1010 'No Pressure' Editorial from the world

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT. Despicable promotional video from environmental fascists with editorial comments from the first hours of its release. Yes some spelling and grammar errors remain... you can cope.

• Category

  News & Politics

[Jaeron2]

Watch closely at 4:59 - "I think it is fine to explode children for a good cause." I think that about sums it up. They used that "behind the scenes" clip, instead of hiding it like they should have because that truly is what they believe. It embodies the climate change movement.

[CRJarvis]

The Quran Teaches to Terrorize all unbelievers.

Global warming Teaches to Terrorize all unbelievers.

Here is the Video they made for you.

Green peace “Save the Planet, kill yourselves.”

Has now become “save the planet, kill everyone else.”

[gpoop23]

They showed those people dying in the most ridiculous way because they thought that would ensure nobody would actually interpret the ad as a threat from them. Unfortunately, it seems they underestimated the narrow-mindedness of the average american, and now their campaign for a noble cause is screwed.

Also, I'm pretty sure that kid at 4:59 was joking. But, you know, it's totally plausible that one ad shoot can turn a perfectly innocent kid into an eco-terrorist.

[gpoop23]

Holy crap, everyone is taking this way too literally. The meaning isn't that we have to kill everyone who doesn't reduce their carbon footprint, it's that if we don't start taking action against pollution, we'll all die. I think everyone freaked out because they can relate to the people who got blown up, the people who think there's "no pressure" to actually do something.

[Szarko32c]

Q: Is it true that the one of 10:10 critic committed suicide?

10:10: Yes, it is true, we even recorded his very last words: "Don't shoot!"

[50srefugee]

Breaking News:

agu dot org /pubs/crossref/2012/2011GL0507­20.shtml

"Hydroclimate of the northeastern United States is highly sensitive to solar forcing"

Key Points: Holocene northeast US hydrological change is consistent with solar forcing. Small changes in solar forcing are amplified in our region by Arctic Oscillation. Leaf-wax abundances in peatlands provide high-resolution climate information.

Note this is from NASA's GISS, previously a major purveyor of CAGW propaganda.

[50srefugee]

@topologyrob: "so blindingly obvious"

One last thing. There has been a rhetorical shift from Global Warming to Climate Change.

Why?

Too many people shivering.

The result was a claim that no matter what the climate did, it was bad, and the fault of those pesky humans.

A model that explains every outcome after the fact, or that predicts every outcome, scattershot fashion, so that when one of them turns out to be true, victory can be claimed, is totally worthless.

Fraudulent, even.

[50srefugee]

@50srefugee:

Ahem.

5. Doing X will not cause more hardship than it prevents.

[smacks self]

[50srefugee]

@topologyrob: "humans can be so irrational"

Yup, they believe in crap like socialism, in the State being more competent to run our lives and businesses than we are.

Look up "Watermelon". Same dictionary as "Oreo". And no, we're not talking desserts.

[50srefugee]

@topologyrob: "so blindingly obvious"

There are at least five separate claims:

1. There is an clear record of past climate, from last year to the last billion years.

2. There is unprecedented climate change occurring...

3. ...Due solely to human action.

4. We can fix it by doing X.

5. Doing X will not cause more hardship than it causes.

I think none of these claims is rock solid. NONE.

C'mon, seriously: What does it even mean to say you know the temperature of the entire planet TODAY?

[50srefugee]

@topologyrob: "the evidence is so blindingly obvious that we're changing the climate".

The burden is on you. Prove it. Take into account the last ten years of climate data. Discuss measurement problems. Hazards of proxy data. Urban heat islands. Temperature station siting. Prove that it's humans doing it, and not, say the sun.

Explain the fragility of a climate that's, hah, weathered the last couple of billion years fairly well.

Ice ages, anyone?