You don't seem to have a very good memory, Stepin Fetchit. You babbled on about 60 alleged scientists and their papers--that's an ad populum fallacy, of the "snob appeal" variety.
I have no idea what Olive Tree has been arguing with you about, because i don't read his posts.
You've trashed this thread with you idiotic denial of reputable scientific work...That's common with holy rollers like you...vicious personal attacks ..
You don't seem to have a very good memory, Stepin Fetchit.
no one can victimize anyone else online unless they fall for the bullying, you pathetic bullshit merchant.
I understand the technical term these days is "cry-bully". I rather like it.
Parados has addressed his claims point by point, and Parados is not given to name-calling. I guess people see what they want to see.
Jimbo aint happy, which suits me just fine.
NASA Global Warming Alarmist Endorses Book That Calls For Mass Genocide
Prominent NASA global warming alarmist Dr. James Hansen has endorsed an eco-fascist book that calls for cities to be razed to the ground, industrial civilization to be destroyed and genocidal population reduction measures to be implemented in the name of preventing climate change.
Hansen, who was back in the news today commenting on a NASA press release that claims the last decade was the warmest on record, said that Keith Farnish, author of a new book called Time’s Up, is correct in calling for acts of sabotage and environmental terrorism in blowing up dams and demolishing cities in order to return the planet to the agrarian age....“Keith Farnish has it right: time has practically run out, and the ’system’ is the problem,” wrote Dr. James Hansen on the Amazon website.
Keith Farnish, author of a new book called Time’s Up, is correct in calling for acts of sabotage and environmental terrorism in blowing up dams and demolishing cities in order to return the planet to the agrarian age
The Club of Rome...consists of current and former heads of state, UN bureaucrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists and business leaders from around the globe. The club states that its mission is "to act as a global catalyst for change through the identification and analysis of the crucial problems facing humanity and the communication of such problems to the most important public and private decision makers as well as to the general public."
"In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together."
The real enemy then is humanity itself.
As for Parry, he didn't address many arguments that I was making at all. To the extent he did, he was just wrong.
Farnish doesn't seem to have a functioning conscience. Take global warming away from him and he'd find some other reason to preach violence.
I wonder how I can not be addressing your argument...
Where your 6 points not an argument?
"First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the pig Tate's stomach! Wild!"
Dohrn became one of the leaders of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM), a radical wing of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), in the late 1960s. Dohrn with ten other SDS members associated with the RYM issued, on June 18, 1969, a sixteen-thousand-word manifesto...The manifesto stated that "the goal [of revolution] is the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism...
. On October 11, 1968, Dohrn suggested she would expand the movement to non-students and do all that was necessary to complete the job of "attack, expose, destroy." In greeting each other, delegates to the war council often spread their fingers to signify the fork [in Sharon Tate's stomach].
So it isn't your argument because you claimed it was made by certain climatologists?
Instead, you have just claimed I am wrong...
In a round about way, what he's saying is anti-science (although it's folded into generally anti-human). So we're almost back on topic.
And read my response to your attempted "refutation" (which only made assertions, with no support by way of facts, evidence, or reason).