report me, go ahead. There are also stipulations against backseat moderating, yes?

Me a troll? An amusing notion. You fit the picture far better than I.

BTW, if you have any compelling arguments or reliable evidence on the motivation of greenies, I am still interested.


I wonder what the folks at that bastion of communism, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have to say. They exist within the US Dept of Commerce which is quite obviously a communist front - after all, commerce and communist share the first 4 letters.

They say that the first half of 2012 has been the hottest ever recorded in the US, at an average 4.5°F higher than average. And that doesn’t include temperatures from July where there’s been 9 days (so far) of record breaking temps in the ongoing heatwave.

There are plenty of news reports about this at the moment. Here’s one from those communist sympathizers at Bloomberg. … -u-s-.html

It’s a good thing that this whole climate change is just a communist, Occupy Wall St, left-wing, unwashed tree hugging hippie plot and isn’t really happening.



It’s a good thing that this whole climate change is just a communist, Occupy Wall St, left-wing, unwashed tree hugging hippie plot and isn’t really happening.[/quote]

I would say it is a combination of big-government left-leaning bureaucrats, cash-hungry “publish or perish” academics that want to suck hard on the public teet, unaccountable NGO officials that see a long term gravy train, trust fund shit disturbers that want to punish momsy and dadsy, closet Marxists posing as economic nationalists, and the lower stratums of university liberal arts rabble all grouped together in a common cause (I won’t say which group I think most alarmists on here belong in! :laughing: )

Would you trust the pseudo-science and scaremongering of such simians who adhere to such beliefs with a religious fervor of a Salafist? :laughing: :smiley: I sure the hell wouldn’t! And I’m glad that people such as Moore were able to see such people for what they really are and return to the mainstream (he did help centre-left and centre-right governments in an advisory role after leaving Greenpeace). To me, that illustrates how far from the fringes he came in from and so where so many eco-activists and economic nationalists remain. :smiley: :laughing: :laughing: In other words, Moore grew “the fuck up.” Shame so many others haven’t.


When you have supplied evidence that Moore is taking money from private industry… Over to you… WE all know how that is going to turn out, don’t we?

Trolling? Hmmm never thought of it that way but your refusal to supply any information of your own while constantly demanding it from others… ironically the very subject of your warning to other posters, seems to fit the bill. Yes, I think that you are a troll.


When you have supplied evidence that Moore is taking money from private industry… Over to you… WE all know how that is going to turn out, don’t we?

Trolling? Hmmm never thought of it that way but your refusal to supply any information of your own while constantly demanding it from others… ironically the very subject of your warning to other posters, seems to fit the bill. Yes, I think that you are a troll.[/quote]

Patrick Moore’s a PR consultant. You think he’s doing it pro bono?

Here’s an article on him by Monbiot, the famous Marxist columnist for the Economist, in the Guardian.

Check out Moore’s client list at the bottom of this page. Those are clients; they pay him money.

There’s nothing wrong with being paid, of course. Doctors get paid, teachers, cops etc. Why not?
But the point is that he is being paid to criticize the environmental movement,so he cannot be regarded as a neutral source on it.
Again, nothing wrong with taking a position, but it’s important to know that he is inherently biased in his public statements on eco issues.


Big John. Thanks for the link. Good reading.

This is interesting and a good advance for the science of global warming. You really would be an idiot to start refuting some of this stuff. It seems we’re about two years off knowing wether the weather (nice pun) is man-made climate changes or not. This will certainly help those that need to adapt to the changing climate. Anyway, have a read guys. … NETTXT9038


Are you sure that you want to use this to attack Moore? It chimes in exactly with what I have been saying about climate change and environmental lunacy as opposed to commonsense balanced solutions. Read on…

Patrick Moore was a leading figure with Greenpeace Canada and subsequently with Greenpeace International between 1981 and 1986
. In 1991 he established a consultancy business, Greenspirit Enterprises, “focusing on environmental policy and communications in natural resources, biodiversity, energy and climate change.”[1] Moore began working for the Nuclear Energy Institute front group, the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, in 2006. He has worked for the mining industry, the logging industry, PVC manufacturers, the nuclear industry and in defence of biotechnology. In October 2008, Greenpeace issued a statement distancing itself from Moore, saying he “exploits long gone ties with Greenpeace to sell himself as a speaker and pro-corporate spokesperson, usually taking positions that Greenpeace opposes.” [2] Moore describes himself as “chairman and chief scientist” of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd., a PR company that "work with many leading organizations in forestry, biotechnology, aquaculture and plastics,
developing solutions in the areas of natural resources, biodiversity, energy and climate change."
He is also a Board Member of NextEnergy, a Canadian energy services company.[3] "In 1990, Dr. Moore founded and chaired the BC Carbon Project, a group that worked to develop a common understanding of climate change. "Dr. Moore served for four years as Vice President, Environment for Waterfurnace International, a manufacturer of geothermal heat pumps
for residential heating and cooling with renewable earth energy
. He is now a Director of NextEnergy Solutions, the largest distributor of geothermal systems in Canada. "As Chair of the Sustainable Forestry Committee of the Forest Alliance of BC from 1991 -2002,
he led the process of developing the “Principles of Sustainable Forestry” which were adopted by a majority of the industry…
He obtained a Ph.D. in Ecology, Institute of Resource Ecology, at the University of British Columbia in 1974, and was the recipient of a Ford Foundation Fellowship (1969-1972). [4][/quote]

Specifically, there are many many areas for further discussion. I am going to choose two…

[quote]In December 2007,
Moore slammed “anti-PVC activists” for “pushing retailers toward untested, less affordable and potentially riskier materials” with a “fear-mongering campaign.”
His comments came two days after “Sears Holdings Corporation, parent of the Sears and Kmart retail chain stores, said it will work to phase out use of PVC in its packaging and merchandise,” reported ICIS. [9] Moore’s resume states that in 2001, he was “retained by IPEX, Canada’a largest manufacturer of PVC, to intervene in the environmental policy of the Toronto 2008 Olympic Bid.” [10 In a December 2007 press release from his Greenspirit firm, Moore was quoted as saying, “It’s completely unacceptable for these activists to call PVC ‘toxic’ when PVC’s effects on health and the environment have been investigated at every stage from manufacture through use and on to final disposal – in all cases vinyl has been shown to be safe and environmentally sound.” The release did not disclose Moore’s or the firm’s financial relationship with the PVC industry. [11] Moore used similar language in a July 2006 letter to the San Francisco Chronicle: “Vinyl is one of the most sustainable, flexible and cost-effective materials available. Alternatives are more expensive, less versatile and often pose unknown health or environmental risks.” [12][/quote]

So this wink wink nudge nudge (didn’t disclose his firm’s financial relationship as opposed to all the pronouncements and peer-reviewed haha papers that discuss climate change without discussing funding? grants?) is supposed to be enough to get rid of the core precept of his argument which is so often true in environmentalism… PVC is proved to be safe. Alternatives are often more expensive, do not work well and may cause unknown risks themselves. Think of all the effort in the area of biofuels as a “green” solution and how it led to massive deforestation and burning of swamps and forests (all those carbon emissions) to increase the land for oil palms because some idiotic environmentalists without thinking (as always) deemed them to be “greener.” Likewise, look at ethanol and then wonder whether it is really better to burn gasoline and oil or corn? especially given how it raised food prices for the poor and also dollar for dollar was probably not as green as the gas used in the first place. So these are many areas where “caring environmental activists” don’t think.

[quote]At the May 2007 “New York Hard Assets Investment Conference,” Moore was a keynote speaker. He told attendees, “Since my entry into the global environmental movement in 1971, mining has contributed significantly to a more sustainable world economy, and key beneficiaries of this progress are mining workers, families and communities,” according to Resource Investor. [6]

Moore said that mining companies in third world countries must deal with “corruption among environmental groups and local governments compounded by yellow journalism. Greenspirit Strategies partnered with Newmont as a leader in mining sustainability to dispel such false reports,” reported Resource Investor. Moore also accused “environmental extremists” of being “anti-human,” “anti-science and technology,” “anti-globalization,” and “anti-civilization.” [7[/quote]

Gosh how outrageous of him to do so!!!

Now, looking over this link, I cannot help but notice that all the wink wink nudge nudge stuff is hardly what you would see if I were to say do a search on Al Gore now is it?

Again, I completely agree with Moore. There are practical ways for development and environmental sustainabililty to go hand-in-hand but NOT when a bunch of whacked out radicals are out to fight ANY progress or development. I think that it is most telling that the aboriginal groups of British Columbia want the radical environmental activists GONE. Now, why would that be do you think?

Final comment: This is becoming a discussion of Patrick Moore. The original discussion was whether communist idiots were moving into environmental activism. This is the key concern for my point. I believe that Patrick Moore’s comments are still relevant. They are. He is quite right to push for a balance between corporations and let’s face it for all the hyper anti-capitalist rants, they still husband resources far better than the alternatives.

AFter all, is it soooo wrong of committed activists like Moore to work with corporations and other organizations to improve the environment? Is this the ultimate sin? that means that his views are NEVER to be accepted?


[quote]Climate change researchers have been able to attribute recent examples of extreme weather to the effects of human activity on the planet’s climate systems for the first time, marking a major step forward in climate research.The findings make it much more likely that we will soon – within the next few years – be able to discern whether the extremely wet and cold summer and spring so far experienced in the UK this year are attributable to human causes rather than luck, according to the researchers.

Peter Stott, of the UK’s Met Office, said: “We are much more confident about attributing [weather effects] to climate change. This is all adding up to a stronger and stronger picture of human influence on the climate.”

But the researchers also said that not every extreme weather event could be attributed to climate change. For instance, the extremely cold British winter of 2010-11 – starkly exemplified by the satellite picture of the UK and Ireland covered in white on Christmas Eve, as snow gripped the nations – was owing to variations in the systems of ocean and air circulation. Although such cold winters are now only half as likely as they were several decades ago, owing to a generally warming climate across the world, extremely low temperatures of this type are still possible depending on circulation effects – in this case, a negative North Atlantic Oscillation, the circulation system that is a key determinant of European weather.

Floods in Thailand last year, another example studied in the research, were also not judged to be due to climate change but to other factors such as changes in the management of local river systems.

Following and predicting temperature rises tends to be much less complex than predicting – and attributing the causes of – changes in precipitation patterns.

But the key question – of whether man-made global warming is putting a dampener on British summers – will take several years to solve, according to Stott. "
This is an open question in terms of research – it is too early days to be able to say,"
he said.[/quote]

I don’t think that this is the FIRST time that anyone has claimed to be able to link these weather episodes with manmade climate change. In fact, the inability to link any of this and have it stick over the past 20 years is precisely why the average man’s faith in the global warming religion has cratered. Oh those heathens going back to their old gods of… sputter sputter… PVC and KMART shopping!!! God damn them!!!

And after all of that ALL OF THAT we find out that most weather incidents like floods are caused by action on the ground… and then… the conclusion after all of this is that it is an open question and too early to be able to say… Okay, nothing to see here… let’s move on…


Hi Fred.

Well at least the article is honest! Nothing to see? Quite. Not yet. You will have to wait two years to prove it wrong :smiley:

See you then.