Look, we will never have a global governance as long as Russia and China are not under control. Those bases are to contain and crush them. We were all set to take out Russia until they rigged our election for Trump. Hillary was chomping at the bit for war. China is after Russia. Then we can drop borders, allow free movement of people, have one global currency, and at last have a government composed of intelligent people who will make the hard decisions that benefit everyone, not just a few bankers in London and New York.
They'll feel the boot of oppression on their necks and wonder why they're so poor when socialism promised them such prosperity. Chinese were better off under the warlords and Russians were better off under the Tsar, Cubans were better off under Batista, Vietnam, Cambodia, the list goes on.
And THIS is why Americans reject so much bullshit. Even when we do the right thing and are virtuous, we still never get a teeny weeny little bit of credit for it. No, "fuck you America" is all we ever hear. Go to hell. Stop posting here.
It's not a troll argument. Those are powerful and influential people who want to put an end to capitalism and implement a global governance, and they are using the global warming argument as a Trojan Horse. The more sunlight shined on them the better.
What about it was false? Asians are regularly discriminated against for the crime of studying hard and having good values. The patriarchy isn't very popular in universities either.
If only the ACLU hadn't sued to shut down the mental asylums on the grounds that it was inhumane to imprison people who had committed no crime, California wouldn't have this problem. Sad!
You'd think that Europe of all places would know the stupidity of blood and soil arguments, and know that the only way to progress is globally. Tying people to the land is not only folly, it leads to genocide. Free movement of people and data is the only way forward in the 21st century.
At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
Capitalism is irreconcilable with a livable climate and as humans can't change the laws of nature
"What changed for me was hearing the argument for the existence of a climate debt, which is the idea that in order to address the crisis . . . which was created by the wealthiest countries in the world and is being felt most acutely by some of the poorest countries in the world, there needs to be a process of redress.
Core inequalities need to be tackled through redistribution of wealth and technology. And this was explained to me as a chance to heal the world; to heal some of the deepest and most lasting wounds left by colonialism. And I suddenly saw that though this crisis continues to be existentially terrifying, it could also be a catalyst for really inspiring change and social justice."
(OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War... First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.
Christiana Figueres, leader of the U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change: "This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history."
Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S undersecretary of state for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: "We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: "No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."
Daphne Muller, green-progressive-liberal writer for Salon: "This moment requires we the people to rethink democracy as a global mechanism for enacting policy for and by the planet."
Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."
David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope."
Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the s
I could be wrong, but it sure seems like you know absolutely shit about climate change and the Paris accord. From where I sit it looks like a do-nothing agreement (less than 0.05C impact over 100 years) that would have cost trillions of dollars for what, exactly? How does paying money to the developing world help the climate? Do you think all those 3rd world kings and rulers are going to use that money responsibly to combat climate change? I can think of any number of projects that would be a far more useful investment: solar farms, updating ourselves on nuclear fuel rod recycling like France does, improved/expanded fracking for natural gas, the list is innumerable. Why waste your money on Paris exactly? Please enlighten all of us why this is the best use of our money.
How come the Paris Climate Accord can't be renegotiated when the planet is in danger from humans destroying it? Why can't we keep the earth saving parts while removing the "screw the American taxpayer" parts?
Remember when Trump pulled us out of the Paris deal, Leftists started screaming for state's rights? They engaged in rhetoric and action that would make John Calhoun's heart swell with pride for its open defiance of federal policy. If that's not 4D chess, I dunno what is.
Really? They were advanced? What was their position on women's rights? Did they allow women to vote? Did they invade other countries and overthrow their governments so systems could be set up so women could vote? Did they open their borders and welcome strangers speaking incomprehensible languages and practicing backwards cultures? Did they create manufacturing techniques that reduced the price of goods so low that it lifted billions of people out of squalor? If not, then they're not as advanced as us. It's OK to look down on inferior cultures - and if you disagree with that statement then visit any trailer park in America and then come back and tell us about savages.
Our educational system has done a good job teaching our own people that Western culture is the worst that the world has ever produced. It's not. Go and check the actual figures for the 20th Century. Most are by China (PRC), Russia, Japan, China (KMT), Cambodia, and other non-Western cultures. Who remembers the Indonesian genocide? The Pakistani genocide of 1971? Nobody, because it doesn't serve the political purpose of convincing people that the West is the worst.
We need fewer stupid people voting. In fact, most of the problems we have today is stupid people being allowed to vote. If anyone is stupid enough to fail to recognize a joke that's been circulating for decades, we're better off without those people determining our government.
You know who else uses violence to silence people the disagree with? Fascists. Congratulations, you just invented online fascism. Nice idea you came up with there.
Seriously, how do you have the complete lack of self-awareness to think up these things?
Ebay just locked me out of the account I've had for years and years. Why? They want to know my real identity. They either wanted to send a text to my cell, call me voice, or have me upload a scan of my ID card. I used Ebay for a long time with no problems, and now suddenly they want my infoz? Let's clean our own house before we criticize others for doing the exact same thing.
Attacking journalists? Nice. You just put yourself in the basket of deplorables with Trump and Musk. Listen to this exchange:
Kara: "You pick fights with the press over Twitter, and then you have all your fans, of which there are many. Are you aware of what they do once you start them off?"
Elon: "Well, I have to say, my regard for the press has dropped quite dramatically."
Kara: "Explain that, please."
Elon: "The amount of untruthful stuff that is written is unbelievable. Take that Wall Street Journal front-page article about, like, âoeThe FBI is closing in.â That is utterly false. Thatâ(TM)s absurd. To print such a falsehood on the front page of a major newspaper is outrageous. Like, why are they even journalists? Theyâ(TM)re terrible. Terrible people."
Kara: "I get that, but do you understand the mood in this country around the press and the dangers of attacking, especially when the president is doing that? In quite an aggressive, âoeenemy of the stateâ and everything else. Itâ(TM)s disturbing when someone like you as a leader does that, too, or goes along with it."
Elon: "The answer is for the press to be honest and truthful, and research their articles and correct things properly when they are false. Which they donâ(TM)t do."
Kara: "Okay. But Iâ(TM)m asking if you understand where it goes to."
Elon: "Yes, of course I do."
Kara: "What do you think of that? Are you worried about unleashing a dangerous cycle that a lot of the press are worried about? Justifiably."
Elon: "I suggest the press take it to heart and do better."
Kara: "What about what Donald Trump does, about âoeenemy of the peopleâ? Do you look at it that way?"
Elon: "No."
Kara: "Just that you donâ(TM)t like falsehoods."
Elon: "Yeah. There are good journalists and there are bad ones, and unfortunately the feedback loop for good versus bad is inverted, so the more salacious that an article is, the more salacious the headline is, the more clicks itâ(TM)s gonna get. Then somebody is not a journalist, they are an ad salesman."
Kara: "What about things that are just critical of you that you donâ(TM)t like? Do you think youâ(TM)re particularly sensitive?"
Elon: "No. Of course not. Count how many negative articles there are and how many I respond to. One percent, maybe. But the common rebuttal of journalists is, âoeOh. My articleâ(TM)s fine. Heâ(TM)s just thin-skinned.â No, your article is false and you donâ(TM)t want to admit it."
And you're on an American website. Behave like a good guest. And no, calling anyone a cunt is the mark of a vile misogynist. Leave your toxic masculinity in the 20th century where it belongs.
It's almost as if they have style guides that tell them to use units that their audiences will understand! OMG that's so weird!
Do you have anything useful to contribute, or are you just going to keep leeching off the US Navy's free protection for your exports, completely lopsided trade agreements that you profit highly from and Americans lose from, and the US military's highly subsidized free service whereby we put our own young men in harm's way so you can sit back and take potshots at them? You are entitled to our unflinching protection, we are entitled to your unending scorn.
Negative. They simply didn't find the same thing, and in that exact paragraph you quote they say their sample size was too small. They also gave people quinine instead of black coffee, and quinine is very unpleasant indeed.
I can't help but notice another emotional outburst, complete with misogynist slur. You know using that word is the equivalent of using the N-word, don't you? You sure you're not connected to psychopathy in some way? This is the exact kind of everyday sadism they talk about in the original study, hurting people for fun in daily life.
You're changing the topic from the link between black coffee and psychopathy to attempt to stigmatize overweight people. Don't you think they're picked on enough already?
Frankly, this sounds to me like the kind of everyday sadism they talk about in the article.
Boy, that came out of left field. Who was even talking about fishing? We were talking about daylight being wasted because the whole population is asleep. Then we have to burn coal to make up the difference when the sun goes down early. Fishing WTF.
Slashdot Mirror
Look, we will never have a global governance as long as Russia and China are not under control. Those bases are to contain and crush them. We were all set to take out Russia until they rigged our election for Trump. Hillary was chomping at the bit for war. China is after Russia. Then we can drop borders, allow free movement of people, have one global currency, and at last have a government composed of intelligent people who will make the hard decisions that benefit everyone, not just a few bankers in London and New York.
They'll feel the boot of oppression on their necks and wonder why they're so poor when socialism promised them such prosperity. Chinese were better off under the warlords and Russians were better off under the Tsar, Cubans were better off under Batista, Vietnam, Cambodia, the list goes on.
Because fishing has absolutely nothing to do with the global climate crisis? Just stop.
And THIS is why Americans reject so much bullshit. Even when we do the right thing and are virtuous, we still never get a teeny weeny little bit of credit for it. No, "fuck you America" is all we ever hear. Go to hell. Stop posting here.
It's not a troll argument. Those are powerful and influential people who want to put an end to capitalism and implement a global governance, and they are using the global warming argument as a Trojan Horse. The more sunlight shined on them the better.
What about it was false? Asians are regularly discriminated against for the crime of studying hard and having good values. The patriarchy isn't very popular in universities either.
That's so stupid. I hate that story. Tibetans set themselves on fire all the time and nobody ever revolts. It's confirmation bias.
If only the ACLU hadn't sued to shut down the mental asylums on the grounds that it was inhumane to imprison people who had committed no crime, California wouldn't have this problem. Sad!
You'd think that Europe of all places would know the stupidity of blood and soil arguments, and know that the only way to progress is globally. Tying people to the land is not only folly, it leads to genocide. Free movement of people and data is the only way forward in the 21st century.
At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
Capitalism is irreconcilable with a livable climate and as humans can't change the laws of nature "What changed for me was hearing the argument for the existence of a climate debt, which is the idea that in order to address the crisis . . . which was created by the wealthiest countries in the world and is being felt most acutely by some of the poorest countries in the world, there needs to be a process of redress.
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/
Core inequalities need to be tackled through redistribution of wealth and technology. And this was explained to me as a chance to heal the world; to heal some of the deepest and most lasting wounds left by colonialism. And I suddenly saw that though this crisis continues to be existentially terrifying, it could also be a catalyst for really inspiring change and social justice."
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2014/09/13/facing_climate_change_headon_means_changing_capitalism_naomi_klein.html
(OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War... First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.
Christiana Figueres, leader of the U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change: "This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history."
Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S undersecretary of state for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: "We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: "No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."
Daphne Muller, green-progressive-liberal writer for Salon: "This moment requires we the people to rethink democracy as a global mechanism for enacting policy for and by the planet."
Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."
David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope."
Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the s
I could be wrong, but it sure seems like you know absolutely shit about climate change and the Paris accord. From where I sit it looks like a do-nothing agreement (less than 0.05C impact over 100 years) that would have cost trillions of dollars for what, exactly? How does paying money to the developing world help the climate? Do you think all those 3rd world kings and rulers are going to use that money responsibly to combat climate change? I can think of any number of projects that would be a far more useful investment: solar farms, updating ourselves on nuclear fuel rod recycling like France does, improved/expanded fracking for natural gas, the list is innumerable. Why waste your money on Paris exactly? Please enlighten all of us why this is the best use of our money.
How come the Paris Climate Accord can't be renegotiated when the planet is in danger from humans destroying it? Why can't we keep the earth saving parts while removing the "screw the American taxpayer" parts?
Remember when Trump pulled us out of the Paris deal, Leftists started screaming for state's rights? They engaged in rhetoric and action that would make John Calhoun's heart swell with pride for its open defiance of federal policy. If that's not 4D chess, I dunno what is.
Really? They were advanced? What was their position on women's rights? Did they allow women to vote? Did they invade other countries and overthrow their governments so systems could be set up so women could vote? Did they open their borders and welcome strangers speaking incomprehensible languages and practicing backwards cultures? Did they create manufacturing techniques that reduced the price of goods so low that it lifted billions of people out of squalor? If not, then they're not as advanced as us. It's OK to look down on inferior cultures - and if you disagree with that statement then visit any trailer park in America and then come back and tell us about savages.
Our educational system has done a good job teaching our own people that Western culture is the worst that the world has ever produced. It's not. Go and check the actual figures for the 20th Century. Most are by China (PRC), Russia, Japan, China (KMT), Cambodia, and other non-Western cultures. Who remembers the Indonesian genocide? The Pakistani genocide of 1971? Nobody, because it doesn't serve the political purpose of convincing people that the West is the worst.
We need fewer stupid people voting. In fact, most of the problems we have today is stupid people being allowed to vote. If anyone is stupid enough to fail to recognize a joke that's been circulating for decades, we're better off without those people determining our government.
You know who else uses violence to silence people the disagree with? Fascists. Congratulations, you just invented online fascism. Nice idea you came up with there.
Seriously, how do you have the complete lack of self-awareness to think up these things?
Ebay just locked me out of the account I've had for years and years. Why? They want to know my real identity. They either wanted to send a text to my cell, call me voice, or have me upload a scan of my ID card. I used Ebay for a long time with no problems, and now suddenly they want my infoz? Let's clean our own house before we criticize others for doing the exact same thing.
Congratulations, you just murdered the Civil Rights Movement in its crib.
Attacking journalists? Nice. You just put yourself in the basket of deplorables with Trump and Musk. Listen to this exchange:
Kara: "You pick fights with the press over Twitter, and then you have all your fans, of which there are many. Are you aware of what they do once you start them off?"
Elon: "Well, I have to say, my regard for the press has dropped quite dramatically."
Kara: "Explain that, please."
Elon: "The amount of untruthful stuff that is written is unbelievable. Take that Wall Street Journal front-page article about, like, âoeThe FBI is closing in.â That is utterly false. Thatâ(TM)s absurd. To print such a falsehood on the front page of a major newspaper is outrageous. Like, why are they even journalists? Theyâ(TM)re terrible. Terrible people."
Kara: "I get that, but do you understand the mood in this country around the press and the dangers of attacking, especially when the president is doing that? In quite an aggressive, âoeenemy of the stateâ and everything else. Itâ(TM)s disturbing when someone like you as a leader does that, too, or goes along with it."
Elon: "The answer is for the press to be honest and truthful, and research their articles and correct things properly when they are false. Which they donâ(TM)t do."
Kara: "Okay. But Iâ(TM)m asking if you understand where it goes to."
Elon: "Yes, of course I do."
Kara: "What do you think of that? Are you worried about unleashing a dangerous cycle that a lot of the press are worried about? Justifiably."
Elon: "I suggest the press take it to heart and do better."
Kara: "What about what Donald Trump does, about âoeenemy of the peopleâ? Do you look at it that way?"
Elon: "No."
Kara: "Just that you donâ(TM)t like falsehoods."
Elon: "Yeah. There are good journalists and there are bad ones, and unfortunately the feedback loop for good versus bad is inverted, so the more salacious that an article is, the more salacious the headline is, the more clicks itâ(TM)s gonna get. Then somebody is not a journalist, they are an ad salesman."
Kara: "What about things that are just critical of you that you donâ(TM)t like? Do you think youâ(TM)re particularly sensitive?"
Elon: "No. Of course not. Count how many negative articles there are and how many I respond to. One percent, maybe. But the common rebuttal of journalists is, âoeOh. My articleâ(TM)s fine. Heâ(TM)s just thin-skinned.â No, your article is false and you donâ(TM)t want to admit it."
You get jet lag when you cross to a different continent on the other side of the world. Not a single hour. Jeez, Grandpa.
And you're on an American website. Behave like a good guest. And no, calling anyone a cunt is the mark of a vile misogynist. Leave your toxic masculinity in the 20th century where it belongs.
Nah, double milk & double sugar for me. Drown that shit.
It's almost as if they have style guides that tell them to use units that their audiences will understand! OMG that's so weird!
Do you have anything useful to contribute, or are you just going to keep leeching off the US Navy's free protection for your exports, completely lopsided trade agreements that you profit highly from and Americans lose from, and the US military's highly subsidized free service whereby we put our own young men in harm's way so you can sit back and take potshots at them? You are entitled to our unflinching protection, we are entitled to your unending scorn.
USA out of NATO.
Negative. They simply didn't find the same thing, and in that exact paragraph you quote they say their sample size was too small. They also gave people quinine instead of black coffee, and quinine is very unpleasant indeed.
I can't help but notice another emotional outburst, complete with misogynist slur. You know using that word is the equivalent of using the N-word, don't you? You sure you're not connected to psychopathy in some way? This is the exact kind of everyday sadism they talk about in the original study, hurting people for fun in daily life.
You're changing the topic from the link between black coffee and psychopathy to attempt to stigmatize overweight people. Don't you think they're picked on enough already?
Frankly, this sounds to me like the kind of everyday sadism they talk about in the article.
Boy, that came out of left field. Who was even talking about fishing? We were talking about daylight being wasted because the whole population is asleep. Then we have to burn coal to make up the difference when the sun goes down early. Fishing WTF.