Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/24/09 01:08 PM, ReiperX wrote:

1) The emails can be taken out of context easily, 2) they were stolen, 3) they were stolen by a hacker, so I'm not even going to risk downloading them to find out there's some unknown virus in there (hugely publicized download, millions of people downloading it as (s)he knew would happen, perfect chance to infect,

1. There is stuff in there that cannot be taken out of context.

2. So what? The UN is trying to steal $400bn a year in carbon taxes and deinstrialise the Western world by 20 years minimum.

3. Thousands of people have downloaded them. There is no virus. My virus checker has searched it. If they wanted to infect you with a virus, there are much easier ways. I mean, you're REALLY not being logical with this statement.

That's a nice explanation there.

What do you make of the comments on the modelling source code:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/22/cr u-emails-may-be-open-to-interpretation-b ut-commented-code-by-the-programmer-tell s-the-real-story/

Oh, and by the way, all these models are able to conclude is that carbon is up and that temperature is up.

They are not able to understand that it's temperature that causes CO2, not CO2 that causes temperature. They also do not take into account the massive changes in the Sun's activity.

When you are in a position of "scientific credibility", you are able to wield that influence to manipulate others. Most of these scientists have a deep disdain for humanity, because they see a large population as a bunch of idiots, who get paid more money than them -- even though they're much more intelligent and productive (scientists are generally very low-paid). And so, they actually believe in levying a carbon tax to suppress large populations and take more of the pie for themselves,

By converting to a green economy, you take all the existing infrastructure and turn it "green". This will take decades, and when all is said and done, we'll have the exact same stuff, except it'll be classified as "green", at which point the controllers will come in with another scheme to maintain their monopoly. These are the same people than loansharked the third world with huge debt. They are not friendly people.

You already are

In the downstairs department

At 11/24/09 10:49 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: You just don't understand what you are reading, so here's the deal. I find your evidence entirely unpersuasive and I'll not comment again until you post something of value or go get your scientific background that you are sorely lacking. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.

You're not a scientist either, buddy.

I bet you believe in population reduction too. I bet you think it's a coincidence that big companies are setting up schemes where they can profit immensely from selling carbon credits. I bet you think it's good that Obama -- a man who has lied on endless policies -- is putting his weight behind this man-made climate change theory. I bet you think 1+1 = 2.0000000000000001 (or some variety), not 2. I bet you believe it's just a coincidence that Al Gore stands to make milions, if not billions, from this. I bet you think all the big corporations are backing this because they want to "save the Earth", not "line their pockets".

As Einstein said: "Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it."

At 11/24/09 07:52 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 11/24/09 07:39 AM, Mr-Money wrote: they say that they cannot debate the skeptics, because the skeptics are right.

Quote, please?

These quotes are directly from the hacked emails, which can be downloaded from the Pirate Bay: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5171206/
Hadley_CRU_Files_(FOI2009.zip)

"I seem to be getting an email a week from skeptics saying where's the warming gone. I know the warming is on the decadal scale, but it would be nice to wear their smug grins away." - Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>

"In any case, if the sulfate hypothesis is right, then your prediction of warming might end up being wrong. I think we have been too readily explaining the slow changes over past decade as a result of variability-that explanation is wearing thin. I would just suggest, as a backup to your prediction, that you also do some checking on the sulfate issue, just so you might have a quantified explanation in case the prediction is wrong. Otherwise, the Skeptics will be all over us-the world is really cooling, the models are no good, etc. And all this just as the US is about ready to get serious on the issue." - Mike MacCracken <mmaccrac@comcast.net>

"Your final sentence though about improvements in reviewing and traceability is a bit of a hostage to fortune. The skeptics will try to hang on to something, but I don't want to give them something clearly tangible." - Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>

Those are just three examples. I have many, many more if you would like them.
----------------------------------------
------------------------------

In addition, the SOURCE CODE of the modelling software is laden with comments from the programmers admitting that they are adding exceptions to make up for the lack of clear trends. Read it here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/22/cr u-emails-may-be-open-to-interpretation-b ut-commented-code-by-the-programmer-tell s-the-real-story/

At 11/23/09 11:49 PM, Worthless-Wisdom wrote: I think you're getting mixed up between global warming and anthropogenic global warming. I think its hard to doubt that global warming has been occurring, whether it is due to human activity is another debate all together.

But the point is: if you read the hacked emails and talking points, they say that they cannot debate the skeptics, because the skeptics are right. And so, we should be incredibly dubious of all of this, especially when it's basically a profiteering scam for big banks to sell you carbon credits:

http://www.jpmorganclimatecare.com/about /carbon-offsets-explained/

At 11/23/09 12:52 PM, gumOnShoe wrote: Also, by globalists do you mean free masons, the jewish conspiracy, etc etc? LOL

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuudeee... Are you kidding me?? Do you really think it's a whacky conspiracy that most US politicians are bought and paid for? Do you even know what the word "lobbying" means.

There is no way in hell that you can tell me the trend is not globalism, and that a global carbon tax would not be the icing on the cake.

When you see every big corporation, every big politician and every big TV show putting out this propaganda to "save the planet", you KNOW that it is a scam being run top-down by globalist elites.

And by the way, you say the Republicans would smack down the bill, as if somehow they are different from the Democrats. I know it's easy to watch Fox News and MSNBC shouting each other, and think that there's real competition. But maaaaaaaaybe, if you watch this promotional video from Rupert Murdoch, you would realise that they're all........ globalists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xxUIVyk fM

Fox News just plays the opposition, and they're very good actors, indeed.

At 11/23/09 11:42 AM, Elfer wrote:

Do you think that any US politician right now is going to propose taxing their constituents and then sending the money somewhere that they have no control over it?

Yes, because so many of them are all on the payroll of the globalists.

The new EU President has said that we're going to have a global carbon tax already. He's only been in office for a few days.

So many of these politicians are on the payroll of the globalists. And if they become unpopular, fine... they get voted out of office. So what? They'll just bring in the next puppet frontman.

At 11/23/09 10:24 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 11/23/09 10:00 AM, Mr-Money wrote: There will also be an annual tax, paid directly to the UN.

Neither of the links you posted said anything even remotely close to this.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?F useAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_i d=D5C3C93F-802A-23AD-4F29-FE59494B48A6

http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afre c/vol15no4/154finan.htm

All you have to do is use Google.

At 11/23/09 09:48 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 11/23/09 09:43 AM, Mr-Money wrote: Carbon taxes are planned across the world, to be paid directly to the United Nations and IMF.

For instance...

I didn't quite understand your question. I guess you're asking for proof. Here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20 09/nov/03/ban-ki-moon-climate-funding

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environ ment/carbon/6527970/Everyone-in-Britain-
could-be-given-a-personal-carbon-allowan ce.html

It's basically a carbon rationing scheme, where they tell you how much carbon you can use. If you go over your limit, you can pay for more carbon allowance. There will also be an annual tax, paid directly to the UN.

Back to my point about corruption: I don't believe in global warming, but I do think that third world nations need to be developed. So.... I'm begging the UN.... Draw up a detailed plan of what you're going to do with our money. How much will be invested in 2010, 2011, what will be bought etc. You can't just say "pay us billions or the planet will die". Sorry.... Ain't gonna work. And the fact that they're doing that should be cause to believe this is a scam.

We should be thankful for Bing. If Google ever got a complete monopoly, hell would be unleashed.

At 11/23/09 09:25 AM, JohnnyWang wrote: Tell me again, who profits from this? Aside from Al Gore getting money for hiis movie, sure.

Carbon taxes are planned across the world, to be paid directly to the United Nations and IMF. The money is then handed to private corporations, who are supposed to be micromanaging it to direct money to suffering third world nations.

But I think we all know what happens when you hand companies a blank cheque.

Why do you think all the big companies are getting behind this? You think they actually think the planet is going to be destroyed??

If you actually download the leak, it's brutal:

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5171206/
Hadley_CRU_Files_%28FOI2009.zip%29

They say climate change skeptics are "irrating" and should be ignored. They say the debate should be limited to how we stop climate change, not whether we need to in the first place.

They say trends do not support the evidence, so we're going to have to lie and put out fake numbers.

This is just brutal. The entire Al Gore Church of Climtaology is coming to its knees. And it really is a church. Al Gore sequel to An Inconvenient Truth will focus on the "religious" aspects to how we should save the planet. This is getting out of control.

It will eventually start up in probably a second (currenty it's 7 seconds)... so... it'll be good as a dual-boot thing if you want to go straight into the Internet.

Hormones in the water supplies, people. That's what's causing this.

Employment is for spiritless demons.

It doesn't really matter if you die alone or at some party snorting cocaine.

All that matters is that you fulfill your individual destiny. Then the rest is just pomping around and adding fluff.

The way you beat a bully is by punching him in the face. Any other reaction will just mean that it goes on and on and on and on.... in your case, for 3 years.

What is the specific theme of your album? Because at the end of the day, that's quite important.

I always make good Flashes, apart from the 20-30 that I have scrubbed from my account.

For some reason I keep listening to Represent by (hed) PE

Death is cool.

You see, kids... money fucks people up.... Working repetitive jobs to feed a family that cares more about the television than you fucks families up... If people would just talk to each other openly and spend less time watching the TV and being materialistic, things would change.

I have to say: this story reminds me of my family. You're not as uncommon as you might think.

Google Wave seems seriously dope. It's just... most of the time, all you want to do is drop an email, a Facebook status update or something. Due to the fast world that we live in... well... you're not going to be on the computer at the same time as other people, most likely.

There are loads of reasons to love Linux, namely, "there are tons of great free programs", "you can run it off a memory stick"

But then there's the... "When I plug in my USB Wifi dongle, why do I have to spend 5 hours browsing the web so I can learn how to type in lines of code just to get it to fucking work"

Pros and cons. It's still early days.

Version 9.10 of Ubuntu, coming out in 5 days, will have an app store, like the iPhone. I think this will really change the game and make installing software a lot easier.

I couldn't help but laugh at this t-shirt. Does this make me a bad boy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8okYhcRwr gY

I swear, if one of you make a joke about this..

He sure does love women. Photoshop it.

I can't believe how stupid and uneducated humanity is.