- Joined
- Jun 8, 2012
- Messages
- 19,500
- Reaction score
- 5,458
- Location
- Wokingham, England
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Lots of propaganda out there about seat belts too. For shame, governments. Trying to encourage responsible choices. For shame.
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
...whereas, of course, the anti-AGW crowd is entirely objective and free of political manipulation. Wake up.
They arent the ones fraudulently emptying my pockets
Yeah, keep believing that. :roll:
When I buy fuel I'm getting something in return. What exactly is it I have gotten from the 40% green CO2 tariiff on my UK energy bills since 2009 ?
It's not exclusively a benefit to you, it pays for a reduction in the negative externalities of global warming, or so the theory goes. In the same way you're forced to fork over extra quid for a car equipped with a catalytic converter and other pollution reduction technology
So you'd be quite happy to see yourself scammed on the basis of an increasingly dodgy hypothesis and no warming for the last 15 years ! Somehow I'd seriously doubt that.
UK energy bills are set to double by 2020 despite falling commodity prices and expected national gas self sufficiency by 2015 purely on the basis of this stealth tax. If you can afford to pay for such moral superiority be my guest. Me I get a bit angsty when I'm getting 'volunteered' for it. I can afford the heating bills our old folk certainly cant. So much for moral superiority then :roll:
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.
Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes
But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there.
You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so
And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality
The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple
Climate realists did not write the the climategate e-mails. They climate fraudsters did that to themselves.People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.
Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes. But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there. You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so.
And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality. The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple.
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
Lots of propaganda out there about seat belts too. For shame, governments. Trying to encourage responsible choices. For shame.
Pop quiz y'all. The world is not warming anymore because:So you'd be quite happy to see yourself scammed on the basis of an increasingly dodgy hypothesis and no warming for the last 15 years ! Somehow I'd seriously doubt that.
How long have you lived in a democratic country, I wonder?Many snicker at the accusation that governments are complicit in the current AGW scare and that they are simply following the advice of their scientific advisors. These three public information videos financed using public taxpayer monies would seem to suggest otherwise by going far beyond what the science supports in order to scare their respective taxpayers into compliance. In Europe in particular this has been fair game
This one aired on the BBC was clearly meant to programme the guilt into the conscience of parents whilst scaring the kiddies about their futures too. Obviously this acheived the clever double header of programming both present and future taxpayers. Needless to say this propaganda piece was devoid of any legitimate scientific content.
Act on CO2: Bedtime Story - YouTube
Your evidence that the these videos were funded by the UK government and EU money, please.This one was paid for by the UK government is so graphic it had to be pulled by the BBC. But the fact that someone in government thought that financing and then airing this shocker would be advisable in the first place is what is so troubling
10-10 - No Pressure: green ad shows kids exploding GRAPHIC!!! - YouTube
And then you have this one financed by EU money that wheels out that old alarmist cliche the polar bear. The cute and cuddly polar bears are always good for guilt trip or two even though their populations are actually flourishing ! (warning graphic)
Polar Bear - YouTube
When you see this sort of government backed media disinformation campaign its little wonder why some of the more gullible out there are so vehement in the defence of claims of looming catastrophe isnt it ?
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
The problem is that spending government funds to indoctrinate the uneducated is a bit unethical.
Imagine that. A government operating without ethical guidance.
Well, it worked pretty well for Hitler so, why not?
...whereas, of course, the anti-AGW crowd is entirely objective and free of political manipulation. Wake up.
Yeah, keep believing that. :roll:
It's not exclusively a benefit to you, it pays for a reduction in the negative externalities of global warming, or so the theory goes. In the same way you're forced to fork over extra quid for a car equipped with a catalytic converter and other pollution reduction technology.
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.
Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes. But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there. You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so.
And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality. The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple.
HEEEEEY GODWIN
I'm curious as to when in Conservaland "educate" and "indoctrinate" became synonyms.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?