CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholicism > News and Politics
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 1st March 2007, 09:18 PM
Posts: n/a
Default Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming & Environmentalism

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism)

From the Inside Flap
"Global warming":
the Left's last best chance to gain a stranglehold on our political system and economy

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 justify the lifestyle restrictions they want to impose. With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only "global governance" (Jacques Chirac's words) can tackle such problems.

Now, in The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Global Warming and Environmentalism, Christopher C. Horner tears the cover off the Left's manipulation of environmental issues for political purposes--and lays out incontrovertible evidence for the fact that catastrophic man-made global warming is just more Chicken-Little hysteria, not actual science. He explains why, although Al Gore and his cronies among the media elites and UN globalists endlessly bleat that "global warming" is an unprecedented global crisis, they really think of it as a dream come true. It's the ideal scare campaign for those who hate capitalism and love big government. For, as Horner explains, if global warming really were as bad as the Leftist doomsayers insist it is, then no policy imaginable could "solve" it. According to the logic of the greens' own numbers, 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.

Horner (an attorney and senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute) reveals the full anti-American, anti-capitalist, and anti-human agenda of today's environmentalists, dubbing them "green on the outside, red to the core." He details how they use strong-arm legal tactics--and worse--against those who dare to point out the weakness of their arguments for global warming. Along the way, he explodes ten top global warming myths, carefully examining the evidence to determine how much warming there really is and what is actually causing it. He exposes the lies that the environmental lobby routinely tells to make its case; the ways in which it is trying to impose initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol on an unwilling American public; and much more--including the green lobby's favorite politicians (John Kerry, John McCain, Joe Lieberman, and others).

It's time to stand up to the environmentalist industry and insist: human beings are not the enemy. In breezy, light-hearted, and always entertaining fashion, The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Global Warming and Environmentalism gives you the facts you need to do so.
Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2007, 02:14 AM
Posts: n/a

The logic for global warming is flawed. The data people keep referring to states that Earth has risen one degree on average over the last century. That is not a crisis. I also have read of Greenland being farmable land at one time. Now it is frozen. Folks, it happens. The Earth heats and cools. Also forgotten is the fact that the magnetic poles in the Earth are in a state of change, currently. That extra magnetic radiation is having who knows what effect. Again, it happens. I think a relatively small examination of those major figures, groups, and corporations behind this nonsense reveals agendas that have little to do with the environment.

Also, I understand enough nuclear bombs or something similar could destroy all life as we know it. The claim being made is that global warming will destroy the world.

As a people we have a lot ore to worry about than this.
Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2007, 03:02 AM
Posts: n/a
Default Pope Benedict aint huggin trees

This was on LifeSite news and on Zenit.

Pope's Retreat Preacher Speaks on Antichrist as a "pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist"

By John-Henry Westen

VATICAN CITY, March 1, 2007 ( - Papal watchers are wondering what message Pope Benedict XVI was giving when he selected retired Bologna archbishop Cardinal Giacomo Biffi to preach the annual Lenten retreat to the Pope and the top members of the Vatican.

Rocco Palmo, expert Vatican reporter for The Tablet, the international Catholic weekly published in London England has noted the significance of the selection of the Lenten retreat preacher.* "Since time immemorial -- or, at least, the retreat's heightened profile over the 20th century -- the selection of the preacher has become a closely-watched indicator of the prevailing winds in the papal apartment," said Palmo on his blog.* "(T)he choice often falling to a voice the Pope might like to tout... and not just for a higher prominence on the preaching circuit."

Palmo added weight to his remarks noting that "Before their respective elections to the papacy, both Joseph Ratzinger and Karol Wojtyla were tapped to lead the annual exercises."

This year's selection when it became known created a stir since Cardinal Biffi, while he is known for orthodox faith and frank words, is most well known, at least in the secular media, for his preaching on the Antichrist.* In fact, the Times of London reported in 2004 that the Cardinal described the Antichrist as "walking among us".

The Lenten retreat did not disappoint.* Cardinal Biffi picked up on his oft repeated theme of the Antichrist, basing his remarks on the works of Vladimir Soloviev, a Russian theologian who has received praise from Pope Benedict prior to his elevation to the pontificate.

Quoting Soloviev, the Cardinal said "the Antichrist presents himself as pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist."

"He will convoke an ecumenical council and will seek the consensus of all the Christian confessions, granting something to each one. The masses will follow him, with the exception of small groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants," he said according to a Zenit translation of a Vatican Radio summary here: .

In his "Tale of the Antichrist" Solovyov foresees that a small group of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants will resist and will say to the Antichrist: "You give us everything, except what interests us, Jesus Christ".** For Cardinal Biffi, this narrative is a warning: "Today, in fact, we run the risk of having a Christianity which puts aside Jesus with his cross and resurrection."

The 78-year-old cardinal added that if Christians "limited themselves to speaking of shared values they would be more accepted on television programs and in social groups. But in this way, they will have renounced Jesus, the overwhelming reality of the resurrection."

The cardinal said he believes that this is "the danger that Christians face in our days … the Son of God cannot be reduced to a series of good projects sanctioned by the prevailing worldly mentality."

The preacher of the Spiritual Exercises added that "there are relative values, such as solidarity, love of peace and respect for nature. If these become absolute, uprooting or even opposing the proclamation of the event of salvation, then these values become an instigation to idolatry and obstacles on the way of salvation."

Cardinal Biffi affirmed that "if Christianity -- on opening itself to the world and dialoguing with all -- dilutes the salvific event, it closes itself to a personal relationship with Jesus and places itself on the side of the Antichrist."

Cardinal Biffi's reflections, in fact, are very similar to remarks Pope Benedict made last Fall in a meeting with Swiss Bishops.* While Pope Benedict did not speak of the Antichrist, he spoke of a new false or "substitute" religion, calling it also a "successor" of religion.

"Modern society is not simply without morality, but it has, so to speak, 'discovered' and professes a part of morality", the Pope told the Swiss bishops. "These are the great themes of peace, non-violence, justice for all, concern for the poor, and respect for creation."

However, the Pope warned that these "great moral themes" have "become an ethical complex that, precisely as a political force, has great power and constitutes for many the substitute for religion, or its successor."

"It is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible," concluded the Pope. "It is only then that non-violence can express itself in every direction; only then that we truly welcome creation, and only then that we can arrive at true justice."
Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2007, 11:45 AM
Joey Joey is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 629

"It is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible," concluded the Pope. "It is only then that non-violence can express itself in every direction; only then that we truly welcome creation, and only then that we can arrive at true justice."

Yes, Pope Benedict summed it up beautifully.
"Closer to You bid me, that with Your saints I may be praising Your name, forever and ever."

Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2007, 12:39 PM
Rob Rob is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sicily, Italy
Posts: 1,001

Originally Posted by logue View Post
The logic for global warming is flawed. The data people keep referring to states that Earth has risen one degree on average over the last century. That is not a crisis. I also have read of Greenland being farmable land at one time. Now it is frozen. Folks, it happens. The Earth heats and cools.

Althought an average rise in temperature of one degree might seem small. On large scale it is a considerable amount.
Greenland might have been farmable once, as the sahara desert was once an oasis. I don't think that the melting of a large surface of Antarctica can be compared to this, especially if you consider that it has happened in the last 20 years. The changes in Grennland occurred over 100 years or more.

Originally Posted by logue View Post
Also forgotten is the fact that the magnetic poles in the Earth are in a state of change, currently. That extra magnetic radiation is having who knows what effect. Again, it happens.

That is speculative. The shifting of magnetic poles shouldn't have major consequences on the world, and on man's activity, at least compared to pollution. You seem to believe that the shifting of magnetic poles will have more problematic consequences than the rise of average temperature. How can you believe to troubles that will bring something that hasn't happened yet (the shifting of magnetic poles) if you don't even believe that the rising of average temperature, which is empirical and evident now, has no effect on the world?

Originally Posted by logue View Post
Also, I understand enough nuclear bombs or something similar could destroy all life as we know it. The claim being made is that global warming will destroy the world.

The global warming might not destroy the world, but I remind you that you still live on the world. So man will suffer greatly if he doesn't do something about pollution.

For to me, to live is Christ; and to die is gain (Phil 1:21)
Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2007, 02:23 AM
Posts: n/a
Default French Pro-global Warming Scientist Says There Is No Global Warming

Allegre's second thoughts

Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists and among her most celebrated scientists, was among the first to sound the alarm about the dangers of global warming.

"By burning fossil fuels, man increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which, for example, has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century," Dr. Allegre, a renowned geochemist, wrote 20 years ago in Cles pour la geologie.." Fifteen years ago, Dr. Allegre was among the 1500 prominent scientists who signed "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity," a highly publicized letter stressing that global warming's "potential risks are very great" and demanding a new caring ethic that recognizes the globe's fragility in order to stave off "spirals of environmental decline, poverty, and unrest, leading to social, economic and environmental collapse."

In the 1980s and early 1990s, when concern about global warming was in its infancy, little was known about the mechanics of how it could occur, or the consequences that could befall us. Since then, governments throughout the western world and bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have commissioned billions of dollars worth of research by thousands of scientists. With a wealth of data now in, Dr. Allegre has recanted his views. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank.

His break with what he now sees as environmental cant on climate change came in September, in an article entitled "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" in l' Express, the French weekly. His article cited evidence that Antarctica is gaining ice and that Kilimanjaro's retreating snow caps, among other global-warming concerns, come from natural causes. "The cause of this climate change is unknown," he states matter of factly. There is no basis for saying, as most do, that the "science is settled."

Dr. Allegre's skepticism is noteworthy in several respects. For one, he is an exalted member of France's political establishment, a friend of former Socialist president Lionel Jospin, and, from 1997 to 2000, his minister of education, research and technology, charged with improving the quality of government research through closer co-operation with France's educational institutions. For another, Dr. Allegre has the highest environmental credentials. The author of early environmental books, he fought successful battles to protect the ozone layer from CFCs and public health from lead pollution. His break with scientific dogma over global warming came at a personal cost: Colleagues in both the governmental and environmental spheres were aghast that he could publicly question the science behind climate change.

But Dr. Allegre had allegiances to more than his socialist and environmental colleagues. He is, above all, a scientist of the first order, the architect of isotope geodynamics, which showed that the atmosphere was primarily formed early in the history of the Earth, and the geochemical modeller of the early solar system. Because of his path-breaking cosmochemical research, NASA asked Dr. Allegre to participate in the Apollo lunar program, where he helped determine the age of the Moon. Matching his scientific accomplishments in the cosmos are his accomplishments at home: Dr. Allegre is perhaps best known for his research on the structural and geochemical evolution of the Earth's crust and the creation of its mountains, explaining both the title of his article in l' Express and his revulsion at the nihilistic nature of the climate research debate.

Calling the arguments of those who see catastrophe in climate change "simplistic and obscuring the true dangers," Dr. Allegre especially despairs at "the greenhouse-gas fanatics whose proclamations consist in denouncing man's role on the climate without doing anything about it except organizing conferences and preparing protocols that become dead letters." The world would be better off, Dr. Allegre believes, if these "denouncers" became less political and more practical, by proposing practical solutions to head off the dangers they see, such as developing technologies to sequester C02. His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear."
Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2007, 02:31 AM
Posts: n/a
Default The Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle

In a polemical and thought-provoking documentary, film-maker Martin Durkin argues that the theory of man-made global warming has become such a powerful political force that other explanations for climate change are not being properly aired.

disagree with the prevailing consensus that a 'greenhouse effect' of carbon dioxide released by human activity is the cause of rising global temperatures.

Instead the documentary highlights recent research that the effect of the sun's radiation on the atmosphere may be a better explanation for the regular swings of climate from ice ages to warm interglacial periods and back again.

The film argues that the earth's climate is always changing, and that rapid warmings and coolings took place long before the burning of fossil fuels. It argues that the present single-minded focus on reducing carbon emissions not only may have little impact on climate change, it may also have the unintended consequence of stifling development in the third world, prolonging endemic poverty and disease.

The film features an impressive roll-call of experts, including nine professors – experts in climatology, oceanography, meteorology, environmental science, biogeography and paleoclimatology – from such reputable institutions as MIT, NASA, the International Arctic Research Centre, the Institut Pasteur, the Danish National Space Center and the Universities of London, Ottawa, Jerusalem, Winnipeg, Alabama and Virginia.

Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2007, 02:33 AM
Posts: n/a
Default Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists

Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists

Research said to prove that greenhouse gases cause climate change has been condemned as a sham by scientists.

A United Nations report earlier this year said humans are very likely to be to blame for global warming and there is "virtually no doubt" it is linked to man's use of fossil fuels.

But other climate experts say there is little scientific evidence to support the theory.

In fact global warming could be caused by increased solar activity such as a massive eruption.

Their argument will be outlined on Channel 4 this Thursday in a programme called The Great Global Warming Swindle raising major questions about some of the evidence used for global warming.

Ice core samples from Antarctica have been used as proof of how warming over the centuries has been accompanied by raised CO2 levels.

But Professor Ian Clark, an expert in palaeoclimatology from the University of Ottawa, claims that warmer periods of the Earth's history came around 800 years before rises in carbon dioxide levels.

The programme also highlights how, after the Second World War, there was a huge surge in carbon dioxide emissions, yet global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

The UN report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was published in February. At the time it was promoted as being backed by more than 2,000 of the world's leading scientists.

But Professor Paul Reiter, of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said it was a "sham" given that this list included the names of scientists who disagreed with its findings.

Professor Reiter, an expert in malaria, said his name was removed from an assessment only when he threatened legal action against the panel.

"That is how they make it seem that all the top scientists are agreed," he said. "It's not true."

Gary Calder, a former editor of New Scientist, claims clouds and solar activity are the real reason behind climate change.

"The government's chief scientific adviser Sir David King is supposed to be the representative of all that is good in British science, so it is disturbing he and the government are ignoring a raft of evidence against the greenhouse effect being the main driver against climate change," he said.

Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2007, 01:23 PM
Posts: n/a
Default Global Warming, it's all about taking America's money

Global Warming Tax – “An Inconvenient Truth

By Tim Wilson

Immediately following the publication of their political summary of the latest International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the publicity successes of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”, the United Nations (UN) is demanding more money – mainly from the USA. You have to be incredibly naive to think these acts are unconnected or a coincidence.

The Administrator of the UN Development Program, Kemal Dervis, has just demanded that the US (and other “rich” nations) double their “contributions” to “developing nations” (which would include China and India) in order to reach a “global deal to curb climate change”. Naturally, they want this funding channelled through the UN, which has been responsible for most of the international drive through the seventeen agencies they run with a finger in the environmental pie, to make Global Warming a topical issue. States which support them have their own reasons for doing so and are less concerned that this money, which will mostly come from American pockets, should go through the UN as long as they make a profit. And talking of profit, the biggest winners on the new international Carbon Trading market? China – probably the dirtiest, biggest source of pollution on the planet!

The next step in this extortion act will be the publication of the supporting science documents to the IPCC Report. One problem with this is that they have already said they are delaying publication to ensure these supporting documents do not contradict or detract from the political summary! A major triumph of speculation over fact – politics triumphs over science, politics alters facts to suit theory, politics ignores contradictory evidence. The beneficiary of this? All those involved in Carbon Credit trading and all those whose power and careers depend on the Global Warming business.

The whole business of Global Warming has become a scam of epic proportions. There is scientific consensus that there is Climate Change. There is not scientific consensus that man is to blame for the impending doomsday scenarios that are put out by the Global Warming lobby. It is indisputable that the Climate is changing, but that may be part of the natural cycle of Planet Earth and the evidence of man’s effect is anything but indisputable, according to many reputable and distinguished scientists. Pollution is indisputably bad, and good works to mitigate the effects of pollution are a good idea. There appears to be scientific consensus on that. But there is no scientific consensus that human-generated carbon emissions are causing either long- or short-term problems. There is speculation and theory, but no definitive proof and plenty of argument, including that carbon emissions may even be beneficial.

Americans are already paying Carbon Taxes on almost every international flight, on top of their tax “assessments” to the UN. Now the UN is suggesting that a tax of 0.7% of GDP should be “donated” to them to help further their fight against Global Warming. 0.7% does not sound like very much, until you realise that would be in the order of $85 billion per year from the US – to a corrupt, opaque, unaccountable bunch of wasters who already abuse over $5 billion per year of American taxpayer money and an unknown amount of personal charity giving. No wonder they are putting so much effort into the idea!

It's always about the money and redistribution via taxation...
Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2007, 09:32 PM
Posts: n/a
Default Articles

FYI - it is fun to read what people think on topics who post here. It is NOT fun to read what articles people think we should read. If you want to make a point, make a point, don't just post what other people write. If you are going to post and article, like Ron does, then you should write the article, like Ron does.

Just my opinion.

Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.