Global Warming and Gun Bans?

Status
Not open for further replies.

TX1911fan

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
2,014
This may seem off topic, but I read the article linked below and drew the comparison between global warming alarmists hoping for world government, and the gun banners hoping for the same thing. Most of them happen to be on the same side politically, anyway. It seems like it just might be a convenient way for them to take control, no? If you can get some kind of international government because global warming is an international crisis, how much further is it to get that same international body to ban guns?

Remember, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean everyone isn't out to get you . . .

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/2/6/155027.shtml

Global Warming Equals Socialism
Philip V. Brennan
Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007

There's a very simple question that the global warming scaremongers don't seem to be able to answer in a straightforward, credible manner.

It has to do with the current refrigeration of much of the United States and the claims of the global warming alarmists which appear to be very much at odds.

According to the propaganda campaign being hammered at the people of the world, the polar ice cap is melting and the polar regions are on the verge of becoming a tropical paradise.

I would like to know, if the polar regions are warming, how they able to bestow Arctic weather upon much of the U.S. as they are currently doing?

If the Arctic is the planet's refrigeration system and if that system is losing its coolant due to global warming, how can it continue to bless the U.S. with cold fronts that continue to break records for their severity?

The lame excuse the alarmists provide is that, oh well, climate is measured over the long term, you see, and over a year's time, the climate is seen as getting warmer, despite the frigid temperatures seen in the winter, which are merely temporary.

That's called "begging the question."

In an e-mail promoting a new book, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming" the Conservative Book Updates from Human Events Book Service had the following wisdom to impart: "For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small.

"It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior.

"With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before."

In that book, CBC reports that author Christopher C. Horner explains why, although Al Gore and his cronies among the media elites and U.N. globalists endlessly bleat that "global warming" is an unprecedented global crisis, they really think of it as a dream come true.

"Global warming is the ideal scare campaign for those who are doing all they can to secure strict control over society, business, and the minutest details of individual life." As Horner explains, "if global warming really were as bad as the Leftist doomsayers insist it is, then no policy imaginable could 'solve' it . . . no matter how much we sacrifice there would still be more to do. That makes global warming the bottomless well of excuses for the relentless growth of Big Government."

Writing in Canada's National Post, Feb. 5, Timothy Ball addresses the strongarm tactics employed by the environmentalist left. Dr. Ball, chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg, Canada recalls what happened to him when he spoke out against the global warming hoax.

"What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in university, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent."

Dr. Ball recalls that he once got a three-page letter from an academic colleague telling him he had no right to say what he was saying, especially in public lectures.

He was also accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being in the pay of oil companies. "That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay, you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club, or governments pay, there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?"

What did Dr. Ball say that got him in such trouble with some of his colleagues?

Just this: "Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and that for 32 years I was a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg."

Politicians are being listened to, however, wrote Dr. Ball, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.

In recent weeks we have seen environmentalist wackos issuing fatwas against any scientist who dares to contradict their propaganda, demanding they be exiled from the scientific community and tried in international courts.

For example, The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist, Heidi Cullen, advocated that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming.

Appearing on the Larry King Show Jan. 31, MIT's professor of atmospheric science Dr. Richard Lindzen spoke about the widely touted scientific report issued by the U.N.'s Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and allegedly the work of 2,500 scientists insisting that it's 90 percent certain that global warming is manmade.

In fact, Dr. Lindzen explained, all that was issued last Friday was a summary for policy-makers that is not prepared by scientists. "It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else.

"They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policy-makers has the input of about 13 of the scientists; but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit."

Added Lindzan about the whole global warming scare, "I think it's mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves." [Note: doesn't this sound like the anti-gun alarmists?]

Then there is this juicy story about the lengths to which the globalbaloneyists will go to convince the world it is tottering on the brink of a cataclysm.

The pro-global warming BBC reported that "rising seas, caused by global warming have for the first time washed an inhabited island of the face of the earth."

According to BBC, "The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India's part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true."

According to TheNewsisNowPublic.com, the story was a hoax.

BBC didn't bother to mention that Lohachare Island disappeared 22 years ago and that the entire region of The Sundarbans is a river delta, or that the disappearance of the island has been attributed to erosion, not global warming.

All of this provides solid evidence that Christopher C. Horner is right on target in his charge that the whole global warming business is nothing but pure politics — a means by which the left can take control of just about every human activity worldwide.

The real purpose behind the global warming movement is the establishment of a world socialist order under the control of the United Nations.

Global warming is what I've been saying it is since 1997: a lot of globaloney.

Phil Brennan is a veteran journalist who writes for NewsMax.com. He is editor and publisher of Wednesday on the Web (http://www.pvbr.com) and was Washington columnist for National Review magazine in the 1960s.

He also served as a staff aide for the House Republican Policy Committee and helped handle the Washington public relations operation for the Alaska Statehood Committee which won statehood for Alaska.

He is also a trustee of the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a member of the Association For Intelligence Officers.

He can be reached at [email protected].
 
I think the UN is using GW as a proxy to justify Global Socialism (GS). It does not really matter if it is true and the predictions about what will happen 100 years from now create a scare environment where they can't be proved wrong until long after it is too late. Look at the statue in front of UN HQ(revolver with barrel tied in a knot) to see what will happen with GS.
 
I think part of the debate is a "your bad so you should be punished". Farmers, loggers, factory workers, oil workers, people who produce equals bad. The people getting the blame also happen to have a pretty good percentage of the guns in the country. They are getting labeled as destroying the earth so they should be punished. There really isn't any logic to the debate. Its a mob mentality sort of thing. Get the mob all mad and send them off to ruin peoples lives. You don't have to do anything wrong. Your instantly guilty. Nothing you say can be trusted. Your pre-judged to be guilty. You must be punished.
 
I was in the Denver Museum of Natural History a while back and happened to notice a chart of the golbal temperatures. It did not look good. Most of the time the global climate was such that our current population would not be possible. Dramatic swings in temperature were the norm, until just recently.

What I find the most instructive is that there is no evidence presented that any of the current proposed "solutions" to global warming will actually make any difference. It's not like CFCs where you can just quit using them. The big fault of Kyoto was that the bulk of the worlds population was not covered, allowing them to catch up and contribute as much as the "developed" world. Like pollution from poor people doesn't count? How does the planet know where the CO2 comes from?

I am always amazed that so many people find it more important to do something than to do the right thing. And, too many times, they actually prefer to do the wrong thing, even when a better option is presented.

Just so it's obvious, the tie in to gun control, is the same problem. The proponents of gun control don't have to prove any benefit to their new laws, they just need to appear to "care" and to be "doing something".
 
There is no chance that this will stay on topic. Partly because some object to GW on the grounds that the cure may be worse than the ill, which is a position I'm somewhat sympathetic towards. Mainly though because many object to the science purely on the grounds that they don't like the cure, and that's not a position I'm sympathetic towards.

We went around and around on this topic just the other day, and it was probably off topic then. I'm not at all surprised at the sheer volume of contrarian pieces that have appeared lately, the IPCC briefing document was published on the 2nd of this month. The observant will note that the names cited in the article above are the same names as always appear in these articles, and that's because in order to find someone who seems to have the right credentials to satisfy an already sympathetic audience you have to look right past the vast majority of climatologists and then you get left with Lindzen, Singer and Ball.

Besides which, there comes a point when you start ignoring the science because of some sort of conspiracy theory, and I note that these articles are tending more and more towards that.
 
I know 3 climatologist, non who beleive in global warming. Only one of which will go public about it, George Taylor. I remeber in college I knew a grad student who was was going to do a study to prove global warming. Well after she went through all her trouble, she just found out there was no global warming by the results of her own study. Science has nothing to do with this. Its about power. The vast majority of the public knows nothing about climatology. So they can be told anything.

As for conspiracy, is there some huge conspiracy to take away are guns? Apparantly since theres so many laws banning guns, many people have the same goals. Same with global warming, all there needs to be is a whole lot of people with something to gain. There are plenty in the public who can have their own interest in it. It could be just something to insult their neighbor about who works at a factory. Could be just someone with lots of money who would like there to be laws making it so expensive to drive that he has empty roads to drive on. Theres those who want the new jobs enforcing the regulations. Theres the mind set who feel better about themselves by going along with the big cause of the day. Politicians gain power through the global warming hysteria so of course a lot of them would be for it.
 
It always amuses me...

that the pure scientific evidence that the earth goes through cooling and heating phases and has for millions of years, but now the "scientists" for global warming are blaming the whole shebang on us....

I am curious how we went back in time and drove all of that ice out of what is now Wisconsin? Did we all go back in time and rev up our SUVs? Nope, as far as I know, the earth warmed up and the ice retreated and we had nothing to do with it.

Also, from what I have read, it is a very small area where the ice has broken off in the arctic and down in the Antarctic, the ice is increasing.

There is also the disturbing fact the the ice caps on Mars may also be retreating... Now how in the world did Laurie David get her Personal Jet out to mars to destroy those caps?

It seems to me, the credible scientists all seem to agree. Manmade global waarming may have a small impact, mostly negligible, but that exterior forces, such as the sun, volcanoes, forrest fires, etc cause far more impact than humans do.

Here is an interesting brain teaser..... If global warming was the greatest thing to ever happen to the planet and we wanted to do it as fast as possible. How would we? It is total arrogance to think that we can have so much impact on an environment compared to the environment itself.
 
Here is an interesting brain teaser..... If global warming was the greatest thing to ever happen to the planet and we wanted to do it as fast as possible. How would we? It is total arrogance to think that we can have so much impact on an environment compared to the environment itself.
I'll remember that one!
 
BigFatKitten hit on this one which is also a good point.

Until 1971, the scare was Global Cooling. These same people wanted to put soot on Greenlandd to melt the ice and warm up the planet to try and stop the next ice from happening.

What ever happened to History & records? or is everyone just ignoring them?:scrutiny:
 
that the pure scientific evidence that the earth goes through cooling and heating phases and has for millions of years, but now the "scientists" for global warming are blaming the whole shebang on us....
Since when do politicians care about science? Or economics?
 
Every one of the anti GW arguments you people are making was thoroughly debunked in the last GW thread we had about two days ago.

Do we need to go through this again? :rolleyes:
 
My personal favorite is the "volcanoes are doing way more than humans" one.

That gets trotted out a LOT. Then when you show people that humans contribute 150 times the CO2 that volcanoes do...it gets quiet. :neener:
 
Gun related content--when the SHTF thanks to uh...the sun, volcanoes, and stuff like that ;), I'm certainly glad my gear will include the tools to defend myself.
 
Complex system and common sense

To keep this gun relevent. Lets proprose a thought problem.

Suppose we for some reason wanted to slow down the earths rotataion around its axis. Could we get everyone in the world to shoot thier gun at the same time in the appropriate direction such that the reaction of the bullet leaving the barrel would cause the rotation of the earth to slow?

But then we would also have the air slowing the bullet down which would reverse the effect of the bullets initial impulse.

But we would have the bullet hitting the ground also reversing the effects of the initial impulse.

Ok, so we have to build a lot of big towers that stick above the atmosphere so we can shot our bullets without air resisistance.

But, if we build a tower we are changing the angular momentum of the earth like iceskaters who have their arms in close spining quickly who spread their arms and start spinning slower. So maybe we don't need to shoot our guns but just build towers.

Now, like such an example, which was really fairly straight forward in comparison, we have Global Warming.

Are the actions of humanity causing global warming to happen? The evidence, if we are to believe various reports, does indicate that it is true.

We are still dealing with a complex system. We don't know enough factors to make rational choices. We could find out that the solar system is about to enter a galactic dust cloud that will cause the radiation from the sun to decrease in such a way that the only thing that will save us is increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

We could be facing the opposite situation where inaction will cause all the bad things that are being predicted.

I am sitting in my house wondering when the cold spell will break so I can work on my daughters car without freezing my privates off. Am I for global warming at this particular time?

The majority of the USAs human population that is engaged in national politics lives in coastal areas. These are the areas that would be most affected by rising ocean levels. Could this have some bearing on what is considered important?

The majority of the liberals in the USA live on either the east or west coasts. Could this be why liberals seem so concerned about the posibility of rising ocean levels?

Why would a conservative that lives in land locked Ohio that is about 1000 feet above sea level care if the ocean level raised a few feet?

Not only is Global Warming a complex climate issue it is also a complex social and political issue.

Back to guns.

The same complex social and political issues that make Global Warming such a hot topic also contribute to keep the right to keep and bear arms a hot topic.

Division of concerns based on location. Lack of knowledge of basic facts. Lack of desire to become educated on basic facts. The normal human capacity for deception because it is for a good cause.

Unlike GW the RTKBA can be motivated by direct experience of hostilities with destructive minded humans and other dangerous animals. Anyone who has been stalked by a large cat or ursine comes to a basic understanding that firearms can save their lives. Yet how many people will ever be in that situation? Of those that have been targeted by destructive humans, how many will admit to that fact and take precautions?

Enough ramblings, just had some thoughts to throw out about various topics and this thread seemed to be a fitting place for them.

dzimmerm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top