Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Climate change film blows up in Richard Curtis's face 
Author Message
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
Quote:
A short film scripted by leading British comedy screenwriter Richard Curtis on behalf of the 10:10 environmental campaign has achieved the dubious distinction of becoming one of the more short-lived propaganda tools designed to help save humanity after it was withdrawn following complaints about its graphic scenes of exploding climate change refuseniks.


Yes, because blowing up people who don’t agree with you is Such A Good Idea. Bloody idiot.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environmen ... 96801.html

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:14 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: behind the sofa
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
Yes, because blowing up people who don’t agree with you is Such A Good Idea.

As I said in the other thread, I think it's pretty much the only option when negotiation fails. It's called "war" and it's the last resort.

These people would destroy the planet. There is no greater principle to fight for. If they won't listen, they must die before they kill us all.

_________________
jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly."

When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net


Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:46 am
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
Yes, because blowing up people who don’t agree with you is Such A Good Idea.

As I said in the other thread, I think it's pretty much the only option when negotiation fails. It's called "war" and it's the last resort.

These people would destroy the planet. There is no greater principle to fight for. If they won't listen, they must die before they kill us all.


As you are probably aware, I am not convinced. I find the whole “Climate Change” circus to be as corrupt and devious as the Catholic Church. You would have me killed for what is merely ideology?

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:50 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: behind the sofa
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
JJW009 wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
Yes, because blowing up people who don’t agree with you is Such A Good Idea.

As I said in the other thread, I think it's pretty much the only option when negotiation fails. It's called "war" and it's the last resort.

These people would destroy the planet. There is no greater principle to fight for. If they won't listen, they must die before they kill us all.


As you are probably aware, I am not convinced. I find the whole “Climate Change” circus to be as corrupt and devious as the Catholic Church. You would have me killed for what is merely ideology?

It's not just climate change, which is indeed something of a church. I believe the analogy is deliberate. Climate change is the "Hell" of the new religion, invented to make stupid little children behave themselves. The truth is, people should behave themselves for the sake of their fellow people without being threatened by a "devil".

99% of all the fossil resources mankind has used and 99% of all toxic landfill have happened in the last few of generations. It should be obvious this isn't sustainable.

The usual excuse of the selfish capitalist pig is "I'll be dead before it matters" - which translates as "F*ck you, F*ck your children and F*ck the planet - I'm all right Jack."

If climate change is a religion that can convince some people to stop raping our children, then so be it. If they won't be converted, then yes - kill them. There's plenty of historical precedent.

_________________
jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly."

When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net


Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:07 pm
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
Reply with quote
Very Nazi-esque. Replace those who aren't convinced (about man made global warming) with Jews and you've got a advert Hitler himself could have used.

_________________
pcernie wrote:
'I'm going to snort this off your arse - for the benefit of government statistics, of course.'


Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:12 pm
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
Very Nazi-esque. Replace those who aren't convinced (about man made global warming) with Jews and you've got a advert Hitler himself could have used.


GODWIN!

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:21 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: behind the sofa
Reply with quote
The primary difference is that "the Jews" represented an imaginary scape-goat, not a real and present danger.

A better analogy might be the indigenous people of some tropical paradise defending themselves against invaders who would pillage their resources leading to the death of their children and the end of their civilisation.

_________________
jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly."

When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net


Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:29 pm
Profile WWW
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
The primary difference is that "the Jews" represented an imaginary scape-goat, not a real and present danger.

A better analogy might be the indigenous people of some tropical paradise defending themselves against invaders who would pillage their resources leading to the death of their children and the end of their civilisation.

Well that is America, and Australia screwed then. They are the worst polluters of all.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:31 pm
Profile
Spends far too much time on here
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:38 am
Posts: 2967
Location: Dorchester, Dorset
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
The primary difference is that "the Jews" represented an imaginary scape-goat, not a real and present danger.


It's only a clear and present danger to the believers.

_________________
I've finally invented something that works!

A Mac User.


Mon Oct 04, 2010 6:57 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: behind the sofa
Reply with quote
tombolt wrote:
JJW009 wrote:
The primary difference is that "the Jews" represented an imaginary scape-goat, not a real and present danger.


It's only a clear and present danger to the believers.

We're talking about scientific evidence so blindingly simple a slime mould should understand it. Hitler's "evidence" was comprised mostly of delusions.

Would you allow someone to kill your loved one because they're so ignorant they think firing a loaded gun in their face is fun?

Ignorance is no defence in law or in war.

_________________
jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly."

When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net


Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:13 pm
Profile WWW
Spends far too much time on here
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:38 am
Posts: 2967
Location: Dorchester, Dorset
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
We're talking about scientific evidence so blindingly simple a slime mould should understand it.


I'm not necessarily an unbeliever, but I certainly find it far from simple to understand. I could be thicker than slime mould though!

_________________
I've finally invented something that works!

A Mac User.


Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:41 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
We're talking about scientific evidence so blindingly simple a slime mould should understand it. Hitler's "evidence" was comprised mostly of delusions.

überGodwined!


Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:56 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
tombolt wrote:
JJW009 wrote:
We're talking about scientific evidence so blindingly simple a slime mould should understand it.


I'm not necessarily an unbeliever, but I certainly find it far from simple to understand. I could be thicker than slime mould though!


There is indeed the complexity of the data, but we must also remember that the data represents a very small subset of potential data that could provide amore accurate picture of influences on our climate. There have been serious attempts to block research into the causes of the sun on our climate, for example, with those most vocal blockers being those with a large vested interest in the “carbon footprint” economy. The picture is skewed at source, hyped by the media, distorted by the politicians. It is no wonder that people are getting cynical about it, especially when there were those emails which came to light, and the enquiry conveniently found little amiss. The fact that the Freedom of Information Action had to be used at all shows that there is something being hidden.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:02 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
tombolt wrote:
JJW009 wrote:
We're talking about scientific evidence so blindingly simple a slime mould should understand it.


I'm not necessarily an unbeliever, but I certainly find it far from simple to understand. I could be thicker than slime mould though!


There is indeed the complexity of the data, but we must also remember that the data represents a very small subset of potential data that could provide amore accurate picture of influences on our climate. There have been serious attempts to block research into the causes of the sun on our climate, for example, with those most vocal blockers being those with a large vested interest in the “carbon footprint” economy. The picture is skewed at source, hyped by the media, distorted by the politicians. It is no wonder that people are getting cynical about it, especially when there were those emails which came to light, and the enquiry conveniently found little amiss. The fact that the Freedom of Information Action had to be used at all shows that there is something being hidden.

There is no impact from the sun, into overall global warming. As a consequence of decades of heavy pollution the earth is actually suffering from what is called the global dimming. Whereby around 5% of the suns energy is simply not getting through to the ground. That has a cooling effect and has been ignored, yet the earth is still warming. The biggest vested interests are the oil companies.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:07 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
There is no impact from the sun, into overall global warming. As a consequence of decades of heavy pollution the earth is actually suffering from what is called the global dimming. Whereby around 5% of the suns energy is simply not getting through to the ground. That has a cooling effect and has been ignored, yet the earth is still warming. The biggest vested interests are the oil companies.


I'm no scientist, but that sounds like nonsense to me, given the incidences of skin cancer are rising - what's happening?
Either the suns energy in the form of UV light is finding it easier to get here or humanity has become more susceptible to it's affects.
Also, given that solar activity appears to be affecting radioactive decay via an unknown mechanism, I don't think anyone can rule out just what the role of sun is in affairs here on Earth.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:52 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.