Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 179

Thread: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

  1. #1

    Default Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.


    resiting the green dragon

    Here is a great documentary exposing the religious and spiritual beliefs and worldview of the radical environmental movement, watch and see how the leaders of the moments call on pagan deities of earth moon sun etc and worship "mother earth" among other things of nature. Learn who there high priest are, there rules that must be followed, and how they treat decanting or heretical views.[/B] Also included are the facts of science they do not tell you, the illogical and unfounded conclusions based on the science and knowledge we do have, and facts to reply to all there [B]scare tactic doomsday scenarios they will tell of what will happen if we dont follow them know. As well as how theyindoctrinate,the lies they spreed to help there agenda, and there history going back over 100 years of false predictions [prophecies] etc doomsday scenarios such as today's global warming warnings, these are not new these have been around all along and all there predictions have been false so far, watch in the leaders owns words there real purpose [its not to save trees].
    Overall very good very informative and very scary to know people have power and intentions that they have and there view of human life. Watch the videos pro death agenda etc millions die a year because of environmentalism policy who have power in poor countries to control the people.
    done from a christian perspective, but if you are atheist there will be more than enough facts to respond with next time a radical environmental starts making claims that will make this worth it.


    promo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAA2sLtzXJM

    topics of dvd
    The False World View of the Green Movement Dr. E. Calvin Belsner
    Rescuing People from the Cult of the Green Dragon Dr. Peter Jones
    Logos vs. Mysticism: Environmentalism's Flight from Reason Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi
    From Captain Planet to Avatar: The Seduction of Our Youth Dr. Michael Farris
    A Brief History of Environmental Exaggerations, Myths and Downright Lies Dr. Steven Hayward
    Putting Out the Dragon's Fire on Global Warming Dr. David Legates
    How "Going Green" Impoverishes You, Your Church, and Your Society Hon. Becky Dunlop
    Ravaging the World's Poor Dr. James Tonkowich
    The Green Face of the Pro-Death Agenda: Population Control, Abortion and Euthanasia Dr. Charmaine Yoest
    Threats to Liberty and the Move Toward a Global Government Dr. E. Calvin Beisner
    A Biblical Guide to Genuine Creation Stewardship Dr. James Tonkowich
    Go Therefore and Make Disciples: Advancing the Gospel in a World Permeated by Environmentalism Dr. Peter Jones
    http://www.resistingthegreendragon.com/


    31,000 scientist reject global warming
    http://www.petitionproject.org/
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qZHkvtV5rAHYPERLINK "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qZHkvtV5rA&feature=player_embedded"&HYPERLINK "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qZHkvtV5rA&feature=player_embedded"feature=player_embedded


    great documentary called cool it. By a professor who believes in man made global warming. Shows hoe cap and trade is big time corruption, talks of the scare tactics used to gain votes. Shows the indoctrination and scare tactic’s used on school children.Why alternative solutions are not considered.
    http://coolit-themovie.com/

    25 free videos, titled 25 videos al gore does not want you to see.
    http://www.ihatethemedia.com/25-anti...ant-you-to-see


    Global Warming:#A Scientific and Biblical Expose' of Climate Change free online
    gives many alternative reasons for global warming, shows recent sun activity is more likely cause of warming, that increase temperature is cause of increase c02 not other way around well as pointing out, a warmer climate overall is better than a cooler climate throughout human history. Shows how global warming polices kill over 1,000,000 in Africa every year. goes into death threats and other things made at those who “deny” man made climate change.
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...rming-politics

    A Gallup poll at the time reported that 53% of scientists actively involved in global climate research did not believe global warming had occurred; 30% weren't sure; and only 17% believed global warming had begun. Even a Greenpeace poll showed 47% of climatologists didn't think a runaway greenhouse effect was imminent; only 36% thought it possible and a mere 13% thought it probable
    http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...1-5c755457a8af



    global Warming—When Politics and Science Collide gives alternative reasons for global warming.
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...rming-politics

    1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming
    http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/...n-ipcc-gore-2/






    false prophecy of radical environmentalist/Scare tactic’s lies.

    threats/scare tactic’s of famine,plagues,floods etc come right out of the OT. If we dont follow these certain rules, or if we sin against mother nature, she will punish us with famine floods etc.

    Doomsday scenarios [al gore] straight out of book of revaluations.



    some predictions of radical environmentalist from 1970,they have being trying scare tactics for decades and even started in late 1800's all have been wrong and way off.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
    • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist


    “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
    • George Wald, Harvard Biologist

    “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
    • Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

    “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”
    • Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

    “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
    • Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

    “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
    • Life Magazine, January 1970

    “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
    • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

    In the 1960s,environmental scientists similarly claimed
    that DDT harmed humans and caused cancer, thus resulting in a near worldwide ban on the use of that pesticide. Now, four decades later, the scientific community has found no harm to humans from DDT,30 so it has been reintroduced to fight the mosquitoes that carry malaria. .31 Regrettably, in the intervening years, between one and two million persons each year needlessly died each year from malaria because DDT had been banned.32
    Africa Fighting Malaria, “Dr. Conyers, I Presume” (at http://www.fightingmalaria.org/article.aspx?id=785); Spiked, “Without DDT, malaria bites back” (at http://www.spiked-online.com/Article...htm).HYPERLINK \l "R30"(Return)


    Today, we are told by many—scientists, economists and politicians—that the great environmental challenge of the present age is climate change. Thirty years ago, scientists were certain that the world was rapidly cooling, and the first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970, amid fears of a new ice age. Fortune magazine cited a number of leading climatologists who had concluded that global cooling was “the root cause of a lot of that unpleasant weather around the world”, and that “it carries the potential for human disasters of unprecedented magnitude”.1
    Peter Gwynne wrote that there were ominous signs that the earth’s weather patterns had begun to change dramatically and that these changes would result in a “drastic decline in food production—with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth.”2#He added:


    “The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it … The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”



    some of the kind of lies
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    greenhouse gas
    95% of greenhouse gas is water vapor.


    any co2 released is a pollutant, .

    carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it is like calling clouds pollutants, they are naturally forming and essential to life.
    an appeal to reason a cool look at global warming Nigel Lawson.
    http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6

    without c02 there is no life on earth. Plants/trees grow a lot better with added c02 in autmospher.


    great documentary called cool it. By a professor who believes in man made global warming. talks of the scare tactics used to gain votes. Shows the indoctrination and scare tactic’s used on school children. Why alternative solutions are not considered.
    http://coolit-themovie.com/

    threats/scare tactic’s of famine,plagues,floods etc come right out of the OT. If we dont follow these certain rules, or if we sin against mother nature, she will punish us with famine floods etc.

    Modern endangered species is a modern day noahs ark. Doomsday scenarios [al gore] straight out of book of revaluations.

    claim world is falling apart
    we have more trees know than a decade before,and decade before that etc.
    cleaner water cleaner air, both are improving all the time.
    More food production with far less farm space used.
    Estimated sea level rise by un 1 foot over next 100 years, in last 100 years it rose 1 foot. No one noticed.

    Polar bears- 1960 estimated 5,000 today 2012 22,000.

    the world is overpopulated

    if texas were populated with the density of new york city it would have more than enough room to fit entire worlds poulation.
    http://www.omg-facts.com/Other/The-E...d-Fit-In/55348

    the#world#population#could fit in#Texas#with a density of new#York#city.
    Did you know…everyone on the planet (7 billion) could fit in the state of Texas (area of 268,820 square miles) at a density 26,040 people per sq. mile. Thats a 1000 less people per square mile than in New York City!

    If you put all 7 billion people in Alaska (663,268 square miles) there would only be 10554 people per square mile. Rather roomy. And if all of the planets people were put in the united states (3.79 million miles) there would only be 1846 people per square mile.

    Bottom line…there is plenty of room on this planet and there are plenty of resources, and when resources become constrained man will use his creativity and resourcefulness to solve any problems that may arise
    http://www.omg-facts.com/Other/The-E...d-Fit-In/55348

    the entire world#population#could fit in#Jacksonville#Florida#twice [standing room.]


    Would water be a problem, though? It's calculated that we need 350 billion liters of water per day to properly hydrate 6.8 billion people. It seems like a lot, but the Columbia River alone could produce that amount in less than a day. By the way, the Columbia River is the U.S.’s fourth largest river. So, again, that leaves the rest of the world’s water supply open and ready to serve. So, we’re not really overpopulated. We just need to be better at managing our resources
    Read more at#http://www.omg-facts.com/Other/The-E...HEguTgX8lv.99#
    http://www.omg-facts.com/Other/The-E...d-Fit-In/55348

    http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smar...ity-8230/17896


    We are running out of resources
    #virtually all environmentalists, including some Christian ones, believe that resources are limited and are rapidly running out due to increased demand. The reality, however, is that such claims have been circulating since the time of Tertullian in the second century#ad, and we have still yet to run out of any significant resource, nor are we likely to in the foreseeable future. In truth, we have an abundance of natural resources
    http://creation.com/creation-preserv...ominion-part-2

    Cyprian, writing in the third century, stated:
    “You must know that the world has grown old, and does not remain in its former vigor. It bears witness to its own decline. The rainfall and the sun’s warmth are both diminishing; the metals are nearly exhausted#
    St. Cyprian,#ad Demetrium;#in: Jones, W.T.,#A History of Western Philosophy,#2nd#ed., Harcourt, Brace, and World, New York, vol.#2:6, 1969

    George Reisman points out,
    “ … the fact is that the world is made out of natural resources—out of solidly packed natural resources, extending from the upper limits of its atmosphere to its very center, four thousand miles down. This is so because the entire mass of the earth is made of nothing but chemical elements, all of which are natural resources … Even the sands of the Sahara desert are composed of nothing but various compounds of silicon, carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, aluminum, iron, and so on, all of them having who knows what potential uses that science may someday unlock.”
    Reisman, G.,#Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics,#Jameson Books, Ottawa, IL, p. 71, 1998.

    In reality, resources are becoming more abundant, not less.
    http://creation.com/creation-preserv...ominion-part-2


    for responses to increase floods/rainfall,stronger/more hurricanes,sea level rising fast or slow? Greenland melting?c02 cause of most of the warming?climate models
    watch Putting Out the Dragon's Fire on Global Warming Dr. David Legates




    How they view mankind

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution...."
    SaveThePlanetProtest.com
    http://www.salon.com/2010/09/01/jame...covery_gunman/

    I suspect that eradicating smallpox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.
    —John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal

    “we are so bad,so polluting,so exploitative,so violent,so destructive that we owe it to the world not to be born in the first place”
    steyn M america alone regenery new yorkp7-8 2002

    Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.
    —John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal

    The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing….This is not to say that the rise of human civilization is insignificant, but there is no way of showing that it will be much help to the world in the long run.
    —Economist editorial

    We advocate biodiversity for biodiversity’s sake. It may take our extinction to set things straight.
    —David Foreman, Earth First!

    Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.
    —Dave Forman, Founder of Earth First!

    If radical environmentalists were to invent a disease to bring human populations back to sanity, it would probably be something like AIDS
    —Earth First! Newsletter

    Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, is not as important as a wild and healthy planets…Some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.
    —David Graber, biologist, National Park Service

    If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.
    —Prince Phillip, World Wildlife Fund

    Cannibalism is a “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
    —Lyall Watson, The Financial Times, 15 July 1995

    To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.
    —Lamont Cole

    The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer.

    Humans, it claimed, are planetary parasites. We are an infection, a “disease [that] has spread and is still spreading.” The editorial discusses “swarming human masses” and says that we, the food we produce, and the artifacts we manufacture all amount to waste products that make no ecological sense and serve no ecological purpose. As the last line of that 1970 editorial reveals, The Ecologist believes that halting “the spread of the disease with which [man] is afflicting the biosphere” is an admirable goal.
    The Ecologist
    http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2010/...ans-parasites/


    Much like The Ecologist, he believes human civilization should cease expanding and should be “reversed.” He thinks television shows should “stop encouraging the birth of any more parasitic human infants.” Instead, “programs encouraging human sterilization and infertility” should be aired. He believes humans to be “the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and [that we] are wrecking what’s left of the planet.”
    radical environmentalist James J. Lee

    Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels.
    The Ecologist


    At a UN summit on global warming the USA offered with the money to be spend to reduce global warming by 20%. to end hunger and famine disease and allow clean drinking water to all of Africa, the UN rejected.

    Global Warming:#A Scientific and Biblical Expose' of Climate Change gives many alternative reasons for global warming, as well as pointing out a warmer climate overall is better than a cooler climate throughout human history. Shows how global warming polices kill over 1,000,000 in Africa every year. They keep people in poverty leaving them without energy availability.
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...rming-politics

    polices such as with ddt, kill millions of humans in asia to protect a higher rate of bird eggs being prayed apone because of thinner shells..
    Ravaging the World's Poor Dr. James Tonkowich resiting the green dragon.

    In practice, however, animal-righters usually regard man as#lower#than the animals. After the#Valdez#oil spill which killed 30,000 birds (about 0.1% of the area’s population), some called it a worse tragedy than the 1984 chemical leak in Bhopal, India. But this killed more than 3,000people#and injured 200,000 others.8#Many animal liberationists have said it is acceptable to use ‘defective’ humans in scientific tests as opposed to testing things on healthy animals.

    rey, R. & G.,#Journal of Medical Ethics#9:94–97, 1983


    India [many people starve to death, high population] according to UN grew enough food to feed whole population and export. But rats eat large amounts of food, that they will not kill because they view man= to rats.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWzpk7X4veM




    The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
    http://archive.org/details/TheFirstGlobalRevolution



    Nietzsche claims that religion has fostered guilt to such neurotic levels that some people feel culpable and apologetic about their very existence. Compare this with extreme conservationists who want to sacrifice themselves for trees and whales. And teachers, like myself, will attest to significant numbers of their students who feel that their cats or whatever are equal to human beings. And not only are members of the next generation egalitarian about all life, but they often feel positively awful about the way that their species has corrupted and defiled the whole beautiful symphony of nature. The planet, they feel, would be better off without us. We are not worthy. In this extreme form, one does not seek to reduce one's carbon footprint so much as eliminate one's very being.
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/11...#ixzz2JwZucyHx





    Radical environmentalism a religion modern version of ancient pagan religions worshiping creation of mother earth, trees etc. popularization of Pantheism
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    “Western society is in a dramatic shift away from monotheism, notes Dr. Taylor, professor of religion at the University of Florida. And in many cases, he says, former believers are turning to Mother Earth to fill the spiritual void. He cites findings that large numbers of people in Europe and the United States express "deep trust in nature as inherently spiritual or sacred." “
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle1443672/


    “a new religion of Eco-fundamentalism”
    p 104 http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6

    #“Environmentalism, as a substitute for religion, has come to the rescue.# “
    http://chronicle.com/article/Green-Guilt/63447/


    “I suspect that it is no accident that in Europe Eco fundamentalism in general and global warming absolutiam in particular, has found it's most fertile soil. For it is in europe that has become the most secular society in the world, were the traditional religions have the weakest hold. Yet people, still feel the need for comfort and higher values that religion can provide, and it is the quasi-religon of green alarmism and what has been well described as global salvationism....which has filled the vacuum with the reasoned questioning of its mantras regarded as little short of sacrilegious”
    p102 http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6

    “The PC [political correctness] at the ipcs as it were, is the most oppressive and intolerant form of political correctness in the western world”
    p 105 http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6


    In this innovative and deeply felt work, Bron Taylor examines the evolution of "green religions" in North America and beyond: spiritual practices that hold nature as sacred and have in many cases replaced traditional religions.
    Dark Green Religion: Nature Spirituality and the Planetary Future
    http://www.brontaylor.com/environmen..._religion.html

    Unlike faiths that promise heaven in the afterlife, eco-spirituality calls upon adherents to treat the biosphere as paradise on earth, he explains. Figures such as Al Gore have called environmental destruction a "spiritual crisis."
    The movement has latter-day prophets, including naturalist Henry David Thoreau and Sierra Club founder John Muir, and its own sacred texts, notably Charles Darwin's#On the Origin of Species, in which the theory of evolution suggests a kinship between humans and all living things.
    It has modern-day crusaders, such as Jane Goodall and David Suzuki, who wage campaigns to protect nature's "sacred balance."
    Although there is no central organizing body, devotees celebrate their own holidays - equinoxes, solstices and Earth Day - and make mass pilgrimages to sites such as the Carmanah Valley on Vancouver Island and Walden Pond in Massachusetts.#
    For others, the practice of eco-spirituality is ritualized in "mindful" walks in nature each day, or giving praise to the Earth as they consume their vegan meals.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...article1443672

    Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience, we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper. In addition, the righteous pleasures of being more orthodox than your neighbor (in this case being more green) can still be had—the new heresies include failure to compost, or refusal to go organic. Vitriol that used to be reserved for Satan can now be discharged against evil corporate chief executives and drivers of gas-guzzling vehicles. Apocalyptic fear-mongering previously took the shape of repent or burn in hell, but now it is recycle or burn in the ozone hole. In fact, it is interesting the way environmentalism takes on the apocalyptic aspects of the traditional religious narrative. The idea that the end is nigh is quite central to traditional Christianity—it is a jolting wake-up call to get on the righteous path. And we find many environmentalists in a similarly earnest panic about climate change and global warming. There are also high priests of the new religion, with Al Gore ("the Goracle") playing an especially prophetic role.

    We even find parallels in environmentalism of the most extreme, self-flagellating forms of religious guilt. Nietzsche claims that religion has fostered guilt to such neurotic levels that some people feel culpable and apologetic about their very existence. Compare this with extreme conservationists who want to sacrifice themselves for trees and whales. And teachers, like myself, will attest to significant numbers of their students who feel that their cats or whatever are equal to human beings. And not only are members of the next generation egalitarian about all life, but they often feel positively awful about the way that their species has corrupted and defiled the whole beautiful symphony of nature. The planet, they feel, would be better off without us. We are not worthy. In this extreme form, one does not seek to reduce one's carbon footprint so much as eliminate one's very being.

    The same demographic group for whom religion has little or no hold (namely white liberals) turns out to be the most virulent champions of all things green. Is it possible that these folks must vent their moral spleen on environmentalism because they don't have all the theological campaigns (e.g., opposing gay marriage, opposing abortion, etc.) on which social conservatives exercisetheir#indignation?


    Recently while I was brushing my teeth, my 6-year-old son scolded me for running the water too long. He severely reprimanded me, and at the end of his censure asked me, with real outrage, "Don't you love the earth?" And lately he has taken up the energy cause, scampering virtuously around the house turning off lights, even while I'm using them. He seems as stressed and anxious about the sins of environmentalism as I was about masturbation in the days of my Roman Catholic childhood.

    Environmentalism should be regarded on the same level with religion "as the only compelling, value-based narrative available to humanity," according to a paper written two years ago to influence the future strategy of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), the world's would-be environmental watchdog.

    Read more:#http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/11...#ixzz2JwZucyHx

    In the documentary called “cool it”,shows it has become the “moral” issue of the day.
    http://coolit-themovie.com/

    With the decline of Christianity in the face of the evolutionary onslaught, environmentalism seems like a substitute religion, with an established dogma; ‘plastic is bad, recycling is virtuous, forests are sacred sites, developers are satanical’.3

    Hugh Mackay,#The Adelaide Advertiser, 2 May 1990

    #And much environmentalism is fanned by evolutionary pantheism. ‘Mother Earth’ is the creative goddess, who must be protected and pacified.

    Many modern environmentalists hold to a highly romanticized, virtually pantheistic view of nature. Images and stories of simple, yet idyllic, tribal life reinforce the erroneous “noble savage” stereotype—mankind living in glorious harmony with nature without pollution or overcrowding. These environmentalists, therefore, oppose any development that involves any alteration to nature. Such alteration is inherently bad, amounting to a moral violation

    Destruction of Religious Beliefs
    In order to bring about their desired complete reordering of society, the elite have engaged in a systematic effort over many decades to destroy the current religious and moral structures that have dominated for centuries. This requirement does demonstrate that there are real morals and values worth holding onto taught by the major religions even if their stories are largely fabricated. By promoting a do as you please culture via movies, television and other means the elite are creating a cultural climate of moral relativism. In such a climate there are no boundaries and the public can be led to accept any standard no matter how degrading.
    New Religion Based on Earth Worship
    Today, the elite are seeking to destroy the old religious belief systems and replace them with a "new age" religion based on a form of earth worship. Doing so will accomplish multiple objectives - to get people to accept lower standards of living; to accept voluntary sterilization to save mother earth thus helping to depopulate the planet; and to accept restrictions on rights and freedoms in the name of saving the environment.
    Scientists/Experts are the New Priesthood
    As we move into a more advanced form of scientific dictatorship based on earth worship, the new priests are the scientists and related experts. These experts will serve as the technocracy, or the middle man holders of knowledge, as they have throughout history.


    in india local village is wiped out with many deaths loss of house, crops because of overflowing river, Americans went there to help and to try and divert the river around the village to prevent death/financial loss. But locals would not as they viewed river as god like and not to me touched/messed with.
    Logos vs. Mysticism: Environmentalism's Flight from Reason Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi#


    "because the idea of climate change is so plastic, it can be deployed across many of our human projects and can serve many of our psychological,ethical, and spiritual needs"
    Dr mike hulme director of Tyndall center u of east anglia uk.


    celebrate the high holy day of this religion as they pay homage to the earth God. Of Earth Day, evolutionary anthropologist Margaret Meade once explained that:
    EARTH DAY is the first holy day which transcends all national borders, yet preserves all geographical integrities, spans mountains and oceans and time belts, and yet brings people all over the world into one resonating accord, is devoted to the preservation of the harmony in nature and yet draws upon the triumphs of technology, the measurement of time, and instantaneous communication through space. EARTH DAY draws on astronomical phenomena in a new way — which is also the most ancient way — by using the vernal Equinox, the time when the Sun crosses the equator making the length of night and day equal in all parts of the earth. To this point in the annual calendar, EARTH DAY attaches no local or divisive set of symbols, no statement of the truth or superiority of one way of life over another.



    their own ark of the coveneant
    embraced by the UN:
    Recognizing that the United Nations is central to global efforts to solve problems which challenge humanity, the Ark of Hope carrying the Earth Charter and the Temenos Books was exhibited at the United Nations during the World Summit PrepComII in January-February 2002.
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/48749
    http://www.arkofhope.org/


    The Ark of Hope is a cheesy and presumptuous copy of the original Israeli Ark of the Covenant which housed the Ten Commandments that Moses received from God and carried down from Mt Sinai. This is meant to disrespect the original and also wipe out biblical religion.
    The Ark of Hope, a 49” x 32” wooden chest, was created as a place of refuge for the Earth Charter document, an international peoples treaty for building a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century. The Ark of Hope also provides refuge for the Temenos Books, Images and Words for Global Healing, Peace, and Gratitude. The Earth Charter’s 16 principles are the guiding vision behind the creation of these books. The Ark of Hope was created for a celebration of the Earth Charter held at Shelburne Farms, Vermont on September 9, 2001.


    there own temple
    C. GAIA & Temple of Understanding, NYC the
    Gaia is the pagan idea that the earth is itself a living organism. The Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City is actually a shrine of many non-Christian religions.#One author states:
    One of most influential NGOs (Non-governmental organizations) allied closely with the U.N. and intimately involved in their creation of agenda is the#Temple of Understanding (TOU), located in The Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City. This organization’s objectives are, according to its website, “developing an appreciation of religious and cultural diversity, educating for global citizenship and sustainability, expanding public discourse on faith and ecology, and creating just and peaceful communities”. Most importantly, although not explicitly stated by the TOU, the cathedral is the center of cosmology, or the worship of Gaia. The Cathedral of St. John the Divine is not only home to the TOU, but has also previously housed the#National Religious Partnership for the Environment, theLindesfarne Association#and the#Gaia Institute, which are all proponents of the gaia hypothesis.
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/48749


    10 commandments in gergiaeorgia_Guidestones

    Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
    Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
    Unite humanity with a living new language.
    Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
    Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
    Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
    Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
    Balance personal rights with social duties.
    Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
    Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

    The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
    http://archive.org/details/TheFirstGlobalRevolution


    Modern endangered species is a modern day noahs ark. Doomsday scenarios [al gore] straight out of book of revelations.

    threats/scare tactic’s of famine,plagues,floods etc come right out of the OT. If we dont follow these certain rules, or if we sin against mother nature, she will punish us with famine floods etc.

    modern day cap and trade is same as medevil catholic church indulgence.



    Global warming radical environmentalism agendas.

    "The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution."
    #Saul Alinsky’s “rules for radicals http://www.scribd.com/doc/60422138/Rules-for-Radicals-1

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
    - excerpt,#UN Agenda 21
    http://www.green-agenda.com/agenda21.html


    communist goals 1958

    32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
    communist wanted to take over and get behind the environmental movement as they thought it was only way to get enough regulation to control business, destroy the free market system and give more control to the government.


    1]radical environmentalist are after population control, trying to emulate china's one child policy [if the government deems you fit].
    2] relocate people from rual areas to cities
    3] higher gas prices
    4] manipulate transportation patterns.
    5] forbid human access to land
    6] seizure of private property
    7]restrict water use
    8]additional taxes
    9]restrict amount of waste
    10]forced community involvement
    11]many more.


    Agenda 21: How Will It Affect You?


    The activists now prefer to call it “climate change”. This gives them two advantages:
    1. It allows them to seize as “evidence” the inevitable occurrences of unusually cold weather as well as warm ones.
    2. The climate is always changing, so they must be right.
    3. Only the relatively elderly can remember the cynical haste with which the scaremongers dropped the “coming ice age” and embraced exactly the opposite prediction, but aimed at the same culprit – industry.#

    What is the way to destroy economy? Have the major producers and resources [coal oil etc] have so many fines payments they cannot afford anymore and scare public with disasters [global warming] if they use products.
    http://www.amazon.com/Agenda-Grindin.../dp/B003Z3CZGG


    great documentary called cool it. By a professor who believes in man made global warming. Shows how cap and trade is big time corruption, talks of the scare tactics used to gain votes. Shows the indoctrination and scare tactic’s used on school children.Why alternative solutions are not considered.
    http://coolit-themovie.com/


    great article great quotes
    http://www.climatedepot.com/a/9035/S...-UN-IPCC--Gore
    http://globalistagenda.org/




    a better economy and standard of living always leads to better protection and care of environment, yet this is not allowed in poor countries such as in africa/india by environmentalist. Why?.


    Global Warming:#A Scientific and Biblical Expose' of Climate Change gives many alternative reasons for global warming, as well as pointing out a warmer climate overall is better than a cooler climate throughout human history. Shows how global warming polices kill over 1,000,000 in Africa every year. goes into death threats and other things made at those who “deny” man made climate change.
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...rming-politics

    federal money has spent 100's of billions of dollars trying to prove man made global warming, and ignores and does not fund other explanations data that contradict it.

    Some in politics environmentalist that are anti capitalism,political freedom,wealth,industrialization that use promotion of fears of global warming as way to serve there own agenda.

    Alternative solutions that dont change policy or help progressive agenda but just solve solution are outright rejected.
    great documentary called cool it. By a professor who believes in man made global warming. Shows hoe cap and trade is big time corruption, talks of the scare tactics used to gain votes. Shows the indoctrination and scare tactic’s used on school children.Why alternative solutions are not considered.
    http://coolit-themovie.com/
    and
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...rming-politics


    Strong hates capitalism, saying: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?
    Maurice Strong
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/48749



    Destruction of Religious Beliefs
    In order to bring about their desired complete reordering of society, the elite have engaged in a systematic effort over many decades to destroy the current religious and moral structures that have dominated for centuries. This requirement does demonstrate that there are real morals and values worth holding onto taught by the major religions even if their stories are largely fabricated. By promoting a do as you please culture via movies, television and other means the elite are creating a cultural climate of moral relativism. In such a climate there are no boundaries and the public can be led to accept any standard no matter how degrading.
    New Religion Based on Earth Worship
    Today, the elite are seeking to destroy the old religious belief systems and replace them with a "new age" religion based on a form of earth worship. Doing so will accomplish multiple objectives - to get people to accept lower standards of living; to accept voluntary sterilization to save mother earth thus helping to depopulate the planet; and to accept restrictions on rights and freedoms in the name of saving the environment.
    Scientists/Experts are the New Priesthood
    As we move into a more advanced form of scientific dictatorship based on earth worship, the new priests are the scientists and related experts. These experts will serve as the technocracy, or the middle man holders of knowledge, as they have throughout history.


    http://rense.com/general32/americ.htm
    http://agendadocumentary.com/
    http://www.amazon.com/Resisting-Corn...ref=pd_sim_b_1

    In a CSPAN interview, Van Jones#admits#that "environmentalists" only care about the environment when it helps advance their political cause:
    You’ve never seen the environmental movement more quiet during an oil#
    spill. I guarantee you, if John McCain had been President, with that oil
    spill, or George Bush had been President with that oil spill, I’d have#
    been out there with a sign protesting. I didn’t, because of who the#
    President was.
    http://thecitysquare.blogspot.com/20...is-always.html


    The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
    http://archive.org/details/TheFirstGlobalRevolution


    this is not surprising to any christian, as the bible said people would reject there creator and worship nature.

    20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

    21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

    24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
    romans 1
    Last edited by total relism; 04-23-2013 at 05:36.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  2. #2
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Ahahahahahahahaha.

    Also, I'm rather intrigued by this "Great book of revaluations"... Is that the book of the bible where all of its values are changed?
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

    Member thankful for this post:



  3. #3
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Don't need a bible to call the Green-Khmer ideolgy bullcrap, just another doomsday religion clever businessmen make lots of money with
    Last edited by Fragony; 04-08-2013 at 10:46.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fragony View Post
    Don't need a bible to call the Green-Kmer ideolgy bullcrap

    i agree.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  5. #5
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fragony View Post
    Don't need a bible to call the Green-Khmer ideolgy bullcrap, just another doomsday religion clever businessmen make lots of money with
    Still, it's usually best done with accurate arguments, something the OP doesn't have. At all.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  6. #6

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    Still, it's usually best done with accurate arguments, something the OP doesn't have. At all.

    could you please give a example of a inaccurate argument i made? i would love to fix my op if you can show it contained any.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  7. #7
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    could you please give a example of a inaccurate argument i made? i would love to fix my op if you can show it contained any.
    Simple:

    All of it. Including the general tone. And the false quotations. A quick tip in that regard: when re-using a quote someone else has made, always check the original source to confirm its validity. Common mistake.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 11:37.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  8. #8

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    Simple:

    All of it. Including the general tone. And the false quotations. A quick tip in that regard: when re-using a quote someone else has made, always check the original source to confirm its validity. Common mistake.
    i will take that as you not being able to point out even one specific example of "a inaccurate argument" you claimed of my op. Please back up if you can, show any quote taken out of context etc A quick tip when making claims about quotes being out of context, always check the original source to confirm its validity. Common mistake
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 12:11.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  9. #9
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    i will take that as you not being able to point out even one specific example of "a inaccurate argument" you claimed of my op.
    I lol'd.

    This is an informal place, but when all one offers is a wall of text with a dozen quotes, the least one can demand of you is that you actually check the validity of the quotes you give. For a starter, try finding your quote from savetheplanetprotest.com on the website given. Also, look up the definition of the term "poison", and check how that fits with the way you have used it.

    I don't really see the need to give you more, as you have obviously given no effort whatsoever to present your argument.

    Come back when you've put some effort into this, and I'll respond. The OP is no basis of a discussion, it's a great wall of errors.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 12:29.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

    Member thankful for this post:



  10. #10
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    With the commie. There are plenty of studies that question the theory, bring that instead.

  11. #11
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fragony View Post
    With the commie. There are plenty of studies that question the theory, bring that instead.
    The further one ventures from "mainstream science"(and climate change is definitely mainstream), the greater is the risk of running into hacks and pseudoscience. That of course does not mean that non-mainstream is wrong, but it does mean that you have to be more careful and mindful of errors. The OP is a brilliant example of this.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  12. #12
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    The further one ventures from "mainstream science"(and climate change is definitely mainstream), the greater is the risk of running into hacks and pseudoscience. That of course does not mean that non-mainstream is wrong, but it does mean that you have to be more careful and mindful of errors. The OP is a brilliant example of this.
    Kiss->forhead, why can't we just get along

    It's still bull by the way

  13. #13

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    I lol'd.

    This is an informal place, but when all one offers is a wall of text with a dozen quotes, the least one can demand of you is that you actually check the validity of the quotes you give. For a starter, try finding your quote from savetheplanetprotest.com on the website given. Also, look up the definition of the term "poison", and check how that fits with the way you have used it.

    I don't really see the need to give you more, as you have obviously given no effort whatsoever to present your argument.

    Come back when you've put some effort into this, and I'll respond. The OP is no basis of a discussion, it's a great wall of errors.

    as stated, please give one example were you think any quote i have used is out of context, you assume so for some reason, yet cant show were. Than claim others have done what you do, assume a quote is out of context without checking. Hypocritical at its greatest. I checked out the website savetheplanetprotest.com, i see no reason to have to make radical environmentalism confirm to some random obscure website that look not well run at all. My op with poison was that the claim its "bad" is false. Oxygen could be considered a poison if to much.


    edit
    wow just noticed, thanks, i did not mean poison but pollutant, as the context clearly shows the mistake as i used pollutant in same sentace and the one before refereeing to same thing c02. Thank you.


    The rest i will ask, what would you like me to do, what effort etc would you like me to put into it? as far as your claim of errors, i ask once more, please show where you think there are errors instead of assuming and not as you say should be done, going to original source. This is on radical environmentalism, not just any environmentalist.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    The further one ventures from "mainstream science"(and climate change is definitely mainstream), the greater is the risk of running into hacks and pseudoscience. That of course does not mean that non-mainstream is wrong, but it does mean that you have to be more careful and mindful of errors. The OP is a brilliant example of this.
    i agree that "climate change" is mainstream, anyone who thinks climate does not change is rejecting science,but i think you missed the point. Assuming your referring to global warming, than the debate is is man made emissions causing a drastic change in climate. Would you say al gore is a media hit? won a Nobel prize? and would be called mainstream [man made causes will cause global warming natural disasters etc] yet his documentary cannot show as a better example of pseudoscience, yet he is mainstream. really in today's age, mainstream means what the mainstream media/indoctrination sorry education system tells you is mainstream. Many examples of how kids are indoctrinated in false info on global warming on my op video links.


    The activists now prefer to call it “climate change”. This gives them two advantages:
    1. It allows them to seize as “evidence” the inevitable occurrences of unusually cold weather as well as warm ones.
    2. The climate is always changing, so they must be right.
    3. Only the relatively elderly can remember the cynical haste with which the scaremongers dropped the “coming ice age” and embraced exactly the opposite prediction, but aimed at the same culprit – industry.#



    you keep claiming
    careful and mindful of errors. The OP is a brilliant example of this.


    yet over and over dont show these and only assume them, that is why no specifics. So i have to ask, just what are you objecting to? what do you disagree with, what do you see as false?

    you originally claimed as being false from op
    general tone.
    And the false quotations


    how the tone can be false i have no idea, but could you back up original claim of false quotes please? you said i must refer to some random website, why must I? as you even said, original context is what matters, not if a quote can be found on some obscure random website.
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 13:46.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  14. #14
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fragony View Post
    Kiss->forhead, why can't we just get along

    It's still bull by the way
    The New Age movement has embraced enviromentalism, and it's no surprise that anything coming from the new age movement is complete and utter bull, just like any other spiritual and/or religious movement. In addition to that, the nature of science is such that a lot of what we consider proven today is in fact false, which is shown by how many times we have realigned our knowledge in the past. Claiming that our current knowledge of the enviroment cannot be one of those is ridiculous and just plain un-scientific. It needs to be disproved before it can be rejected though(as its current status is "proven"), and that hasn't happened yet. There's a continuous realignment going on, of course, like with any subject.

    An additional comment is that the political side of those who reject man-made climate change has attracted countless hordes of hacks, frauds, retards and idiots. They've done more to discredit alternate scientific theories than the Vatican could ever dream of back in the days of Galileo.

    @TR:

    Your OP contains this quote:

    Quote Originally Posted by You
    "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution...."
    SaveThePlanetProtest.com
    This quote is downright false. It simply does not exist. It's a false quote. If you had put any effort into your post, and checked its existence, you would've known this. As for changing "poison" to "pollutant", it's still a huge miss. Check up the definition of "pollutant". This is a fundamental error, one which tells me that you haven't the faintest bit of knowledge of natural science. It's like writing a paper on grammatical errors and having consistent a/an errors.

    I see no effort on your part to make a coherent argument, and so I don't really see the need for me to counter your wall of errors. The best argument against the OP, is the OP itself.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  15. #15

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    An additional comment is that the political side of those who reject man-made climate change has attracted countless hordes of hacks, frauds, retards and idiots. They've done more to discredit alternate scientific theories than the Vatican could ever dream of back in the days of Galileo.

    if anyone wants to see who the political "countless hordes of hacks, frauds, retards and idiots" that this issue bring in, just watch the links on the op, its not thoes who "reject man-made climate change".

    concerning Galileo, we should make sure its true history we tell.
    http://creation.com/the-galileo-affa...ic-hagiography
    shows that ‘Contrary to legend, Galileo and the Copernican system were well regarded by church officials. Galileo was the victim of his own arrogance, the envy of his colleagues, and the politics of Pope Urban VIII. He was not accused of criticising the Bible, but disobeying a papal decree.’



    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    @TR:

    Your OP contains this quote:



    This quote is downright false. It simply does not exist. It's a false quote. If you had put any effort into your post, and checked its existence, you would've known this. As for changing "poison" to "pollutant", it's still a huge miss. Check up the definition of "pollutant". This is a fundamental error, one which tells me that you haven't the faintest bit of knowledge of natural science. It's like writing a paper on grammatical errors and having consistent a/an errors.

    I see no effort on your part to make a coherent argument, and so I don't really see the need for me to counter your wall of errors. The best argument against the OP, is the OP itself.
    it does contain that quote true, as it should.James lee is original creator of the website, How you can claim its false i have no idea.
    http://grist.org/childfree/2010-09-0...ing-eco-wacko/
    http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?se...rld&id=7644553
    http://publicintelligence.net/james-...how-treatment/
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2581733/posts
    http://thoughtcatalog.com/2010/james...age-situation/


    so your most recent claim of
    " It simply does not exist. It's a false quote. If you had put any effort into your post, and checked its existence, you would've known this."

    applies 100% to yourself as i sated before, hypocritical self contradictory and down right false.


    Not to mention we all clearly see your claim of multiple quotes out of context has show all of 0 out of context quotes. Showing again you assume things without tacking your own advice of checking original source.


    pollutant
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollutant
    A pollutant is a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource.


    I think you misunderstand my op so i wont charge you with be false/lying here.
    tell me know how its a big miss as you claim, as my op says

    "
    lie told
    co2 is a pollutant.

    carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it is like calling clouds pollutants, they are naturally forming and essential to life.
    an appeal to reason a cool look at global warming Nigel Lawson.
    http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6"


    effort
    as i asked before what would you like of me? this thread does not end in op, what arguments do you wish me to make? what are you asking for?

    I am fully aware you have assumed "counter your wall of errors" and if you can show anyone i would love to fix, but so far you have not clearly, only assumed a out of context quote never happened, when it did.
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 15:19.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  16. #16
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    The quote was given as from the website savetheplanetprotest.com. It does not appear on that site. Your inability to understand that this makes the quote false astounds me.

    You still haven't shown you known what a pollutant is. Your usage is still utterly wrong, and your sentences makes no sense because of it. I see no effort, and thus see no need to raise additional objections.

    Go through your OP. Remove the errors and clean it up. Come back again, and you'll have your discussion. Until then: no dice.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 15:23.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  17. #17
    Clan Takiyama Senior Member CBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,408

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    A study from 2008 http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/131047.pdf showed that peer reviewed literature (1965-1979) mainly focused on warming.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1970s_papers.gif 
Views:	142 
Size:	14.1 KB 
ID:	8975

    The terms "Global Warming" and "Climate change" have both been used for quite some time http://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=326

    Both Terms Have Long Been Used

    The argument "they changed the name" suggests that the term 'global warming' was previously the norm, and the widespread use of the term 'climate change' is now. However, this is simply untrue. For example, a seminal climate science work is Gilbert Plass' 1956 study 'The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change' (which coincidentally estimated the climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide at 3.6°C, not far off from today's widely accepted most likely value of 3°C). Barrett and Gast published a letter in Science in 1971 entitled simply 'Climate Change'. The journal 'Climatic Change' was created in 1977 (and is still published today). The IPCC was formed in 1988, and of course the 'CC' is 'climate change', not 'global warming'. There are many, many other examples of the use of the term 'climate change' many decades ago. There is nothing new whatsoever about the usage of the term.
    And a Google Scholar search reveals that the term 'climate change' was in use before the term 'global warming', and has always been the more commonly-used term in scientific literature:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cc_vs_gw.GIF 
Views:	190 
Size:	5.0 KB 
ID:	8976
    Of all the "scientists" who doesn't believe in it, it is amazing how they don't produce anything.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Powell-Science-Pie-Chart.png 
Views:	193 
Size:	51.5 KB 
ID:	8977


    Science vs. the Feelies

    Members thankful for this post (2):



  18. #18

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    The quote was given as from the website savetheplanetprotest.com. It does not appear on that site. Your inability to understand that this makes the quote false astounds me.

    You still haven't shown you known what a pollutant is. Your usage is still utterly wrong, and your sentences makes no sense because of it. I see no effort, and thus see no need to raise additional objections.

    Go through you OP. Remove the errors and clean it up. Come back again, and you'll have your discussion. Until then: no dice.

    it was originally on the site please read up sir, he is know dead.

    "His list of demands, posted at savetheplanetprotest.com, is a teabagger’s wet dream of enviro idiocy."

    the original quote is from his list of demands,from his site savetheplanet that he created.

    polutent
    you are desperate fro sure know,i give example in op as it being false claim, i give definition, all you ever have is claims its false. or it could be you still dont get what i said in op. I said c02 is not a polutant.

    you said
    " Remove the errors and clean it up"
    I would if you could show me any, all you have given is claim of a quote you have been shown is legit over and over, and what apears to be a misunderstanding of c02 and pollutants. I think me and you both know your running because you still cant back up your original claims of errors and false quotes. Sometimes it ok to admit if you jumped the gun.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  19. #19
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    To add to CBR's post: the "31,000 scientists reject climate change"-claim has been debunked so utterly so many times I'm astounded to still see it used as fact, anywhere.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  20. #20
    Nobody expects the Senior Member Lemur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin Death Trip
    Posts
    15,754

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    it was originally on the site please read up sir
    That's not an issue, use Wayback Machine and find the original quote.

    Alternatively:

    1. Admit it's a fabrication, or
    2. Declare that you can't be bothered.

  21. #21
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    it was originally on the site please read up sir, he is know dead.

    "His list of demands, posted at savetheplanetprotest.com, is a teabagger’s wet dream of enviro idiocy."

    the original quote is from his list of demands,from his site savetheplanet that he created.

    polutent
    you are desperate fro sure know,i give example in op as it being false claim, i give definition, all you ever have is claims its false. or it could be you still dont get what i said in op. I said c02 is not a polutant.

    you said
    " Remove the errors and clean it up"
    I would if you could show me any, all you have given is claim of a quote you have been shown is legit over and over, and what apears to be a misunderstanding of c02 and pollutants. I think me and you both know your running because you still cant back up your original claims of errors and false quotes. Sometimes it ok to admit if you jumped the gun.
    lol.

    You wrote:

    Quote Originally Posted by You
    carbon dioxide is not a pollutant
    To which the answer is: yes it bloody is. Laughable mistake when the subject is natural science. In fact, if co2 isn't counted as a pollutant, nothing can be.

    The definition of poison fourth graders learn(the poison is in the dosage) is well worth to keep in mind.

    As for the false quote:

    It still astounds me that you cannot understand how to quote. A quote which cannot be checked is worthless, and the one who gives a quote must include the information the reader needs to check the validity of the quote. Failure to do so results in a false quote. The quote, as you have given it, simply does not exist. If you are sure of its existence and validity, you must give the reader the resources needed to confirm it.

    Basic academia 101.

    And as I've said previously, the OP is so full of errors that I simply can't bother pointing them all out. A little effort on your part to iron out the worst ones is the minimum one can expect, really.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 15:41.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  22. #22

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by CBR View Post
    A study from 2008 http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/131047.pdf showed that peer reviewed literature (1965-1979) mainly focused on warming.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1970s_papers.gif 
Views:	142 
Size:	14.1 KB 
ID:	8975

    The terms "Global Warming" and "Climate change" have both been used for quite some time http://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=326





    Of all the "scientists" who doesn't believe in it, it is amazing how they don't produce anything.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Powell-Science-Pie-Chart.png 
Views:	193 
Size:	51.5 KB 
ID:	8977


    Science vs. the Feelies

    climate change/global warming
    i think you misunderstand here,none says that they have not talked of climate change, read my quotes from 1970's, they go far before that as well. Thay always claim climate change, often media al gore type know refer to anything that involves a change in climate [no one disagrees climate does not change] is do to global warming.


    second part, none really disagrees that the earth is not experiencing a warming trend, well maybe some,none i am aware of i posted on op.


    you claim that scientist who reject the man made idea and scare tactics don't produce anything,than base that on a youstube video instead of what they say produce, do you see the circularity in that?.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  23. #23

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemur View Post
    That's not an issue, use Wayback Machine and find the original quote.

    Alternatively:

    1. Admit it's a fabrication, or
    2. Declare that you can't be bothered.

    so let me see if i am right, i need to go to a webpage,that appears to be not run anymore [as the creator id dead] that is constaley confirmed to have a quote from a person ,show in multiple media reporting, to convince you? I could than edit my op, and say it never said anything about global warming. than multiple people would quote from my original op [used later] showing it did, but i kill myself so it cant be reedited. Than you would have to claim i never said it as it can be produced from my original op.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    lol.

    You wrote:



    To which the answer is: yes it bloody is. Laughable mistake when the subject is natural science. In fact, if co2 isn't counted as a pollutant, nothing can be.

    The definition of poison fourth graders learn(the poison is in the dosage) is well worth to keep in mind.

    As for the false quote:

    It still astounds me that you cannot understand how to quote. A quote which cannot be checked is worthless, and the one who gives a quote must include the information the reader needs to check the validity of the quote. Failure to do so results in a false quote. The quote, as you have given it, simply does not exist. If you are sure of its existence and validity, you must give the reader the resources needed to confirm it.

    Basic academia 101.

    posion
    as i said in post 13

    " Oxygen could be considered a poison if to much."

    but the lie/false info that is given is,no matter how much, any released c02 is a pollutant. Hopefully you know understand,that is why it was labeled under the lies section.

    I thought you may have been misunderstanding it.


    as i said,hes dead,lol. But you can deny what everyone else knows [maybe big conspiracy against radicals, maybe he never held people hostage,maybe he never wrote down his demands].

    im going to copy paste my response above
    so let me see if i am right, i need to go to a webpage,that appears to be not run anymore [as the creator id dead] that is constaley confirmed to have a quote from a person ,show in multiple media reporting, to convince you? I could than edit my op, and say it never said anything about global warming. than multiple people would quote from my original op [used later] showing it did, but i kill myself so it cant be reedited. Than you would have to claim i never said it as it can be produced from my original op.


    and they say there are climate change deniers,i wish this type of skeptical thinking was applied to their theory of man made global warming. Anyone who is not in denial, google James J. Lee radical environmentalist.
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 15:57.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  24. #24

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    here is further info on website qoute

    ccording to WHOIS record, SaveThePlanetProtest.com was first registered on January 7, 2008 under registrant James Lee.[1] The domain was registered with a private registration service, which hid the registrant’s information. The WHOIS record only displayed a PO Box address located in Burnaby, Canada, in the contact info.
    The registrant James Lee, a Korean-American, was an environmental protester. On September 1, 2010, he entered the Discovery Communications headquarters building in Silver Spring, Maryland, with a gun and several bombs strapped to his body and took three hostages.[2]
    Lee made his manifesto on his website SaveThePlanetProtest.com (currently defunct) with several demands, including "daily programs based on Daniel Quinn's Ishmael in game show formats broadcasted through Discovery Channel." The manifesto expressed Lee’s disapproval of Discovery Channel promoting global overpopulation. After nearly a four-hour standoff, he was shot and killed by police, and the three hostages were immediately freed.[3]
    The website SaveThePlanetProtest.com was hosted by Doteasy Technology Inc.. The spokesman of this Canadian web hosting firm announced that they had provided information to Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) for further investigation. RCMP Insp. Tim Shields stated that the RCMP was aware of the website situation and was in touch with US law enforcement officials in the investigation.[4]




    i think its clear the radicals on this site are simply trying to hide the truth as well as try to find anything wrong with my op to try to get it ignored. Not to mention even if this one quote was false [it clearly is not] that would not change the worldview of those and how they view human life.


    here is link to his manifesto
    http://www.salon.com/2010/09/01/jame...covery_gunman/
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 16:02.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  25. #25
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Oxygen is indeed a poison. It's also a pollutant. So is co2. The problem with your sentences in the P is not that they are inherently wrong, it's that they simply don't make sense.

    The dosage is the poison, and the same goes for pollutants. Although it's more common to say "placement" instead of "dosage". But that's just to give a clarification to the most common scenarios, in all cases it's a matter of dosage. Some co2 in the air is not a pollutant, more co2 in the air is a pollutant.

    While your statement on the quote is almost unreadable, if I got the gist of it I'd say it's accurate. When you quote, you absolutely need to give the reader the information needed to verify it. A dead host isn't an excuse, sorry. If you don't you might as well leave it out, it adds nothing to a discussion.

    EDIT: now this is an example of how you source. Was that really so hard? Now the quote is good instead of being false as it is in the OP.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 16:06.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  26. #26
    Nobody expects the Senior Member Lemur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin Death Trip
    Posts
    15,754

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    so let me see if i am right, i need to go to a webpage,that appears to be not run anymore [as the creator id dead] that is constaley confirmed to have a quote from a person ,show in multiple media reporting, to convince you?
    Since you can't be bothered with Wayback Machine to substantiate your own quote, how about you just Google it? Turns out this line: "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution," is a direct reference to a 1997 novel titled My Ishmael. It was referenced by crazed gunman James J. Lee. Here's his manifesto (PDF warning).

    So ... how, exactly, does a crazed gunman's misinterpretation of a 1997 novel have any bearing on anything? And why couldn't you be bothered to check and link easily available sources?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    Member thankful for this post:



  27. #27

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemur View Post
    Since you can't be bothered with Wayback Machine to substantiate your own quote, how about you just Google it? Turns out this line: "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution," is a direct reference to a 1997 novel titled My Ishmael. It was referenced by crazed gunman James J. Lee. Here's his manifesto (PDF warning).

    So ... how, exactly, does a crazed gunman's misinterpretation of a 1997 novel have any bearing on anything? And why couldn't you be bothered to check and link easily available sources?

    Inquiring minds want to know.
    great post thank for original, know will you admit its not a false quote?please tell hore tore you can ask hows it relevant, but can no longer say its false as you claimed. I am glad you posted and the author made his position known, not surprising he distanced himself from the crazy. How is it relevant? because it was to him James Lee as he understood it. how he used it what he taught of people was point of my whole section of op, not weather someone else holds same view he did.


    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    Oxygen is indeed a poison. It's also a pollutant. So is co2. The problem with your sentences in the P is not that they are inherently wrong, it's that they simply don't make sense.

    The dosage is the poison, and the same goes for pollutants. Although it's more common to say "placement" instead of "dosage". But that's just to give a clarification to the most common scenarios, in all cases it's a matter of dosage. Some co2 in the air is not a pollutant, more co2 in the air is a pollutant.

    While your statement on the quote is almost unreadable, if I got the gist of it I'd say it's accurate. When you quote, you absolutely need to give the reader the information needed to verify it. A dead host isn't an excuse, sorry. If you don't you might as well leave it out, it adds nothing to a discussion.

    EDIT: now this is an example of how you source. Was that really so hard? Now the quote is good instead of being false as it is in the OP.


    notice what i boleded in your post.

    [B]first[/B]second
    in the amount, i will clarify in op that the lie is no matter how much any release of c02 is pollutant. Thank you, i thought it was more ovius.

    third
    still good original source in op as when it was first posted when website was running. But i shall post both i guess.


    edit
    just edited op


    know includes any relased
    any co2 released is a pollutant, .

    carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it is like calling clouds pollutants, they are naturally forming and essential to life.
    an appeal to reason a cool look at global warming Nigel Lawson.
    http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6


    know includes second refence
    "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution...."
    SaveThePlanetProtest.com
    http://www.salon.com/2010/09/01/jame...covery_gunman/
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 16:23.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  28. #28
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    No one has ever claimed that co2 is not a fundamental component in the world. That's absurd. You're arguing a strawman.

    ....And you still don't get how the quote as it stands in your OP is false? I'm lost for words.

    EDIT: I see you've changed your OP. Good, your quote is now useable.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 16:35.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

  29. #29

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
    No one has ever claimed that co2 is not a fundamental component in the world. That's absurd. You're arguing a strawman.

    ....And you still don't get how the quote as it stands in your OP is false? I'm lost for words.
    because as i showed many times int not false, its original.

    pollutant
    you in fact are arguing straw man and very desperate to find anything indeed, i said c02 is not a pollutant only.

    , in many schools it is called poultant, my kids homework. This book gives many examples.

    AN Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming
    http://www.amazon.com/Appeal-Reason-.../dp/B008SLKRA6

    watch the dvd and documentaries on op many are free, many interview kids see how they see c02, its a pollutant.

    why if you goggle do so many articles come up defending that c02 is not a pollutant if that is never claimed?just google it.


    http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/07/epa-formally-declares-co2-a-dangerous-pollutant/
    http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2009/12/1037/
    http://www.expresswaysonline.com/expwys/ourselves.html
    Why is carbon dioxide considered as a pollutant?
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/<b>Why_is_..._pollutant</b>


    etc etc
    Last edited by total relism; 04-08-2013 at 16:41.
    “Its been said that when human beings stop believing in god they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse, they believe in anything.” Malcolm maggeridge

    The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going. Proverbs -14.15
    The first to present his case seems right,till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Genesis 1.1

  30. #30
    has a Senior Member HoreTore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,014

    Default Re: Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    Yes, co2 is a pollutant.

    How on earth you come to the conclusion that co2 being a pollutant is in opposition to co2 being a fundamental natural resource is quite frankly beyond me. It's both, and which term you use depends on the context.

    Just like it is with every other pollutant out there. Again, I point to the possibility that you do not understand what a pollutant is as the most reasonable explanation.

    EDIT: Barring the possibility of some whacko religious schools in hillbillystan, photosynthesis is taught to all school children. Calling co2 a pollutant while teaching photosynthesis is absurd. Photosynthesis is also one of the first chemical reactions a pupil is exposed to, way before co2 is discussed as a pollutant.
    Last edited by HoreTore; 04-08-2013 at 16:52.
    Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO