Bmanmcfly, you lost complete credibility with the Holdren nonsense. As long as you buy into partisan crap, you can't be taken seriously. No a fact check on that and you should be able to see you error.
I'll try and address the rest later. But I had to point out how disappointing it is to see anyone spout out such stupid partisan nonsense.
Have you read his 1970's writings?? How about his 80's writings? (repeating the same sentiment)... how about his writings from 1996? (another repeat of the sentiment).... you want 'partisan crap', Bush's science adviser Paul Ehrlich co-wrote 'ecoscience'.
These aren't the musings of some control freak... this was a scholarly justification of the hows and whys of population control.... Hell, even when Holdren was interviewed and asked about the book, he went and denied the allegations (which is probably that fact check you mentioned) MEANWHILE THE BOOK IN QUESTION WAS PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED!!!
So, specifically, am I discredited because he didn't write the book discussing such things? Is it because he 'didn't mean it'?? Is it because he changed his mind? Is it because you don't believe anyone could be that evil?
No, I am not taking any sort of partisan position (except where my positions naturally will fall in partisan lines)... I limited the mention to Holdren ONLY to show that this is still going on now... if you want I could go further back... to the papers come out in the 60's how hormones were being studied that would be added to vaccines that would sterilize SOME women and reduce fertility in others. Or even further back to the 20's where the studies were being done on monkeys testing the potentials of 'anti-hormones'...
or I could also point to people like Prince Charles who wrote in his book how if he reincarnates he wishes to be a deadly virus to help with overpopulation.... or looking at the Georgia Guidestones which declares that the world population should be maintained at a stable 500 million.
There's simply TOO MUCH information to cover in the 12000 character limits. So, even if you COULD prove to me that ehrlich and Holdren were somehow joking back in the mid-70's, again in the 80's and again in 1996, I could probably find another 5-10 examples of people in positions of power and influence discussing the need or their desire to reduce human population numbers, and how this is intricately tied to the 'environmentalist' agenda.
That said, I don't expect most people with valid concerns, since yes, humans ARE causing environmental problems through certain activites / industries, to grasp how they are being led to support a position with such diabolical (for lack of a better term) intentions backing it up.
Bottom line... I don't care where my 'credibility' stands... my preference is to have people look into the information and come to their own conclusions... since I know that any objective look into the information makes a pretty conclusive case that there are influential members of society that have a deep seeded belief that the world is over-populated and that there is a need for drastic reduction in human population. Most sources that specify will allude to a 'majority', but most common numbers are between 80-90% reduction, with some 'extreme' who believe humanity to be a parasite and should be COMPLETELY eliminated. "How great an honor it will be to be the last human on earth and to commit suicide so that there can be a great return of the wilderness of the earth."
I honestly WISH I was completely off base with all this.
I have read it, and you are doing more buying into Beck misinformation and disingenuous interpretation than honestly trying to understand what he wrote. Anf that is why you lose credibility and can't be taken seriously/
And while I commend people keeping an open mind and trying to gather information to make judgements, I don't see that from deniers. What I see is people doing the Bush drill, and starting with an answer they want, and trying to make information fit their precoceived answer. This is a poor way to problem solve. Mix that illogic with partisan garbage, beckish disingenuousness, and you have a pretty sad and silly position.
I'm a denier, but I believe there is a better explanation for this. Considering how the Earth has to survive against volcanic activity, our CO2 output is probably that of a couple large volcano explosions. Earth has buffers in place to safeguard against large temperature changes just like our body regulate our temperatures. But I am not saying we should completely ignore the possibility of man-made CO2 as the culprit. I would like to see more research on that, but to force laws just on a hunch is enough to make me a denier for now because people are jumping on the bandwagon and making decisions that can break an economy or two in some countries.
I have read it, and you are doing more buying into Beck misinformation and disingenuous interpretation than honestly trying to understand what he wrote. Anf that is why you lose credibility and can't be taken seriously
And while I commend people keeping an open mind and trying to gather information to make judgements, I don't see that from deniers. What I see is people doing the Bush drill, and starting with an answer they want, and trying to make information fit their precoceived answer. This is a poor way to problem solve. Mix that illogic with partisan garbage, beckish disingenuousness, and you have a pretty sad and silly position.
I'm a denier, but I believe there is a better explanation for this. Considering how the Earth has to survive against volcanic activity, our CO2 output is probably that of a couple large volcano explosions. Earth has buffers in place to safeguard against large temperature changes just like our body regulate our temperatures. But I am not saying we should completely ignore the possibility of man-made CO2 as the culprit. I would like to see more research on that, but to force laws just on a hunch is enough to make me a denier for now because people are jumping on the bandwagon and making decisions that can break an economy or two in some countries.
First, I heartily dislike Glen Beck, and I had no idea that he had even commented on the book... This particular book, in honesty, I first heard discussed listening to Alex Jones, after which I did manage to find the book in a local library, but never bothered to read the whole thing, just skimmed through certain pages to see that things quoted were accurate and in context...
Second, there's no NEED for interpretation... he says these things outright :
- Put sterilants into water supplies so that would-be parents could apply for the antidote to have children
- Forced abortions ARE constitutional (according to the author(s))
- with illigitimate children, the parents could be forced to go through adoption proceedings to be able to raise their own children
John Holdren, Obama's Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet
Has all the page scans, and SOME of the quotes that I was aware of...
Here's the 1980's book he wrote... with some page scans and excerpts again :
John Holdren and Harrison Brown
And that is JUST ONE (1) example of an individual who TRULY BELIEVES in these eugenics / AGW / anti-human philosophies.
Beyond his 'job interview' for science czar, is there ANYTHING ELSE then his denial at that point that he has changed his views since then??
You don't HAVE to take my position seriously... I'm not forcing this down anyone's throats... but I would urge anyone who does think this is a joke to skim through the book itself...
That said.... how about we forget about Holdren's eugenicist dream... when there are SO MANY OTHER sources that are less contended that ALL say the same thing... Even the UN's agenda 21, then the 1996 biological diversity assessment (which alludes to the need for mass reduction in human population numbers)... and so on, and so on...
This isn't a new idea either... even Plato talked about the need back in his day to round up all the poor and stupid and kill them off for the betterment of the human species...
Yes... I agree. Do you honestly think that I somehow WANT to believe this is going on??? That, I'd rather be attempting to inform people about some of the people in power positions that just want to get rid of a majority of the worlds population to more 'manageable levels'... you know, instead of going out with my buds and drinking beer and picking up women or to watch the UFC matchup??? (I like doing those things too, minus the picking up women, my gf frowns on that somehow)... or to hear quotes from the likes of Warren Buffet who is all to happy to say, 'the only war is the class warfare between the rich and the poor, and it's US (the rich) that are winning' (to paraphrase).
Seriously, I would be ALL TOO HAPPY if we legitimately had a benevolent government that wanted to bring us into a 'new world order' that would raise humanity to the highest levels and then take us to the stars.... but almost everytime you scratch the surface of AGW alarmists, of high powered individuals, the super-wealth, the 'too big to fails', etc... IT IS ALL ABOUT control and depopulation so they can keep the earth and it's resources for themselves.
I WISH to be proven wrong. I would like nothing more then to think that everything is good, sadly more often then not, this is not the case.
The shelter-in-place warning has been lifted" at around noon, said Bruce Clawson, Texas City's director of emergency management. The measure, which asked residents to stay indoors and turn off their air conditioners, was initially enacted late Monday as power outages caused disruptions at several of the area's refining and petrochemical facilities, including a brief fire at a large refinery owned by BP PLC (BP, BP.LN). Texas City, an industrial suburb of Houston, contains one of the largest concentrations of refineries and petrochemical facilities in the world.
Not sure it is the best solution,and am not arguing it is. But the thinking is that if they have to pay, they seek other means, thus not havin to pay. It isn't rocket science, and it is a bit disingenuous to act as if the no one understands the reasoning. now, you may argue it won't work. And I might agree. But let's not pretend we don;t see the thinking behind it.
Texas - a healthy environment is not that important. Is this supposed to be a surprise to anyone?
It's bull**** and you know it. It's a way for Al Gore to make money, and that's all it is. To pretend otherwise is think that paying money cleans the air. Carbon credits is a scam.
Catawaba, completely lying, shocking? Not at all.
At a time when many companies are focused on minimizing production of carbon dioxide, a major culprit in global warming, Denbury Resources is all about producing more of it.
The Plano, Texas, company extracts carbon dioxide from a giant underground deposit in Mississippi and uses the gas to draw more oil from abandoned fields. Denbury also sells the CO2 to companies that create carbonated beverages, make dry ice, load fire extinguishers and freeze pieces of chicken.
In trapping and using carbon dioxide that might otherwise be released into the atmosphere, Denbury has become a poster child of sorts for business groups that believe Louisiana should combine aggressive drilling for oil and gas with technologies that capture the carbon released by refineries and major consumers of fossil fuels.
Looking ahead to the day when its naturally occurring carbon dioxide supply at the Jackson Dome is exhausted, Denbury is building a 320-mile carbon dioxide pipeline -- the so-called green pipeline -- across Louisiana so it can buy more of the gas from the state's ubiquitous refineries, chemical plants, utilities and future gasification projects
Bob Cornelius, senior vice president of operations at Denbury, admits he gets some funny reactions when he tells people that he sees value in carbon dioxide. While it may seem perverse, he said it is a good business to be in at a time when the cost of fuel is at a premium and companies are looking for ways to sequester their carbon dioxide emissions.
"We can do a lot of good things at once: We can help the environment, produce more oil and gas, produce more jobs and more energy security," he said.
I happened on this and found it interesting. I wonder if it will ever go anywhere? It seems to good too be true. Maybe it's a hoax? If not, why aren't we on it?
Texas firm harnesses carbon dioxide to extract oil from abandoned fields | NOLA.com
LOL - at first when I saw this thread from the main forum it looked like "Texas fights global warming." Then I was like "wait...that doesn't sound right."
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?