Here is a Fox News report on the gnomes who run the UN and what their agenda is.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/09/08/years-setbacks-looks-world-leader/
If this is true, then it is time for the US and the nations of the G-8, G12 or G-20-whatever it is to gather together and leave the UN to form a league of democratic countries that want to maintain their wealth and sovereignty and let the rest of that outdated and useless body figure out how to get money out of each other's turnips.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
That's sort of like drawing conclusions about the viability of the Republican Party by citing a review from the Huffington Post (which, incidentally, I don't read).
Guess who will be paying for this round of waste?
L'shanah tovah tikatev v'taihatem!
Here we go again! Ban Ki Moon brings forth his position to control the world through the castrated U.N. He wants to bring back the "Climate Change" issue, which has been thrown into a bucket of ice water. The data supporting the Anthropomorphic Global Warming is pseudo-science. In fact, some scientists say that we are entering a cooling period, as does the "Farmers Almanac". Sorry Ban, that will not work.
His other plans are a shameless money grab. What Ban wants, is a continued source of funds to run the U.N. and the world, without having to put his hand out for funding.
By the way, was not Hitler's "Eagles Nest" in the Austrian mountains, where he spent one-third of his time planning for; The conquest of the world.
Squid
Even if you discount the messenger, the message is still clear.... the UN is a fiasco. It is corruption ridden, dominated by third world voting blocks, and bent on transferring whatever wealth it can from developed nations to developing countries. It is financed by a disproportionate share from the US.
It would be better if we formed an alternate organization of democratic countries and let the tyrannical countries plunder each other.
.
Squid, read this:
http://aleksandreia.wordpress.com/2010/09/11/24823/
where even the conservatives offer a reasoned and reasonable perspective, instead of burying their head in the sand and denying well established evidence, as you do.
Squid, you need to pull your head out of your posterior, as you are repeating long-since debunked claims of climate change deniers. Siarlys gave one link, but here's a quicker and handier reference.
Lance,
And you show us a UN Climate Change Task Force report as your source!!??
What's next-a speech by Al Gore?
Ummm...no. Where did you get that from? Here's from the "About us" part of the site:
Skeptical Science is maintained by John Cook. He studied physics at the University of Queensland, Australia. After graduating, he majored in solar physics in his post-grad honours year. He is not a climate scientist. Consequently, the science presented on Skeptical Science is not his own but taken directly from the peer reviewed scientific literature. To those seeking to refute the science presented, one needs to address the peer reviewed papers where the science comes from (links to the full papers are provided whenever possible).
There is no funding to maintain Skeptical Science - it's run at personal expense. John Cook has no affiliations with any organisations or political groups. Skeptical Science is strictly a labour of love. The design was created by John's talented web designer wife.
"Many thanks to Dr. Jan Dash, Director of the UU-UNO's Climate Portal for writing many of the one line responses in 'What the Science Says', with some edits by John Cook."
OK, OK. John Cook (your source) used UNCCTF as his source.
Any chance you'll actually address the evidence this time instead of just making your sweeping dismissals?
And he just used that source for the one-line responses. If you click on those responses, you'll find more thorough examinations of the evidence.
Yeah, like I've said sometimes, just because Fox News reported it doesn't NECESSARILY mean that it's not true.
Lance,
"Any chance you'll actually address the evidence this time instead of just making your sweeping dismissals?"
Evidence? According to whom, that guy Rajendra at the UN or the boys at E Anglia University? You are so quick to label somebody's opinions as evidence.
A guy named James Garrison once had "evidence" that a guy named Clay Shaw was involved in the JFK assassination. The only one left who still believes in that "evidence" is Oliver Stone.
And no, Siarlys, I don't have the time to look at some 40-60 responses from Lance's latest source.
Gary, that's just pathetic. All you have are ad hominems. What exactly are they wrong about?
And again, I've yet to see you even show an understanding as to what global warming even is. All you do is mock it and take pride in your ignorance.
Gary, go to Google Books and search for "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" or both. You will find a selection of books which contain lengthy, detailed, research, some of which even raise the same questions you do, but the others have a lot more data, more detail, more precise explanation.
Unfortunately, the format of a personal blog does not allow any of us to paste all the pages of all those books. If you don't have time to read them, don't blame Lance for your ignorance.
olemic? That's polemic without the p?
Post a Comment