• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

Free episodes:

Forums New posts
These silly little one liners without any links to back your claim that somehow magically, CO2 inherantly contaminated by the process by which they are created and emitted is safe, are akin to some 4 year old insisting "He is too real" in a debate on the existance of santa claus.
 
Sorry. I am tired and full of food. Not in the mood to post from my phone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Do your own f'ing research. Check CO2 and temperature levels 400 million years ago.

Then check them all the way to today.
 
Your argument only works in the abstract, we are discussing a real world situation, the effects of which can be seen and measured.

You have no valid data point to challenge the fact that CO2 emitted as part of the industrial process is inherantly dirty and harmful.
You just keep falling back your your abstract position which isnt a position at all in the real world.

At this point im just wrestling with a pig

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
 
And NOTHING your scientists predicted for over 40 years has come true. Zip.
Yes there is pollution. That's not the CAGW issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Pollution in China is not causing global warming or climate change.
So.. Start a Chinese Pollution thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pixelsmith said:
And NOTHING your scientists predicted for over 40 years has come true. Zip.
Yes there is pollution. That's not the CAGW issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thats never been the point ive argued, and you know it

Got anything relevant ?

No didnt think so

Show me how contaminated water is safe to drink ?

Show me how contaminated CO2 is safe to emit ?

Didnt think so
 
Dude start a pollution thread. This is a climate change thread. Why are you so dense?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Do you drink city water? Seriously.. You seem like your senses are dulled from the pollution intentionally put in the water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is like insisting on talking about ghosts in the UFO thread. It's stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You blather on about too many people in China, then you are worried that they are dying from breathing in the bad CO2 and filtering it out for you with their lungs and giving you good CO2. You should be happy!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pixelsmith said:
I would inhale volcanic emission either. You make no point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Volcano's are not causing Chinas pollution, man made emissions are

One again your abstract argument falls flat on its face when juxtaposed with the real world example
 
More than 1,000 coal-fired power plants are being planned worldwide, new research has revealed.
The huge planned expansion comes despite warnings from politicians, scientists and campaigners that the planet's fast-rising carbon emissions must peak within a few years if runaway climate change is to be avoided and that fossil fuel assets risk becoming worthless if international action on global warming moves forward.
Coal plants are the most polluting of all power stations and the World Resources Institute (WRI) identified 1,200 coal plants in planning across 59 countries, with about three-quarters in China and India. The capacity of the new plants add up to 1,400GW to global greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of adding another China – the world's biggest emitter.

More than 1,000 new coal plants planned worldwide, figures show | Environment | The Guardian
 
Coal got us out of caves and producing products.
What do you have to replace coal and oil?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
obvious innit, that real eco friendly nuclear stuff innit.

Ya know something, i done with this wat i used to do with banking scandals, timeline and follow the money.

Now after several days i understand the re-distribution of American North American and Australian wealth, to the under-developed nations and the UN, but for the life of me i absolutely cannot figure out why we have all 3 nationalities here in this thread salivating over it.
 
Last edited:
These guys are total hypocrites and don't know $#it about the underlying scam. Start with UN Agenda 21 and follow the money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
pixelsmith said:
These guys are total hypocrites and don't know $#it about the underlying scam. Start with UN Agenda 21 and follow the money.
Click to expand...

No, prove your points - articulate your reasoning and supply supporting evidence. In all of this you have not shown yourself to be anyone who has a grasp of the facts. You have demonstrated no substance - just innuendos, slogans, pre-packaged talking points nearly word-for-word. If you are going to make statements like the above, supply evidence - not belief systems couched in what looks like paranoia and fear-based victimization.

Simply because no one answers your one-liners does not mean people are not aware of what you are talking about. Mentioning UN Agenda 21 as though you're disclosing an important secret that needs to be ferreted out simply reveals how much you are in the grip of delusional thinking. I honestly was not sure what was going on with you before, but with this UN Agenda 21 and follow the money nonsense it becomes clear what kind of thinking you are drawn to. Nothing makes sense unless you are a victim and the world is a conspiracy out to do you out of the status-quo as you conceive it to be. Talk about being manipulated and controlled - Pixel, they've got you on auto-pilot!

The reality is you are anti-science. I could post science links until the cows come home and it would make no difference - it has made no difference. It's clear you don't read the science and further, probably don't understand it. It is difficult, I'll grant you.

What's really going on with you I now realize is an ideological agenda - nothing to do with science, least of all AGW.

LINK: Debunked: Agenda 21, ICLEI, Sovereignty, UN, Depopulation | Metabunk

TEXT: "Agenda 21 (Agenda for the 21st century) is non-binding UN resolution adopted by 178 countries at the 1992 Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil. It's an action plan, or series of recommendations and goals aimed at promoting sustainable development, reducing poverty, world hunger, pollution, and climate change.

"While it is non-binding, many governments (both national and local) and institutions use agenda 21 as a useful set of goals and guidelines. At the local level, it's sometime referred to as Local Agenda 21, or LA21.

"In reality the actual effects of Agenda 21 in the US over the last 22 years seem to have been almost zero. Searching for mentions of it on the internet almost entirely results in mentions from conspiracy and conservative organizations.

"The largest "impact" seems to be that a variety of local governments have joined the ICLEI (International Council for Local and Environmental Initiatives) - an organization that includes Agenda 21 in it's goals, but really aimed at development in 3rd world countries. Any US municipality that joins ICLEI is really just affirming their environnemental credentials, and so is largely going to be those of a less conservative leaning. For example, in California, the liberal-leaning Los Angeles County is a member, but the more conservative Orange County immediately to the south is not.

"Concerns regarding Agenda 21 and the ICLEI range from extreme conspiracy theories: http://aircrap.org/alexander-bachman-agenda-21-depopulation-smart-meters/332267/

"Through the less extreme conspiracy theories of the Tea Party: My Tea Party Chronicle: TEA PARTY IS ONTO AGENDA 21

"And has made it all the way up to mainstream political discourse: http://floridaindependent.com/49425/newt-gingrich-agenda-21

"(Newt said the above as an example of things that crop up when he gets more involved with grass-roots discussions. He was tailoring it as an example for his audience. When he mentioned it, a murmur rose in the room, and when he said he would cut funding, then he got a round of applause).

"The problem is that Agenda 21 and the ICLEI have NOT ACTUALLY DONE ANYTHING. Newt is going to cut funding for something that really has no funding. Yes, there are programs that have goals that are similar to goals outlines in agenda 21, but those are programs that would exist anyway. Things like preventing pollution, suppling clean drinking water, and education in 3rd world countries.

"Here's one of the biggest offenses that Newt would be addressing: » City Council of Montana city illegally enforces UN Agenda 21 on taxpayers Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

"Missoula, Montana is simply paying membership dues to the ICLEI. That's all.

"Of course Newt was talking about the federal funding. What would that be exactly? It's hard to find any examples. But let's start with some numbers for comparison. Currently the US pays 22% of the UN's budget. The US is already paying $1.2 billion per year to the United Nations. Another approximately $14 billion goes to the USAID, many of the goals of which are similar to Agenda 21.

"So what is the Federal Agenda 21 funding? There isn't any federal funding for Agenda 21. Everything I've been able to find so far has been federal programs that simply have some similar aspects to Agenda 21. For example - anything to do with energy conservation (like energy efficient light-bulbs, or solar power) will get lumped in with Agenda 21. Since there's no explicit funding, the conservatives are simply using it as an excuse to cut funding to programs they don't like.

"Additional Resources:
Alternet: How Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories May Pose a Genuine Threat to Humanity - excellent article on the dangers of the "paranoid style" type fear of Agenda 21.

Debunked: Executive Order #13575 - —Establishment of the White House Rural Council - a related sub-conspiracy-theory, where an toothless council for facilitating communication is raised to be an evil tool of the New World Order."

"It's interesting to look at the history of conspiracy theories, to see how they got started, and how they spread. It also helps give perspective on whatever the current incarnation of a theory is.

"In this case the conspiracy theory has a very well-defined start.

"Agenda 21 was adopted in 1992, at the 1998 Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, also referred to as Eco 92) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil. Around this time, the Schiller Institute issued a white paper titled "'Eco 92' Must Be Stopped". The earliest reference to this paper is a usenet post from June 21, 1992. Rather oddly this is the ONLY place I could find the full text of the paper. There were some references, but the original web pages are now only found on archive.org.

"Based on the text, it seems to have been written BEFORE the conference, in anticipation."
 
Back
Top