(A racist POS) Global Warming could spell disaster for Blacks


PDA






Desertdog
January 20, 2006, 01:52 PM
This article should PO everybody.

Global Warming could spell disaster for Blacks
By Bruce Britt
http://www.bet.com/News/global_warming_blacks.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&WBCMODE=PresentationUnpublished&Referrer=%7B03CE5360-2620-42CB-AD7E-77E4249C5FB7%7D

Posted Jan. 18, 2006 – If you thought Hurricane Katrina was a once-in-a-lifetime fluke, think again. Concerned environmentalists say that unless the United States gets real about the threat of global warming, African Americans and other people of color can expect a repeat of disasters like Katrina.

“When you look at the trends and put them all together, it’s undisputable that the sea levels are rising,” says Ansje Miller, director of the Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative (EJCC). “Warmer seas mean more intense hurricanes…. You’re going to have intense flooding like we have never seen before. Katrina is really the hurricane of the future.”

Bad News for Blacks

Environmentalists blame the fierce new storms on global warming – the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans. Scientists attribute the phenomenon to gases produced by fossil fuels like gasoline, petroleum and coal. Though critics dismiss global warming as junk science, reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have continually found a discernable human influence on world temperatures.

That’s bad news, especially for African Americans. Citing Katrina as a case-in-point, some environmentalists say global warming impacts minorities and the disadvantaged harder than other groups. If global warming gets worse, many African-American communities will be more vulnerable to breathing ailments, insect-carried diseases and heat-related illness and death. But asking Black folks to give up gas-guzzling SUV’s and other bling is a tough sell.

“It has been ingrained in our heads that to be anything, you must have everything,” says EJCC steering committee member Nia Robinson. “Because some of us have a big car and a nice house, people aren’t seeing that racism still exists. But Katrina showed that racism is alive and well in America. Now that people have that idea, I think we’re in a really critical stage to organize, educate and mobilize people.”

Pollution Worse for Us

Relatively, Blacks are environmental Good Samaritans. Per capita, we emit approximately 20 percent less carbon dioxide than Whites – well below 2020 targets set by the U.S. Climate Stewardship Act. Not only do we use more energy-conserving public transportation, we spend considerably less per capita on energy-intensive material goods.

Yet Blacks are exposed to worse air pollution than Whites in every major metropolitan area. Some charge that the Bush administration has made matters worse by creating new policies, like the Clear Skies Act and the Healthy Forest Initiative, that allow utilities and industries to pollute more. President Bush enraged environmentalists when he opted out of the Kyoto protocol global warming treaty, saying it would harm the U.S. economy.

Critics say the result of these policies could be catastrophic. “By mid-century, we’re looking at the entire Antarctic ice shelf melting,” Miller says. “That could send warmer water throughout… which will have a freezing effect in the Northern European countries. We’re already looking at a number of low-lying areas being completely submerged by sea-level rise. It’s kind of scary.”

Toward a solution, Miller says America must conform with international protections while reducing fossil fuel use. She hopes that the U.S. begins aggressively fining polluters and investing the resulting funds towards sustainable alternatives.

“Katrina showed us that we don’t know how to deal with (environmental disasters),” Miller says. “We really need to make sure that we have mechanisms, escape routes and policies in place that are going to protect those who are most vulnerable.”

If you enjoyed reading about "(A racist POS) Global Warming could spell disaster for Blacks" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Crosshair
January 20, 2006, 01:56 PM
I think global warming is the least of Africas worries right now. Get a stable government going, then we can talk about global warming.

Nitrogen
January 20, 2006, 01:58 PM
I didn't know hurricanes were racist! :confused:

I better watch it, as first, those hurricanes will come after the Blacks, then the Jews, then the gun owners...

Right after I post this, I'll be e-mailing Hornady and asking them which of their self-defense rounds work best against racist hurricanes.

Zundfolge
January 20, 2006, 01:59 PM
Racism from BET? :eek:

I'm shocked!

TexasRifleman
January 20, 2006, 02:01 PM
Racism from BET? :eek:

I'm shocked!


Really, next you'll be telling me Al-Jazeera is biased towards Islam.

You must be joking right?????

Art Eatman
January 20, 2006, 02:06 PM
Purely a generality and not all-inclusive: In most southern cities of the US, the prevailing winds are from southerly directions, SE, S and SW.

It so happens, generally, that the poorer sections of most of these cities lie in the southern parts.

Ergo, by and large, less air pollution into those poorer neighborhoods; more air pollution FROM them into "Rich Hill".

:), Art

engineer151515
January 20, 2006, 02:07 PM
There are times when bloviating personal editorials presented as science are just not worthy of comment or correction. Their fast and loose correlation of scientific theory combined with political agenda or personal vilification is sometimes past the point of meaningful debate or factual correction. At times, these same editorials are sometimes premised in such a disparaging or derogatory basis that they cannot even be contemplated as an attempt at humor. Therefore, unable to talk constructively about the facts and unable to laugh at even the premise of the offensive presentation, I simply will walk away.

IMO - this is one of those times.

answerguy
January 20, 2006, 02:18 PM
It so happens, generally, that the poorer sections of most of these cities lie in the southern parts.



:), Art

Did you just make that up?

Camp David
January 20, 2006, 02:20 PM
But asking Black folks to give up gas-guzzling SUV’s and other bling is a tough sell..

"bling?" What's a bling?

Relatively, Blacks are environmental Good Samaritans. Per capita, we emit approximately 20 percent less carbon dioxide than Whites...

Anyone have a rag? Coke all over my computer monitor! :p

thorn726
January 20, 2006, 02:24 PM
Did you just make that up?

not really , it is a reference ot the old "side of the tracks" thing.
the north side of the tracks is the more affluent side.

honestly, take a look around at most cities and even towns, there is a fair amount of truth to the north/ south thing.


excpet the reality is the pollution keeps heading north to Canada

MinScout
January 20, 2006, 02:29 PM
Like Micheal Savage says: "Liberalism is a mental disorder".

middy
January 20, 2006, 03:02 PM
Wow, global-warming-scare-mongering and race-baiting in one article!

I think I smell a Pulitzer. Or is that just a Pu?

QuickDraw
January 20, 2006, 03:09 PM
the Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative

Enviromental justice?:confused:
What the hell does that mean?

QuickDraw

Malone LaVeigh
January 20, 2006, 03:13 PM
not really , it is a reference ot the old "side of the tracks" thing.
the north side of the tracks is the more affluent side.

honestly, take a look around at most cities and even towns, there is a fair amount of truth to the north/ south thing.
while that is true in a lot of southern towns in my experience it is(was) not true on the Miss. Gulf Coast, for reasons that probably apply to most communities on the gulf.

The most expensive neighborhoods were on the beach. The area known as North Gulfport when I was a kid (it's since been leapfrogged by suburban peckerwoodism) was the black section.

Pilgrim
January 20, 2006, 03:21 PM
Rush Limbaugh told a joke on his radio show about God calling the Washington Post and after convincing the editor God was really calling, informed the editor that He was fed up and was really going to destroy the world next week. The editor asked for an exclusive. God said no, he was going to give the story to other newspapers to give everyone a chance to repent.

The next day, the Washington Post carried the story on page 13, "The World Ends Next Week."

USA Today ran the headline, "God Will Destroy The World; We're Doomed."

The New York Times ran the headline, "God Will Destroy The World; Women and Minorities Suffer The Most."

4t5
January 20, 2006, 03:22 PM
not really , it is a reference ot the old "side of the tracks" thing.
the north side of the tracks is the more affluent side.


This actually has to do with the prevailing winds. Back in the old days, when steam locomotives ruled the earth, the downwind side was "the other side".

hso
January 20, 2006, 03:23 PM
This article should PO everybody.

Global Warming could spell disaster for Blacks
By Bruce Britt
http://www.bet.com/News/global_warming_blacks.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&WBCMODE=PresentationUnpublished&Referrer=%7B03CE5360-2620-42CB-AD7E-77E4249C5FB7%7D



Uhhhh, WOW. I'm offended as a liberal and as a scientist both at once by this article (I'm not sure in which way I'm more offended:scrutiny: ) So blacks are somehow greater victems of global climate change than other races?!? Come again? So global climate change somehow isn't 'color blind'? ***?!?

Look there may be a social injustice irony here that poor blacks in africa that don't contribute to global warming factors will be most strongly impacted, but the very idea that race is an issue is absurd.

GunnySkox
January 20, 2006, 03:28 PM
"bling?" What's a bling?

Someone here hasn't been attending their weekly slangucation classes.

"Bling" is expensive, often shiny and aesthetically impressive, but otherwise useless stuff which one purchases in order to show off one's success.

E.g., putting all kinds of shiny accoutrements (sp?) and bodywork and stuff on a car. Wearing lots of shiny/gold stuff, anything really impressive and cool which you directly associate with yourself. "BBQ Guns" would be "Bling" in modern terminology, just more useful than standard bling. Practibling, as it were.

~GnSx
:D

modifiedbrowning
January 20, 2006, 03:39 PM
It's all Bush's fault.

Camp David
January 20, 2006, 03:46 PM
Someone here hasn't been attending their weekly slangucation classes...

Thanks for explanation Gunny... I freely admit I failed ebonics at a young age.

jlbraun
January 20, 2006, 04:29 PM
Like Micheal Savage says: "Liberalism is a mental disorder".

Nope, this POS isn't a liberal - he's probably peeved that he got kicked out of the liberal tent a long time ago. He's a pseudo-populist race-baiting bureaucrat, and those are on both sides of the aisle. Real liberals don't stand for that.

(Spoken as a liberal)

trueblue1776
January 20, 2006, 04:39 PM
it's a vicious cycle, they acuse you of being racist, if you argue or debate, you are one, vice if you let it go, people wont question the reasoning.
I guess by default I am a racist, according to them. This "them and us" sh-t is getting old. Blacks create the "them and us" enviornment for themselves by calling someone who has never met them racist.

ArmedBear
January 20, 2006, 04:41 PM
Nope, this POS isn't a liberal - he's probably peeved that he got kicked out of the liberal tent a long time ago. He's a pseudo-populist race-baiting bureaucrat, and those are on both sides of the aisle. Real liberals don't stand for that.


So the people who support pseudo-populist race-baiting Howard Dean as head of the DNC aren't "real liberals"? How about the people in my state who voted for Darth Feinstein, Pudd'n'head Boxer or Nancy the Shrill Witch?

Who are the "real liberals"?

And what does it take to get kicked out of the tent?!?:p

iapetus
January 20, 2006, 05:04 PM
"Bling" is expensive, often shiny and aesthetically impressive, but otherwise useless stuff which one purchases in order to show off one's success.

E.g., putting all kinds of shiny accoutrements (sp?) and bodywork and stuff on a car. Wearing lots of shiny/gold stuff, anything really impressive and cool which you directly associate with yourself.


Hmmm... that's the first time I've heard the terms "aesthetically impressive" and "bling" in the same sentence...

And "expensive" may be true in the case of the richer rappers and gangsters etc, but doesn't really apply to the 6-carat gold-effect leaf stuff that the wanna-be gangstas, and all the chavs (www.chavscum.co.uk), neds, scallies, etc cover themselves in.

carlrodd
January 20, 2006, 05:08 PM
I think global warming is the least of Africas worries right now. Get a stable government going, then we can talk about global warming.

i think they were speaking about black americans.

ArmedBear
January 20, 2006, 05:08 PM
http://www.magnumresearch.com/products/DE_Tiger-Striped.jpg

jlbraun
January 20, 2006, 05:59 PM
So the people who support pseudo-populist race-baiting Howard Dean as head of the DNC aren't "real liberals"? How about the people in my state who voted for Darth Feinstein, Pudd'n'head Boxer or Nancy the Shrill Witch?

Who are the "real liberals"?

And what does it take to get kicked out of the tent?!?:p

The DNC isn't made up of liberals, they're technocrats. Feinstein, Boxer, Pelosi, ditto. Liberals understand the difference between prescriptive and proscriptive rights, and fall strictly on the side of the proscriptive. Technocrats are all about ruling over the less priveleged through technological control means, while liberals emphasize self-reliance and self-responsibility.

There's what it takes to get kicked out of the tent. Democrats aren't liberals, not even close. And as the recent elections have shown, the Democrats are getting kicked out of the tent on a national level. Why? Because they're not liberals anymore. People want their rights respected, and want elected officials that will fight for them. Democrats aren't doing that.

Using "liberal" as an insult means insulting Patrick Henry and Ben Franklin. THOSE guys were real patriots and liberals. What we have now are powermongering technocrats who use race-baiting to push our buttons.

Spec ops Grunt
January 20, 2006, 07:13 PM
Who are the "real liberals"?


Libertarians.

ken grant
January 20, 2006, 07:34 PM
Wonder what caused the rise in sea levels many years ago? The sea level was much higher than it is now.
Can't blame it on fuels as there was none:what:

ArmedBear
January 20, 2006, 07:36 PM
Particularly as a Libertarian with some education about the people who built this country and the philosophies that drove them, I understand that you want to hang onto the word "liberal" in the sense of "classical liberal."

But I fail to see how this is really useful. It makes effective communication very difficult.

Moreover, when you talk about being "thrown out of the liberal tent", I have no clue what "tent" that is. That metaphor only works if there is a critical mass of people who comprise that "tent". There appears not to be.

Yes, the people you mention are technocrats, in the Virginia Postrel (http://www.dynamist.com)"The Future and its Enemies" sense. They are its enemies. But that word, too, is problematic, since it has also been applied to the movers and shakers of Wall Street.

I think we should eschew these labels if possible. These labels make Orwellian Newspeak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak) possible. Rob the labels of their power, and it will be harder for these labels to be used to rob us of our liberty.

Bigreno
January 20, 2006, 07:48 PM
...Man, didn't realize it was all my fault.

Next time I drive through a "black" neighborhood I will be sure to roll up my windows before I break wind. Hate to oppress anyone with all my white emissions.

azredhawk44
January 20, 2006, 07:59 PM
But what about the Children??!!??

I thought every cry for more control over us was always "for the children!"

Standing Wolf
January 20, 2006, 09:33 PM
People fifty years from now are going to laugh themselves silly at today's socialist "global warming" scare-mongering. I can't believe anyone with more than 80 I.Q. points takes any of it seriously—the so-called "global warming" part, I mean.

jlbraun
January 20, 2006, 11:11 PM
Particularly as a Libertarian with some education about the people who built this country and the philosophies that drove them, I understand that you want to hang onto the word "liberal" in the sense of "classical liberal."

But I fail to see how this is really useful. It makes effective communication very difficult.

Moreover, when you talk about being "thrown out of the liberal tent", I have no clue what "tent" that is. That metaphor only works if there is a critical mass of people who comprise that "tent". There appears not to be.

Yes, the people you mention are technocrats, in the Virginia Postrel (http://www.dynamist.com)"The Future and its Enemies" sense. They are its enemies. But that word, too, is problematic, since it has also been applied to the movers and shakers of Wall Street.

I think we should eschew these labels if possible. These labels make Orwellian Newspeak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak) possible. Rob the labels of their power, and it will be harder for these labels to be used to rob us of our liberty.

Fair enough. Newspeak labeling does indeed make one's head spin.

(bows)

dm1333
January 20, 2006, 11:20 PM
Well said jlbraun.

Malone LaVeigh
January 20, 2006, 11:25 PM
People fifty years from now are going to laugh themselves silly at today's socialist "global warming" scare-mongering. I can't believe anyone with more than 80 I.Q. points takes any of it seriously—the so-called "global warming" part, I mean.
Other than the American Geophysical Union and every other reputable scientist in the world, that is.

CAnnoneer
January 20, 2006, 11:38 PM
Think about it on the positive side. Only in as successful a society as ours would such idiots survive and prosper, instead of starving to death or getting eaten by hungry lions...

proud2deviate
January 21, 2006, 12:07 AM
We just got four inches of snow, with more on the way (Not a lot, sure, but I hate snow passsionately:cuss: ) At this point, I'd welcome any warming of the globe, country, state, county, city or even my back yard. Am I a racist yet?

CAnnoneer
January 21, 2006, 12:11 AM
Am I a racist yet?

Are you a white man? Are you a white man that prefers white women? Then you are racist by definition.

White Horseradish
January 21, 2006, 01:08 AM
Relatively, Blacks are environmental Good Samaritans. Per capita, we emit approximately 20 percent less carbon dioxide than Whites – well below 2020 targets set by the U.S. Climate Stewardship Act. Not only do we use more energy-conserving public transportation, we spend considerably less per capita on energy-intensive material goods. So is this a fancy way of saying their s4 doesn't stink?

Yet Blacks are exposed to worse air pollution than Whites in every major metropolitan area. Errr... I guess the whites must come over to the ghetto, stink it up, and then go home to the suburbs every night... ***?

Johnny_Yuma
January 21, 2006, 05:35 AM
Someone here hasn't been attending their weekly slangucation classes.

"Bling" is expensive, often shiny and aesthetically impressive, but otherwise useless stuff which one purchases in order to show off one's success.

I can't find this word "bling" in my Oxford English Dictionary for some reason.

Nematocyst
January 21, 2006, 06:59 AM
Bling illustrated A classic, AB.

I can't believe anyone with more than 80 I.Q. points takes any of it seriously—the so-called "global warming" part, I mean. Oh, dang, SW.

I've valued your past posts, but we seriously part ways with that statement.

My IQ is significantly above 80, yet I take 'global warming' very seriously.

Why, I even teach a college-level class about global warming, using - in part, essays from the best single set of web pages {unbiased} on global warming (http://www.aip.org/history/climate/), to help people understand what we know about gw and what we don't, so that they can decide for themselves whether it - and climate change - is real, because this could very easily destroy civilization as we've known it for, say, 8000 years.

Do you do that, too?

Now, if you can back up your assertions that global warming is not real, then put your cards on the table now. Otherwise, I'd move to the back of the room and be quiet.

Go ahead. Make my day. :neener:

<You, too, can help close this thread by discussing global warming in the absence of any discussion of firearms.>

;)

Nem

PS: When a major climate change, triggered by global warming, destroys civilization as we've known it for 100 years, despite the protestations of skeptics, I'm going to be prepared, not to mentioned armed with a shotgun {see user name}, two handguns {K9 & 642}, a CZ .22LR {for taking meat when the Safeway shuts down because the US agricultural system is disabled by climate change}, and a Savage 16FHSS (http://www.savagearms.com/16fhss.htm) in 7mm08 for camp meat for 30.

Sean85746
January 21, 2006, 07:13 AM
Thanks for explanation Gunny... I freely admit I failed ebonics at a young age.

I consistently choose to fail ebonics. Dang it...I live in Arizona...I have enough trouble managing spanglish!

And global warming is a fact...come to Phoenix in the summer.

Atticus
January 21, 2006, 11:15 AM
He's probably right in a convoluted way. Subsitute 'poor' with African American/black and he would be correct. Low lying areas of cities are typically settled by those who can't afford to live in the more costly elevated areas. Those areas a more prone to flooding. Poor (typically black) folks also live in more urban (vs. suburban) areas. They are exposed to more air pollution from cars, buses, and industry than most. Industries that produce nasty by-products are typically located in poorer areas of town as well or visa versa. It isn't racsist...just a fact of life for people with lower incomes.

Desertdog
January 21, 2006, 12:00 PM
My IQ is significantly above 80, yet I take 'global warming' very seriously.
Fine, but the question is not "is there global warming", but "what is causing global warming." The Kooks and Commies blame it on MAN. This I don't buy.

At one time, according to well educated scientist, there was an "Ice Age."

Suddenly, or slowly, there came "global warming" and ended the "Ice Age."

What did MAN do to end the Ice AGE??

What did man do to start the Little Ice Age?

What did man do to end the Little Ice Age?

My problem is not that there is "Global Warming", my problem is blaming it on MAN.

For some reason there is also, at this time of Global Warming, global warming of Venus. What has man done to cause Venus to warm up?

So instead of talking about Global warming, make yourself look intellegent and talk about about the natural climatic changes this world has gone through since the beginning of time.

lance22
January 21, 2006, 12:38 PM
Not only are hurricanes racist against blacks, but so are cigarettes. It seems thta cigarettes give more poison to black people than to white people ...

Cigarettes are Racist - Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060120/us_nm/smoking_dc;_ylt=AlOlPWxusCoSCH8D6OMmw_QEtbAF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)

I guess when you are totally bent on making everything little thing a "race" issue, you can find it whether it's there or not.

XLMiguel
January 21, 2006, 01:10 PM
Gee, I thought it was because they're all gonna drownd because they own all the beach/river front property that will flood when the ice caps melt. Of course, the Sun is racist, too, because it caused all the "people of color" to become colored in the first place, making them conspicous by complexion and easier to 'discriminate' against (was it 'evolution' or 'intelligent design'? - white people who try to 'tan' are race traitors and deserve melinoma - might as well offend everybody). In addition, since they have dark skins, they will ultimately absorb more heat from the sun and will eventually be burned to a crisp, but will always seem to be in a half fried state in the meantime until they combust. Oh, the horror.:neener: :barf: :neener: :barf:

NB: the above statement is completely silly, sarcastic and facetious in a lame, honkified attempt to be a stupid as that article. (where's my hot chocolate?):barf:

PS - ya fergot to add that 'bling' is generally tasteless, too, or is that reduncant?

Duncaninfrance
January 21, 2006, 01:23 PM
I was going to post but I can't take this lot seriously! :rolleyes:
Duncan
ps Bling is for Pimps Yardies and Drug Pushers!!

trueblue1776
January 21, 2006, 01:44 PM
Well, I think my racist self is going to head down to the Klan rally, along with my buddies, Tabacco, Big Buisness, the Judicial System, Health Care, Restaraunts, and WEATHER.

BAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA!

AF_INT1N0
January 21, 2006, 05:38 PM
Think about it on the positive side. Only in as successful a society as ours would such idiots survive and prosper, instead of starving to death or getting eaten by hungry lions...


I'm waiting for the positive side....

Duncaninfrance
January 21, 2006, 06:26 PM
I THINK I MUST BE A MUSHROOM BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP ME IN THE DARK AND FEED BE BULL????!
DUNCAN

Art Eatman
January 21, 2006, 06:31 PM
Seems to me this ol' cow's been pretty-well milked dry...

:), Art

If you enjoyed reading about "(A racist POS) Global Warming could spell disaster for Blacks" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!