Re: "Klaatu, barada, leftwing enviro-propaganda"

On Dec 7, 5:22 pm, Alric Knebel <al...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 16:34:16 -0500, Thanatos <atro...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <4sfnj450ntqgofgbbfkse2rff8q05b4...@xxxxxxx>,
Alric Knebel <al...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 22:12:46 -0500, "RichA" <ob...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

"Alric Knebel" <al...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:vo0mj41csr0rso2u61c0uie9uhv5iqha5n@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 14:36:34 -0800 (PST), calvin
<cri...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 6, 5:28 pm, Alric Knebel <al...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Neither one of you know what it's really about. You're GUESSING it's
got some environmentalist message. Even if it does, you don't even
know how they've managed to fit it in.

But, then again, we KNOW why you two think it's worth harping on.

Oh? Why? (I answered that, by the way.)

Because you resent the environmentalist message, because you associate
it with left-leaning thinkers. AND YOU MUST NOT SURRENDER ANY GROUND
TO LEFT-LEANING THINKERS!

And leftists and other nitwits, the gullable are the first to take junk
science at face value and call for, nay DEMAND that we spend trillions on
it! Like the global cooling of 1975....as reported by "respectable"
leftwing envirokooks...

And I know your kind have enjoyed kicking around this global-cooling
stuff. But I don't remember that back then. If it was a story, it
was reported by only a tiny minority of people, and it never gained
any traction.

Bull***. It was reported on the covers of Time and Newsweek and in all
the major media. Congress had "emergency hearings" on the subject.
Here's one of the Newsweek articles:

http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

Yeah, yeah, yeah. They got a bit concerned. Then they moved on. It
had it's fifteen minutes, then that was it. You dumb ***.

And here's the cover of Time, also reporting on it:

http://www.deramerikaner.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/time_cooling_...
ica.jpg

Here's a hint Knebel: the world isn't all about you. Things do exist
outside of your personal experience. Just because you personally can't
remember something, doesn't mean it didn't happen, and you should really
do a at least a quick Google search on a topic you apparently know
nothing about before opening your drooling mouth and pontificating on it
like you're an expert.

What the hell are you blabbing about? You can google and google until
you piss your pants. It wasn't a BIG story then, as I said, and it's
only being used now by fruits like yourself. Look, asswipe. There
was a sci-fi movie back then, SOYLENT GREEN, that was about the
greenhouse effect. It was about the atmosphere heating up. Remember
that? I don't remember any mainstream stuff that gave this
global-cooling stuff more than a nod.

What you're doing is, finding some off-the-wall reports
from whomever,

LOL! The New York Times, Time Magazine, Newsweek, the LA Times... yeah,
off the wall reports from nobodys.

Yeah. And I'll say it again. You didn't have world-wide conferences
on global cooling. That's how serious it was. Now, you ***-faced
nitwit, I know you've been reading some right-wing swill that's
gathered all these anecdotal stories for you, so you believe that the
whole world was shouting back then about global cooling. But it never
happened, *** stain.

You're a cartoon, Knebel.

No, you simpleton, I'm not. I'm telling it like it is. The ONLY
reason you believe this *** now -- because YOU are not a scientist --
is because you're a fucking right-wing, ass-kissing, ***-swallowing
loon, and if liberals think one thing, the right-wing pieholes you
listen to are going to automatically be against it. Right? RIGHT! I
mean, why do you believe the right-wing gas bags, but not the
scientists claiming global warming? Myself, I don't have a strong
belief, one way or the other. But it's so tiring to hear you gasbags
go at it, with not a thimble of intelligence behind you to gauge this
stuff for yourself, but you'll yap your dumb asses off defending the
opposite view, because it's all about LIBERAL BASHING. You dumb ***.
I've already said this a couple of times, and it seems like you'd have
figured it out by now.

and using it to undermine an global-warming claims,
saying, "Look what they were saying thirty years ago."
The truth is, not that many people were saying that.

No, the truth is, it was remarkably similar to today's global-warming
mantra: every "respected" climatologist was saying it and predicting
that Chicago would be under a glacier by the turn of the millennium. It
was all the same rhetoric about "scientific consensus" that we're
hearing now. Kinda missed the mark on that, huh? And many of those
people back then are the same people who are saying now, "Trust us, this
time we know what we're talking about."

Oh, bull***. World leaders weren't meeting to discuss it. There
were a few articles about it, and that was it. You guys are just
creepy stupid with it, with your paranoid bull*** that it's all about
"socialists trying to seize control of the world economy," and other
nonsense. It's laughable. You paranoid freaks.

______________________________________________
Alric Knebel

The left is basing everything on questionable models that would not be
accepted as 100% accurate in any other scientific realm. Previous
predictions: Peak Oil - 1980. The population bomb, DDT (killed
birds, so the kooks sacrificed 30 million humans to malaria to save
the bird eggs), no more forests (we have more forest acreage now than
at any time in history), etc, etc. Now, we've got Hollywood doing its
best to con the population into believing we need to bankrupt the West
and spend $20T to "save" the environment from a non-pollutant, C02.

.