0
   

Watermelons on the anniversary of Climategate

 
 
Reply Mon 22 Nov, 2010 06:23 am
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100064423/on-the-anniversary-of-climategate-the-watermelons-show-their-true-colours/

Discussion on FR:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2630487/posts

Quote:
Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside.


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2010/11/Watermelons.jpg

Quote:
...This is the theme of my forthcoming book on the controlling, poisonously misanthropic and aggressively socialistic instincts of the modern environmental movement. So how very generous that two of that movement’s leading lights should have chosen the anniversary of Climategate to prove my point entirely.

The first comes courtesy of German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer who has openly admitted what some of us have been saying for some time: that “Climate Change” has nothing to do with man’s modest and thoroughly unthreatening contribution to global mean temperatures, nor even with the plight of baby polar bears so sweet you could almost hug them if you didn’t know they’d take your arm off in a trice. All it is, really, is a Marxist exercise in minority grievance-mongering and wealth redistribution on a global scale...
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 329 • Replies: 3
No top replies

 
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Mon 22 Nov, 2010 06:24 am
"Green on the outside, red on the inside"... Talk about not mincing words...
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  2  
Reply Mon 22 Nov, 2010 07:25 am
@gungasnake,
A watermellon is a good metaphore for the common brain of the right reactionary... Hard on the outside and mushy on the inside..

My economics is socialist.. We will have it, and the only choice is whether we will have the socialism of poverty or of luxury... In fact; without certain knowledge no one can say whether the rich owning most of the commonwelath does not preserve some resources for being destroyed... What is clear is that waste and mismanagement is the rule, that every day reveals people from one city streaming to another, in all likelyhood performing the same jobs in different places of those people coming from the opposite direction...

Our numerous producers competing for, and flooding the markets, the booms and busts, the wasting of fortunes, and capital, and lives are nothing to recommend capital... If we consider the wars for markets and resources, the world wide denials of rights and justice for capital, the destruction of all it cannot put a price on and bring to market, including native cultures; then capital is everywhere a criminal enterprise...

But whether gathered by fair means or foul; whose wealth is it???...Since you bring up the issue of redistribution of wealth; who's wealth is it???... Our oldest property law, which is really the fast fish principal known to those familiar to Moby Dick, says that only the government can dispose of Indian Lands because the government, as the people, has taken all that land from the natives, and made it our commonwealth... If the people of the commonwealth should see fit to allow some people to have some of the commonwealth, it must still support the population in private hands, and it must still pay for its own defense...Property is not just to look at, and to warn others off of... Whether in private hands or public, wealth is still the common wealth, and the rich are on their good behavior with it, or it can at any moment be returned to the people and to the commonwealth, as it should be through taxes, piecemeal...

You should try to understand that both rights and property are what the people say they are, and that as much as the rich, having all, wish to make a dynamic situation static and fixed forever in time; -it is not, and will never be so... Let the rich put a fence around all they own..Let them hire private police when they will not pay taxes for public plice.... Let them deny to the commonwealth their support, and call all they own: Free and Clear... The people own both the fence, and the land it surrounds, and all the wealth in all the banks- if they should so decide, and it is the rich who make certain of the day when all is taken back into the commonwealth and we begin this nation anew; and the only question without answer is: Will the rich lay their necks on the chopping blocks in a vain attempt to protect their privilage...
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Nov, 2010 08:01 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Quote:

The first comes courtesy of German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer who has openly admitted what some of us have been saying for some time: that “Climate Change” has nothing to do with man’s modest and thoroughly unthreatening contribution to global mean temperatures, nor even with the plight of baby polar bears so sweet you could almost hug them if you didn’t know they’d take your arm off in a trice. All it is, really, is a Marxist exercise in minority grievance-mongering and wealth redistribution on a global scale...


Professor Ottmar Edenhofer wrote:
So far economic growth has gone hand in hand with the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. One percent growth means one percent more emissions. The historic memory of mankind remembers: In order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas. And therefore, the emerging economies fear CO2 emission limits.
[...]
... particularly the industrialized countries have a system that relies almost exclusively on fossil fuels. There is no historical precedent and no region in the world that has decoupled its economic growth from emissions. Thus, you cannot expect that India or China will regard CO2 emissions reduction as a great idea. And it gets worse: We are in the midst of a renaissance of coal, because oil and gas (sic) have become more expensive, but coal has not. The emerging markets are building their cities and power plants for the next 70 years, as if there would be permanently no high CO 2 price.
[...]
Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.
[...]
A group of hikers, who represent the world community, walks through a desert. The industrialized nations drink half of the water and then say generously: “Let us share the rest." The others reply: “This is not possible; you have already drunk half of the water. Let us talk first about your historical responsibility." I think if we are arguing about the water supply because we cannot agree on the ethical principles, then we will die of thirst. What we need to look for is an oasis that is the non-carbon global economy. It's about the common departure for this oasis.
Source
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Watermelons on the anniversary of Climategate
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/20/2025 at 10:10:04