SHARE
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Vote up (11) down (10)
Climate change is a wealth redistribution scheme to turn the environment into god

Climate change is a wealth redistribution scheme to turn the environment into god

(5:52) ... that's according to Monica Crowley, a possible press secretary for Donald Trump. Sean Hannity on global warming propaganda pushed by liberals and the left.

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1341 days ago)

I fking hate these people.

ReplyVote up (101)down (86)
Original comment

I fking hate these people.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: kook (1339 days ago)
Latest comment:

Why couldnt the interviever ask him to explain how avalanches affect weather.

ReplyVote up (101)down (87)
Original comment
Latest comment:

Why couldnt the interviever ask him to explain how avalanches affect weather.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1342 days ago)

Bill Cunningham advises us to follow the money. That's a wise approach. Follow the money and I think most people will end up with a conclusion different from his. The money is not in global warming, it's in maintaining status quo. Think about the interests of big oil, the automotive industry, transportation sector, etc. Hell, the entire world economy is based around cheap fossil energy. Follow the money and you will see that the corporate world and their government puppets have great benefits in continuing to poison the planet, and will go out of their way to delude the public in pursuit of ever increasing profits.

ReplyVote up (101)down (98)
Original comment

Bill Cunningham advises us to follow the money. That's a wise approach. Follow the money and I think most people will end up with a conclusion different from his. The money is not in global warming, it's in maintaining status quo. Think about the interests of big oil, the automotive industry, transportation sector, etc. Hell, the entire world economy is based around cheap fossil energy. Follow the money and you will see that the corporate world and their government puppets have great benefits in continuing to poison the planet, and will go out of their way to delude the public in pursuit of ever increasing profits.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1341 days ago)

If you follow the money you will find that the corporations and landowners have hit the jackpot with the gov subsides.Solar and Windpower is a boondoggle for the ages, and as per usual it's the poor people who will suffer.

Liberals and progressives are always easily led into backing these destructive schemes,all you have to do is sell the idea they they are doing good,and "it's the future", and they will quite happily keep on pressing the button to inflict more pain.

ReplyVote up (101)down (98)
Original comment

If you follow the money you will find that the corporations and landowners have hit the jackpot with the gov subsides.Solar and Windpower is a boondoggle for the ages, and as per usual it's the poor people who will suffer.

Liberals and progressives are always easily led into backing these destructive schemes,all you have to do is sell the idea they they are doing good,and "it's the future", and they will quite happily keep on pressing the button to inflict more pain.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1341 days ago)

Renewable energy is a destructive scheme for which the poor will suffer?! What are you talking about?

ReplyVote up (101)down (98)
Original comment

Renewable energy is a destructive scheme for which the poor will suffer?! What are you talking about?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1341 days ago)

Look up the word Boondoggle. Solar panels and wind turbines have to be manufactured, transported and erected. Power lines mus tbe built to connect these to the grid.Spinning backup (diesel) must be on standby 24 7 to kick in when these devices fail to generate electricity in order to protect the stability of the grid. If the net result of the entire system is that no co2 savings are made over the lifetime of the generation device,over conventional systems, and the sole effect is to make electricity too expensive for poor people whilst making a fortune for the corporations building the wind and solar farms, then YES it's a boondoggle

ReplyVote up (89)down (101)
Original comment

Look up the word Boondoggle. Solar panels and wind turbines have to be manufactured, transported and erected. Power lines mus tbe built to connect these to the grid.Spinning backup (diesel) must be on standby 24 7 to kick in when these devices fail to generate electricity in order to protect the stability of the grid. If the net result of the entire system is that no co2 savings are made over the lifetime of the generation device,over conventional systems, and the sole effect is to make electricity too expensive for poor people whilst making a fortune for the corporations building the wind and solar farms, then YES it's a boondoggle

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1341 days ago)

Yeah, there's a risk of ending up like you are describing. And I agree, there is no point in going "green" if the net CO2 emissions are the same. But if the governments are awake and align the incentive schemes properly the boondoggle can be reduced to a minimum. Are there any other options?

ReplyVote up (101)down (93)
Original comment

Yeah, there's a risk of ending up like you are describing. And I agree, there is no point in going "green" if the net CO2 emissions are the same. But if the governments are awake and align the incentive schemes properly the boondoggle can be reduced to a minimum. Are there any other options?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1341 days ago)

Nuclear (as advocated by "death trains" James Hansen). The environmentalists conversant in real maths and science know that it is actually the only viable alternative to generate the base load power required, but how do you educate the dumb kneejerk snowflakes scweamers ?

ReplyVote up (101)down (95)
Original comment

Nuclear (as advocated by "death trains" James Hansen). The environmentalists conversant in real maths and science know that it is actually the only viable alternative to generate the base load power required, but how do you educate the dumb kneejerk snowflakes scweamers ?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1341 days ago)

I haven't seen the math, but as long as it makes sense from an environmental point of view (net CO2 reduction), the main sources of energy should be renewable. If you would need to top up with nuclear to satisfy the energy demand, then so be it. However with nuclear energy follows great inherent risk. If a solar panel fails you mend or replace it. The same goes for a wind turbine or a hydro-electric plant. But if a nuclear power plant fails you end up with a potential Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima.

ReplyVote up (97)down (101)
Original comment

I haven't seen the math, but as long as it makes sense from an environmental point of view (net CO2 reduction), the main sources of energy should be renewable. If you would need to top up with nuclear to satisfy the energy demand, then so be it. However with nuclear energy follows great inherent risk. If a solar panel fails you mend or replace it. The same goes for a wind turbine or a hydro-electric plant. But if a nuclear power plant fails you end up with a potential Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1340 days ago)

Maybe you should calculate how many of these solar panels and wind turbines we will actually need to run your delusion dream scenario. Oh and Thorium reactors ae the future

ReplyVote up (91)down (101)
Original comment

Maybe you should calculate how many of these solar panels and wind turbines we will actually need to run your delusion dream scenario. Oh and Thorium reactors ae the future

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1340 days ago)

We are just getting started and already a fifth of the energy consumed worldwide is from renewable sources. The production is growing exponentially and the prices are declining. Just looking out the window there is no doubt that there's room for wind turbines, solar panels and the likes to satisfy our current energy needs many times over.

Thorium has great potential, but substantial R&D is still required for it to become a significant source of electricity.

ReplyVote up (90)down (101)
Original comment

We are just getting started and already a fifth of the energy consumed worldwide is from renewable sources. The production is growing exponentially and the prices are declining. Just looking out the window there is no doubt that there's room for wind turbines, solar panels and the likes to satisfy our current energy needs many times over.

Thorium has great potential, but substantial R&D is still required for it to become a significant source of electricity.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1340 days ago)

A fifth ???. you're delusional, more like a fifth of 0.1%

ReplyVote up (101)down (82)
Original comment

A fifth ???. you're delusional, more like a fifth of 0.1%

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1340 days ago)

No, that's the truth.

LINK

ReplyVote up (83)down (101)
Original comment

No, that's the truth.

LINK

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1340 days ago)

utter one eyed propaganda nonsense. Even wikipedia puts the figure at only 3.5% (one sixth of 20%) and that doesn't include the energy used in production ( typically coal powered for solar panels ), and the required backup diesel generators.

And thats another facet of a good boondoggle,namely creative accountancy.

ReplyVote up (91)down (101)
Original comment

utter one eyed propaganda nonsense. Even wikipedia puts the figure at only 3.5% (one sixth of 20%) and that doesn't include the energy used in production ( typically coal powered for solar panels ), and the required backup diesel generators.

And thats another facet of a good boondoggle,namely creative accountancy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1340 days ago)

REN21 is legit. Look them up. How about the International Energy Agency? Do you trust them?

LINK

Wikipedia isn't infallible.

ReplyVote up (101)down (90)
Original comment

REN21 is legit. Look them up. How about the International Energy Agency? Do you trust them?

LINK

Wikipedia isn't infallible.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1340 days ago)

Ren21 is one of those biased policy papers generated by think tanks for morons to quote that does the rounds, chock full of dodgy estimates and speculative projections, I didn't have to read it to know that, . By the way bet it includes cooking by fire as as a renewable energy source, it certaintly won't be confined to base load electricity production.

Yes I know wikipedia isn't infallable, but it is left leaning, and leans to favouring renewables. Thats why I used the word "even" when pointing out that their quoted figure is one sixth of yours

ReplyVote up (98)down (101)
Original comment

Ren21 is one of those biased policy papers generated by think tanks for morons to quote that does the rounds, chock full of dodgy estimates and speculative projections, I didn't have to read it to know that, . By the way bet it includes cooking by fire as as a renewable energy source, it certaintly won't be confined to base load electricity production.

Yes I know wikipedia isn't infallable, but it is left leaning, and leans to favouring renewables. Thats why I used the word "even" when pointing out that their quoted figure is one sixth of yours

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1340 days ago)

Your colourful language and innovative punctuation has finally convinced me that you must be correct. I apologize for ever having doubted your limitless wisdom and impeccable gut feeling. From now on I will regard data gathered by governmental and intergovernmental agencies, as well as reports authored by highly recognized organizations supported by the UN and the World Bank as "utter one eyed propaganda nonsense". Those people are all dodgy morons peddling nothing but speculative and biased projections.

ReplyVote up (101)down (90)
Original comment

Your colourful language and innovative punctuation has finally convinced me that you must be correct. I apologize for ever having doubted your limitless wisdom and impeccable gut feeling. From now on I will regard data gathered by governmental and intergovernmental agencies, as well as reports authored by highly recognized organizations supported by the UN and the World Bank as "utter one eyed propaganda nonsense". Those people are all dodgy morons peddling nothing but speculative and biased projections.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1340 days ago)

They have an axe to grind, and that is the problem, but that report you produced is nonsense,believe me there are hundreds of such "authoritive" looking reports designed to bamboozle science ignorant fools such as your good self generated every month. a simple sanity check is enough to dismiss it

It is unfortunate that nowadays our polticians who profess to lead, pride themselves upon their ignorance of science, it's an interesting point that all the hard science graduates amongst the UK's mps voted against the climate change act.Alas being the only MPs equipped to have an inkling of understanding of the "science",and being a cross party group (lib/lab/con) wasn't enough to persuade their fellow ignoramous MPs

ReplyVote up (100)down (101)
Original comment

They have an axe to grind, and that is the problem, but that report you produced is nonsense,believe me there are hundreds of such "authoritive" looking reports designed to bamboozle science ignorant fools such as your good self generated every month. a simple sanity check is enough to dismiss it

It is unfortunate that nowadays our polticians who profess to lead, pride themselves upon their ignorance of science, it's an interesting point that all the hard science graduates amongst the UK's mps voted against the climate change act.Alas being the only MPs equipped to have an inkling of understanding of the "science",and being a cross party group (lib/lab/con) wasn't enough to persuade their fellow ignoramous MPs

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: ashamed... (1341 days ago)

What a complete crock of shite... you're trying to equate CO2 emissions associated with the making and maintenance of renewable energy solutions as somehow being comparable to the waste and destruction associated with harvesting of natural resources thru *cough* conventional means.. the world's really become a shitty place where mock media gets to hold a candle against science and the likes of Hannity spew their vitriole...

ReplyVote up (94)down (101)
Original comment

What a complete crock of shite... you're trying to equate CO2 emissions associated with the making and maintenance of renewable energy solutions as somehow being comparable to the waste and destruction associated with harvesting of natural resources thru *cough* conventional means.. the world's really become a shitty place where mock media gets to hold a candle against science and the likes of Hannity spew their vitriole...

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: the one and only MAD (1341 days ago)

I really suggest you look up the word boondoggle. Building turbines and panels takes energy and resources. they dont appear out of thin air. you have to calculate the whole package per kw generated (including spinning backup required). Some of these projects aren't enviromental at all, they just look good, and that is the essence of a boondoggle

ReplyVote up (101)down (86)
Original comment

I really suggest you look up the word boondoggle. Building turbines and panels takes energy and resources. they dont appear out of thin air. you have to calculate the whole package per kw generated (including spinning backup required). Some of these projects aren't enviromental at all, they just look good, and that is the essence of a boondoggle

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Russell Brand interview on Australian TV (Oct 16, 2015)
Russell Brand interview on Australian TV (Oct 16, 2015)
Katie Hopkins on Rinkeby, a no-go-zone in Stockholm, Sweden
Katie Hopkins on Rinkeby, a no-go-zone in Stockholm, Sweden
Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry on The Ten Commandments
Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry on The Ten Commandments
The Hill | Michael Moore responds to criticisms of Planet of the Humans
The Hill | Michael Moore responds to criticisms of Planet of the Humans
Stephen Fry | Will coronavirus keep resurging when lockdowns are lifted?
Stephen Fry | Will coronavirus keep resurging when lockdowns are lifted?