BNP Leader Griffin: Climate Change is a 'Hoax', World Leaders Are 'Mass Murderers'

BNP Leader Griffin: Climate Change is a ‘Hoax’, World Leaders Are ‘Mass Murderers’

WeirdDecember 2009 • Views: 6,783

The leader of the neo-Nazi British National Party is a climate change “skeptic.”

The leader of the British National Party and MEP is at the international summit as a representative of the European Parliament.

But he said global warming was a “hoax” designed to impose tax increases on the citizens of the world through putting up the price of energy. He said world leaders and advocates of action on climate change such as Al Gore are “mass murderers” by supporting biofuels.

He said land for growing food is being taken to grow fuels for crops and it will cause starvation greater than the famines caused by Russian dictator Stalin during the 1930s and Chairman Mao in the 1950s.

“It is a crime against humanity which in future will be seen as an enormous man-made famine. Under Stalin 20 million people died, under Chairman Mao 30 million died. This will be the third and the greatest famine of the modern era and I regard that as a crime.”

Fascists and Islamic supremacists agree — global warming is a hoax.

Jump to bottom

137 comments

Kragar Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:54:35am

He said world leaders and advocates of action on climate change such as Al Gore are “mass murderers” by supporting biofuels.

Meanwhile, Nazi rhetoric and beliefs are still just fine with the BNP.

Baier Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:55:57am

White supremacists and Islamic supremacists agree on a surprisingly large number of issues. Talk about ships passing in the night.

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:56:17am

Fascists and Islamic supremacists agree — global warming is a hoax.

And oil funded Think Tanks.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 10:59:00am

Creationists, Dominionists, white supremacists, Islamic supremacists... it's hard to believe it's the 21st century, sometimes.

The Curmudgeon Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:01:38am

In such matters, one should like for the sliver lining. At least he didn't blame it on Darwin.

The Curmudgeon Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:02:14am

Arrrrgh! I meant "look" for the sliver lining.

John Neverbend Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:03:07am

re: #4 Obdicut

... it's hard to believe it's the 21st century, sometimes.

"You believe it is the year 2009, when in fact it is closer to 2199. I can't tell you exactly what year it is, because honestly we don't know." - Gratuitous Matrix reference.

Haole Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:03:19am

President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was "not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn't that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship … down with imperial dictatorships" he got a rousing round of applause.

When he said there was a "silent and terrible ghost in the room" and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion — 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ — "our revolution seeks to help all people … socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that's the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell … let's fight against capitalism and make it obey us." He won a standing ovation.

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:03:29am

One of the topics of discussion at Copenhagen, among the Long-term Agreement (one of the two tracks of discussions, the other being the Kyoto Protocol) discussion, the one in which the US is participating, is adaptation to climate change including how agriculture must change.

Announced at the conference is a new effort led by New Zealand and the US to coordinate and fund agriculture R&D in 20 countries to figure out how to adapt agriculture to the changes.

New Zealand is speaking right now as I type, about food security and planning for climate changes.

Griffin is just lying.

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:04:40am

re: #8 Haole

I live blogged that here... and just to put it in perspective, Hugo's applause wasn't that much more than many other speakers have received.

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:05:09am

Well as a Nazi, Griffin no doubt welcomes the mass death that climate change will bring to Africa and other non-white areas.

And people wonder why I shout so much at these scum.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:05:09am

re: #8 Haole

Copypasta is a pretty dumb thing to do, dude.

Also: Why do you believe that version of the story?

Interesting Times Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:05:39am

Scientists from Iowa State University working on project to convert farm waste - cow manure and corn stalks - into bio-oil

Cow manure? Does that mean we can eventually turn Denier arguments into usable fuel? ;)

Gus Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:06:50am

re: #8 Haole

President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was "not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn't that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship … down with imperial dictatorships" he got a rousing round of applause.

When he said there was a "silent and terrible ghost in the room" and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion — 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ — "our revolution seeks to help all people … socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that's the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell … let's fight against capitalism and make it obey us." He won a standing ovation.

Bunk. There was no standing ovation. I already posted this in the overnight thread:

re: #573 Gus 802

That would be disturbing if it were true however it is patently false. Hugo Chavez did not receive and ovation for those comments the end of which can be seen here at time stamp 5:30. There is some quick applause and then they cut to the audience and they can be seen seated.

Additionally, at the end of his speech there was no ovation other than applause and can be seen here. Andrew Bolt is falsely characterizing the events that took place. Two people standing up to applause and the occasional clapping does not qualify as an ovation.

Watch the video.

Haole Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:07:17am

re: #12 Obdicut

Copypasta is a pretty dumb thing to do, dude.

Also: Why do you believe that version of the story?

Did he not say those things? Freetoken, You are there right. Did He?

Kragar Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:07:53am

re: #13 publicityStunted

Scientists from Iowa State University working on project to convert farm waste - cow manure and corn stalks - into bio-oil

Cow manure? Does that mean we can eventually turn Denier arguments into usable fuel? ;)

Soylent Cow Pies are people! They're people!!

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:08:27am

re: #15 Haole

Oh yes, as I blogged them here.

What I am saying is that you are exaggerating the response he received.

Gus Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:09:37am

re: #17 freetoken

Oh yes, as I blogged them here.

What I am saying is that you are exaggerating the response he received.

The birth of another fabricated nontroversy.

SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:09:46am

re: #6 The Curmudgeon

Arrrgh! I meant "look" for the sliver lining.

Actually, I think you mean "look for the silver lining".

KingKenrod Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:10:34am

The use of food crops for alternative CO2-neutral fuels is actually a serious problem for the underdeveloped world. It's driving staple food prices up.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:11:44am

re: #15 Haole

Why did you copypasta?

This is the first google hit for that piece of crap you posted:

NSFW

And another:

Link

Use your own words-- or admit you're just using copypasta.

Four More Tears Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:13:18am

re: #18 Gus 802

The birth of another fabricated nontroversy.

We could talk about AGW...

or we could look at the shiny thingie over there!!! zomg!

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:14:11am

Cuba is speaking now... don't recognize the speaker.

Any member of the UN could come and speak, and we're well into the second day of speeches.

Besides Syria, the PA, and Iran, who did the usual, and Cuba and Venezuela and a couple of other small countries, most speakers are staying on topic pretty much.

The speeches are more for domestic audiences, of course.

The real negotiations happen in the back rooms. Though it looks impossible for a treaty to come out of this now, there will be pressure to have one done by the time the UNFCCC meet in Mexico next year.

Hillary was very adamant today, like Kerry was yesterday, and the lead negotiator Todd Stern has been all along, that the US will not sign up to any mitigation effort without all the major emitters on board and with a guarantee of verifiability, thus the pressure on China.

badger1970 Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:14:48am

re: #22 JasonA

"SQUIRREL" !! -(repeated line from "Up")

SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:15:10am

re: #2 Baier

White supremacists and Islamic supremacists agree on a surprisingly large number of issues. Talk about ships passing in the night.

They have, essentially, the same view of the world.

Gus Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:15:46am

re: #22 JasonA

We could talk about AGW...

or we could look at the shiny thingie over there!!! zomg!

Right. And I'm pretty sure they won't even review the videos. They're all running with that fabricated blog from Andrew Bolt which of course is now sitting on Drudge.

Four More Tears Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:16:24am

In other news, the BBC asks its viewers the important questions, like "Should Homosexuals Face Execution?"

*facepalm*

Haole Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:16:50am

re: #17 freetoken

Oh yes, as I blogged them here.

What I am saying is that you are exaggerating the response he received.

Forget about the response......"socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that's the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell" That guys a Bucket head. People wonder why they say it's a socialist power grab. He's handing them the argument.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:19:20am

re: #28 Haole

Um, you think that it's somehow an interesting thing to do, to note that Chavez is a bucket-head?

Surprisingly, socialists will use a crisis to promote socialism. Whacky religious types will use it to promote their religion. And yes, even capitalists will use it to promote capitalism-- accurately, in this case, because engineering innovation bred from capitlism is going to be key.

People with agendas push those agendas: Film at 11.

Now, why are you using copypasta?

SixDegrees Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:19:38am

re: #28 Haole

Forget about the response...

You're the one who brought it up.

Everything else is just standard Chavez. He pukes this sort of thing out on a weekly basis back home, and often goes on literally for hours with it.

There's nothing at all remarkable here, certainly nothing worthy of comment other than the fabricated exaggeration at the end and the use of someone else's words without attribution.

Bubblehead II Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:20:56am

"He said land for growing food is being taken to grow fuels for crops and it will cause starvation greater than the famines caused by Russian dictator Stalin during the 1930s and Chairman Mao in the 1950s."

While the rhetoric is over the top he is right in that by diverting corn from feeding people/animals to the biofuel industry, the end result is an increase in price and availability of corn/meat to those with little or no income.

But not to the point that millions are going to die from starvation.

How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor

Food prices dim biofuel glow

/Yes, I know those are old stories, but they are imho still valid.

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:21:27am

re: #28 Haole

It was just standard Hugo. Indeed, as I wrote while it was happening, it was somewhat mild for him. He did get a solid applause when he was finished, but it was not the standing ovation as you claim.

Randall Gross Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:23:05am

Fascists and Islamic supremacists agree — global warming is a hoax.

Let's not forget the Russian Neo-Imperialists either, they support climate change denialism too, and lots of conservatives are are pimping their swill. When did Putin become a trusted source for Conservatives?

John Neverbend Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:24:08am

re: #32 freetoken

It was just standard Hugo. Indeed, as I wrote while it was happening, it was somewhat mild for him. He did get a solid applause when he was finished, but it was not the standing ovation as you claim.

Reading his reference to Obama, it would appear that the "smell of hope" that he spoke about at the UN may have been flushed away.

Liberally Conservative Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:24:52am

re: #33 Thanos

Let's not forget the Russian Neo-Imperialists either, they support climate change denialism too, and lots of conservatives are are pimping their swill. When did Putin become a trusted source for Conservatives?

This, of course, has nothing to do with oil and natural gas exports keeping the Russian government solvent.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:24:55am

re: #34 John Neverbend

Reading his reference to Obama, it would appear that the "smell of hope" that he spoke about at the UN may have been flushed away.

He who smelt it dealt it!

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:25:05am

re: #32 freetoken

It was just standard Hugo. Indeed, as I wrote while it was happening, it was somewhat mild for him. He did get a solid applause when he was finished, but it was not the standing ovation as you claim.

That wasn't even him making that claim. He copied and pasted his whole comment from here:

[Link: www.theaustralian.com.au...]

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:26:17am

re: #37 Charles

I love the smell of copypasta in the morning.

Killgore Trout Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:28:12am

re: #33 Thanos

Let's not forget the Russian Neo-Imperialists either, they support climate change denialism too, and lots of conservatives are are pimping their swill. When did Putin become a trusted source for Conservatives?

Ron Paul is regularly featured on Russian state propaganda outlets. The tea parties also love the Russian rhetoric about how America is doomed.

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:28:40am

re: #4 Obdicut

Creationists, Dominionists, white supremacists, Islamic supremacists... it's hard to believe it's the 21st century, sometimes.

When you consider that the Christian Identity movement is racist, the presence of the nazis makes sense- and binds all of these groups under the banner of religious fundamentalism.

But there's more- I think the political fascists see this as an opportunity to exploit, an issue they can use to spread fear and animosity, because that is what fascists do. It's a bandwagon for them to hop aboard, and add to their populist rhetoric in their efforts to gain support with the electorate.

albusteve Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:28:49am

re: #20 KingKenrod

The use of food crops for alternative CO2-neutral fuels is actually a serious problem for the underdeveloped world. It's driving staple food prices up.

a gigantic blunder...already showing sign of economic failure, as if those sign were not there to begin with....the most godawful clumsy idea yet

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:29:17am

To go even more into this... The Cuba rep who just spoke a few minutes ago only got a polite applause. He was into full on socialist-theory, condemning the US, etc.

If the sum total of the participants were as anti-American as some people (e.g., Drudge) would have you believe, wouldn't he have gotten one of those (alleged) rousing standing ovations also?

But he didn't get one... he just got the usual applause.

When Hugo spoke I suspect that there were several NGOs in the crowd, some of whom no doubt really eat up what Hugo says and thus really tried to reward him at the end with making noise.

What I have been more struck by, after listening to a great deal of the pressers and plenaries, is how missing anti-Americanism has become. There is a great deal of posturing, yes, in order to try and get funds, but it has been more along the lines of "we're suffering, you're the most guilty, so help us".

*****

Whoa... the Gambia rep (who is in brilliant green - beautiful) finished her speech with a strong statement in support of Taiwan.

Killgore Trout Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:30:35am

Rick Perry: Al Gore has 'gone to hell'

Texas Gov. Rick Perry joked Wednesday that former Vice President Al Gore has “gone to hell” because of his advocacy for climate change policy.
Speaking to a builders group in Dallas, Perry — once a Democrat — was asked about his past relationship with Gore.

“Did you get religion? Did he get religion?” a man in the crowd asked. “What has happened since then?”

“I certainly got religion,” Perry responded. “I think he’s gone to hell,” reports the Dallas Morning News.

Upon hearing the line, the room exploded with laughter and applause.

“I think they agree,” Perry said after the room quieted down.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:31:28am

re: #43 Killgore Trout

Do you have to be religious to get that or something? It sounds just creepy, not funny, to me.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:32:10am

OT - Photos of the Decade

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:34:03am

re: #43 Killgore Trout

Rick Perry: Al Gore has 'gone to hell'

The craziness is getting worse and worse.

Interesting Times Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:34:38am

re: #31 Bubblehead II

While the rhetoric is over the top he is right in that by diverting corn from feeding people/animals to the biofuel industry, the end result is an increase in price and availability of corn/meat to those with little or no income.

Which is exactly why biofuel research should focus on converting inedible waste products instead. And not just agricultural waste - back in the 90s, I read a column from a university newspaper where the writer joked about how great it would be if cars were fueled by urine - "imagine, your drunk buddies all helping you fill up! And Esso could instead be called Pisso..."

Well guess what? Urine turned into hydrogen fuel

Problems of too few resources, too much garbage? - turning waste into fuel is a process that solves both. I hope there are at least some large, powerful corporations looking into it so it can actually get done.

SixDegrees Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:35:10am

re: #41 albusteve

a gigantic blunder...already showing sign of economic failure, as if those sign were not there to begin with...the most godawful clumsy idea yet

There's another gigantic problem with the ideas of biofuel, at least those based on food crops like corn.

It takes a huge amount of energy to produce that corn.

Modern corn varieties yield tremendous harvests - an order of magnitude more per acre than their ancestors did. Part of that is due to breeding, but another part is due to the availability of fertilizer following WWII.

Fertilizer that takes a good deal of energy to make.

And those yields also depend on the application of pesticides. Pesticides are, for the most part, made pretty much directly from petroleum

Not to mention the energy required to till, plant, harvest and process everything.

Food crop based biofuels are a complete waste of time. The resources used for it are far better employed producing food.

Killgore Trout Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:35:25am

re: #44 Obdicut

They're using the same tactic employed against evolution. they're turning it into a theological issue.

badger1970 Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:36:37am

re: #43 Killgore Trout

I think he wants Kinky to be governor. /

Killgore Trout Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:36:53am

Gov. Rick Perry: Al Gore's "Gone To Hell"

Youtube Video

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:37:06am

We have at least two imminent flounces going on in other threads. Maybe three.

The Curmudgeon Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:38:29am

re: #19 SanFranciscoZionist

Actually, I think you mean "look for the silver lining".

Yeah, I'm having a bad day.

SixDegrees Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:38:51am

re: #49 Killgore Trout

They're using the same tactic employed against evolution. they're turning it into a theological issue.

A long row to hoe. They've got to get past that whole Stewardship of the Earth thing the Bible is so adamant about, and they'll have to do more than simply ignore it.

A Man for all Seasons Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:39:21am

re: #42 freetoken

FT: Question: Is every nation attending going to make a speech? If not who determines who talks?

watching you tiny alien kittens are Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:41:14am

Well he could have just said that we should not be subsidizing the use of food crops like corn to make fuel and then I would have agreed. But since he has turned it into an analogy of the holocaust and equated it with genocide I think I'll have to pass on my agreeing with him.

Reasoned and direct argument is becoming an entirely lost art I fear, it is being universally replaced with impassioned hyperbolic appeals to emotion. I keep hoping that someday soon a politician realizes that some of us are actually listening and will support valid appeals to reason.

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:41:27am

re: #55 HoosierHoops

There are 193 countries participating and it is my belief that any one of them can speak if so desired. It started yesterday, continued all day today (Liberia is up now).

So yes, everyone gets their say, to the best of my knowledge. Again, many of these are for the home press to cover though, I am sure.

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:41:31am

re: #45 Mad Al-Jaffee

OT - Photos of the Decade

Some very moving images. Thanks for sharing.

webevintage Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:43:42am

re: #15 Haole

Did he not say those things? Freetoken, You are there right. Did He?

See #14

SanFranciscoZionist Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:44:10am

re: #56 ausador

Well he could have just said that we should not be subsidizing the use of food crops like corn to make fuel and then I would have agreed. But since he has turned it into an analogy of the holocaust and equated it with genocide I think I'll have to pass on my agreeing with him.

Reasoned and direct argument is becoming an entirely lost art I fear, it is being universally replaced with impassioned hyperbolic appeals to emotion. I keep hoping that someday soon a politician realizes that some of us are actually listening and will support valid appeals to reason.

Yeah. There's a crucial difference between:

"Growing corn for fuel has already caused food shortages. We must find different solutions to our problems."

and

"You're murdering millions you lousy bastards!"

Four More Tears Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:44:18am

re: #45 Mad Al-Jaffee

re: #58 Sharmuta

I really didn't need to see the picture of the guy falling. Just my humble opinion.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:45:16am

re: #61 JasonA

re: #58 Sharmuta

I really didn't need to see the picture of the guy falling. Just my humble opinion.

I didn't need to see the Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan photos, but I still looked at them.

Bubblehead II Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:45:18am

re: #47 publicityStunted

We're doing that on a Dairy farm here in the Magic Valley.

Idaho to expand dairy's "green gas" production

As well as trapping and using methane from landfills.

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:46:05am

I should say, it is my opinion that the US will not sign (and the Senate approve), a treaty to reduce emissions in any significant amount until climate change becomes more manifest in the daily lives of Americans. Until then, we will talk a lot, we will fund a bit of adaptation/mitigation efforts especially for very poor countries.

US emissions have gone up fairly steadily the last couple of decades, in conjunction with our population increase. Even the "Great Recession" in which we find ourselves has made only a small dent.

subsailor68 Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:46:05am

re: #52 Charles

We have at least two imminent flounces going on in other threads. Maybe three.

Sigh, I cringe to ask, but which threads? The flounce is a concept that, quite frankly, I just don't understand. What's mature about "What?? You don't agree with me? I'll sit, and spit, and bellow shit; I'll twist, I'll turn, I'll ache and burn; I'll cry, I'll spy, I'll tell you why; I'll moan, I'll grown, I'll pick a bone."

Childish.

Cathypop Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:47:47am

re: #65 subsailor68
Just think of them as adorable little black holes of need.

Four More Tears Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:47:58am

re: #62 Mad Al-Jaffee

I wasn't griping at you, by the way. Just wish whoever put this album together had skipped that one.

Kragar Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:49:07am

And this one is for all the flouncers and soon to be flouncers:

Youtube Video

lawhawk Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:49:37am

re: #64 freetoken

And China isn't going to sign on to anything that imperils their economic growth either, and they're emitting far greater quantities and will do so for the foreseeable future. It's a numbers game - they've got the population size and the power needs aren't going to be met solely through alt-energy or nuclear, so coal/gas/oil are going to be the backbone unless a game-changer comes along. Even if China does meet its own defined targets, emissions are going up.

Ericus58 Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:50:13am

re: #52 Charles

any hints? I've not caught one in real time ;)

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:51:37am

re: #11 LudwigVanQuixote

Well as a Nazi, Griffin no doubt welcomes the mass death that climate change will bring to Africa and other non-white areas.

And people wonder why I shout so much at these scum.

Are you insinuating that the people you shout at so much here at LGF are Nazis and scum?

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:51:56am

re: #48 SixDegrees

I've read that argument a lot, and by folks I know have looked into the issue and I trust. I haven't read much on it myself, but I do like looking up R&D stories on bio-engineering. They're looking more and more at algae as a source for biofuels, although some companies like Shell say it's still about 10 years away. Still- it makes for great reading to look for something positive going on in all this discussion.

Getting back to the corn issue however- it seems it will become even more costly to use food as fuel if weather patterns change and agricultural issues start coming more and more an aspect we have to deal with. Droughts and famines will make the food more valuable as food than a source for fuel. Are corn growing areas going to remain the best places to grow corn? Just how much will we need it as food? It's a lot to consider, and it seems if other sources can be found, ethanol should be ditched completely.

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:52:04am

Crappenhagen:
America-hater and ally of Iran and NK, Hugo Chavez brings the house down with his condemnation of capitalism.
Nazi anti-Semite and Islam-hater Nick Griffin is given centre stage as a duly appointed representative of the EU.
Palestinian terror representative gets the Climate Change rostrum to spew anti-Semitism.
Is this why all the honest research, debate, political negotiation and soul-searching was needed?
There needs to be some kind of coalition of the willing in order to sit down seriously and try to address these very real problems, without allowing the process to be hijacked by the yammering clowns of the world.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:52:10am

re: #67 JasonA

I wasn't griping at you, by the way. Just wish whoever put this album together had skipped that one.

I know what you mean. But often great, memorable photos are also unpleasant. The guy falling is an important "never forget" photo.

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:52:52am

re: #61 JasonA

re: #58 Sharmuta

I really didn't need to see the picture of the guy falling. Just my humble opinion.

He's worth remembering.

andres Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:52:52am

Pot, meet Kettle?

re: #46 Charles

I think the crazyness will fall further down the hole than Rod Blagojevich.

I think it underlines what's important for these extremists groups: manufacturing their own facts. They hate anyone who has the audacity to corroborate facts, and an independent mind.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:54:25am

re: #69 lawhawk

Climate change imperils China's economic growth, though.

Four More Tears Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:54:42am

re: #74 Mad Al-Jaffee

I know what you mean. But often great, memorable photos are also unpleasant. The guy falling is an important "never forget" photo.

That whole album was depressing enough as it was. That first photo reminded me of how hopeful it felt to me back in 2000. The rest was full of suck with precious few exceptions.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:56:49am

re: #73 Spare O'Lake

Crappenhagen:
[...]
There needs to be some kind of coalition of the willing in order to sit down seriously and try to address these very real problems, without allowing the process to be hijacked by the yammering clowns of the world.

COP15 is a UN political conference, as such, it will of course have a sampling of the same odious behaviour that dominate the UN, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Semitism. There is no getting around this.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 11:59:44am

Hi stalker GDFrank. Very flattering.

Sharmuta Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:00:12pm

re: #77 Obdicut

Climate change imperils China's economic growth, though.

You would think they'd be concerned about the Himalayan glaciers melting and what that will do to their people and country to lose it.

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:02:52pm

re: #8 Haole

That's a different issue.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:03:07pm

re: #81 Sharmuta

You would think they'd be concerned about the Himalayan glaciers melting and what that will do to their people and country to lose it.

Actually, they are concerned.

Satellite data from the Indian Space Applications Center, in Ahmedabad, India, indicates that from 1962 to 2004, more than 1,000 Himalayan glaciers have retreated by around 16 percent. According to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China's glaciers have shrunk by 5 percent since 1950s.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:04:17pm

re: #81 Sharmuta

They are, but not enough. The whole situation is a very depressing version of game theory, with lots of brinksmanship going on.

lawhawk Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:05:43pm

re: #77 Obdicut

Has not stopped them one iota from polluting their corner of the planet in ways that would make you cringe.

They routinely pollute the rivers and streams, even though those are the same water sources for towns and cities downstream. The air is so thick with particulates that you can see it (and cut it with a knife). That doesn't even touch on the emissions you can't see.

And even where China is trying to go nuclear, they've got a $250 million corruption scandal involving one of the two nuclear power entities that are to build all the nuke plants China claims that they hope to build over the next few years. Even if they can build them, they'll still be increasing CO2 emissions 72-88% by 2016.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:06:01pm

re: #84 Obdicut

They are, but not enough. The whole situation is a very depressing version of game theory, with lots of brinksmanship going on.

Agreed, China is playing the West like a fiddle.

karmic_inquisitor Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:06:51pm

China has manoeuvred COP15 into a stalemate, which is what they had aimed for.

They want Kyoto in place and simply renewed.

That gives them -

1) No emissions limits now or ever
2) Status as a developing country in perpetuity
3) Subsidies from "Rich Countries" (quoted because debt status is ignored when the word "Rich" is thrown out) paid to China.

They did this by riling up and simultaneously indulging G77 nations. China is the new USSR insofar as using the "non-aligned" states as proxies for complaint against the west.

China has been joined by India, Brazil and South Africa in coordinating this.

[Link: www.guardian.co.uk...]

albusteve Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:08:22pm

re: #86 Bagua

Agreed, China is playing the West like a fiddle.

it will eventually lead to a life and death paradigm imo...China vs US, draw some conclusions to that..whatever China gives it will take back, sooner or later

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:08:32pm

re: #31 Bubblehead II

"He said land for growing food is being taken to grow fuels for crops and it will cause starvation greater than the famines caused by Russian dictator Stalin during the 1930s and Chairman Mao in the 1950s."

While the rhetoric is over the top he is right in that by diverting corn from feeding people/animals to the biofuel industry, the end result is an increase in price and availability of corn/meat to those with little or no income.

But not to the point that millions are going to die from starvation.

How Biofuels Could Starve the Poor

Food prices dim biofuel glow

/Yes, I know those are old stories, but they are imho still valid.

Still, certain areas of the world are on a knife's edge, food-wise.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:09:03pm

re: #87 karmic_inquisitor

Agreed, China is not at all since about wanting to do something positive about Climate Change. They are after short term gain, and a massive transfer of wealth and manufacturing to their control

Canadhimmis Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:11:11pm

White supremacists and Islamic supremacists agree on a surprisingly large number of issues. Talk about ships passing in the night.

Yup, there's probably a fair amount of truth to this statement.
And it's also true that our far left wing is in basic agreement with the Islamists, most obviously their common hatred of America and all she stands for. Thus the statement quoted above isn't worth a hill of beans as it does nothing to show whether or not the global warming religion is based.....errr....the climate change religion is based in fact.

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:11:19pm

Obama is actually really sticking to his guns at this meeting. Again, I can't help being impressed. He's not giving away the store, and he's insisting that nations like China do their part.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:11:47pm

re: #85 lawhawk

Sure. But climate change will still do great harm to their economy. So saying "And China isn't going to sign on to anything that imperils their economic growth either" isn't true.

China wants to be bought off, because China always wants to be bought off to make joint rational decisions. Because, as you point out, they're terribly corrupt.

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:12:48pm

re: #92 Charles

Obama is actually really sticking to his guns at this meeting. Again, I can't help being impressed. He's not giving away the store, and he's insisting that nations like China do their part.

Obama is proving yet again that he is no pushover. He sticks to his positions.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:15:36pm

re: #91 Canadhimmis

Yeah, those far-left Marxists who want religion outlawed are totally in bed with the Islamacists. That makes complete sense.

lawhawk Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:17:17pm

re: #93 Obdicut

Buying off = economic decision. It's always about the money.

Any decision that lets China continuing to emit without verification or any kind of cap will mean that global emissions will continue rising no matter how much other countries kneecap their own economies.

If the President demands and gets China to buy into this scheme, more power to him, but I don't think he's going to get China to agree to anything unless the US ponies up even more money (that we don't have).

freetoken Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:17:30pm

re: #92 Charles

I very strongly suspect that he doesn't want to repeat Bill Clinton's mistake (having Gore negotiate and help direct a treaty, only to have the Senate stop it.)

karmic_inquisitor Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:19:57pm

re: #90 Bagua

Agreed, China is not at all since about wanting to do something positive about Climate Change. They are after short term gain, and a massive transfer of wealth and manufacturing to their control

There is a big fan club of China in the west because China produces a shit load of solar panels and wind turbines.

They are made in dirty plants.

That is somehow supposed to bring redemption. I don't understand it.

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:19:58pm

re: #96 lawhawk

That all depends on how well China understands the science and the predictions-- which would be a lot easier if huge numbers of Western political groups and industries weren't hell-bent on clouding the issue of AGW.

China doesn't have much good real science of their own-- as most information-controlled oligarchies don't-- and they rely on the West for most serious science research.

100

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:22:53pm

re: #96 lawhawk

Buying off = economic decision. It's always about the money.

Any decision that lets China continuing to emit without verification or any kind of cap will mean that global emissions will continue rising no matter how much other countries kneecap their own economies.

If the President demands and gets China to buy into this scheme, more power to him, but I don't think he's going to get China to agree to anything unless the US ponies up even more money (that we don't have).

Add to that the transfer of manufacturing, as things such as steel smelting are shut down in Britain and Germany on account of pollution and emissions, the manufacturing is picked up by China and India, in some cases buying out the actual plants. China and India then continue the same practices, with even less pollution controls, while the European sops feel good about themselves.

In some cases they can double dip as well, making money on the carbon credits as well as the manufactoring. Major scam.

101

Bubblehead II Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:26:20pm

re: #89 The Sanity Inspector

Agreed, but you can lay part of the blame for that on the opponents of GM food.

[Link: www.truthabouttrade.org...]

102

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:26:43pm

re: #67 JasonA

Never forget.

103

friarstale Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:28:57pm

global warming [is] a “hoax” designed to impose tax increases on the citizens of the world through putting up the price of energy.

I believe this, too

land for growing food is being taken to grow fuels for crops

this is true; NPR had a story on it
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89545855

the messenger is flawed, but the message may have a kernel of truth

104

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:29:06pm

re: #99 Obdicut

That all depends on how well China understands the science and the predictions-- which would be a lot easier if huge numbers of Western political groups and industries weren't hell-bent on clouding the issue of AGW.

China doesn't have much good real science of their own-- as most information-controlled oligarchies don't-- and they rely on the West for most serious science research.

In 1999 Chana launched the Shenzhou 1 spacecraft, and in 2003 the Shenzou 5, becoming the third country with a manned space program.

In 2007 China became the fifth nation to orbit the Moon.

While they do not equal the US, they are certainly not rubes in the science world.

105

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:30:27pm

re: #75 Sharmuta

He's worth remembering.

It's a shame we don't know for sure who he is. Was.

106

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:32:01pm

re: #92 Charles

Obama is actually really sticking to his guns at this meeting. Again, I can't help being impressed. He's not giving away the store, and he's insisting that nations like China do their part.

If he does resist the pressure to submit to the blackmail, will that cost him further erosion of his Dem base? After all, Obama had an awful lot of political capital invested in Copenhagen.

107

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:32:13pm

re: #103 friarstale

this is true; NPR had a story on it

the messenger is flawed, but the message may have a kernel of truth

The problem being that Nick Griffin is such an odious man that any subject he endorses is weakened by association.

108

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:34:16pm

re: #107 Bagua

The problem being that Nick Griffin is such an odious man that any subject he endorses is weakened by association.

Yes, and Hitler made the trains run on time.

109

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:36:14pm

re: #104 Bagua

Nah. That's engineering, copying Western tech.

They do not produce good front-rank science. Democracy really is needed to do good science on all fronts. China is fine on engineering, but it sucks at producing science.

AGW deniers really do have a global effect, not just an effect on the US. Attacking scientists is awful, the more so because it gives nations like China and India leverage to say they won't change.

The deniers are the ones who are helping China, Russia, and the Middle East the most.

110

brent Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:36:28pm

#106,92

What good is insisting China do their part? What leverage do we really have? They carry a significant percentage of our debt, and they're arming as though they want to send a signal. We have our hand out to take more debt as he talks tough; it's at best a mixed message.

111

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:37:21pm

re: #104 Bagua

In 1999 Chana launched the Shenzhou 1 spacecraft, and in 2003 the Shenzou 5, becoming the third country with a manned space program.

In 2007 China became the fifth nation to orbit the Moon.

While they do not equal the US, they are certainly not rubes in the science world.

And unrestrained by any shred of respect for intellectual property rights, they hack and steal US technology with seeming impunity.

112

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:38:10pm

re: #110 brent

"If I owe the bank a hundred dollars, I have a problem. If owe the bank ten million dollars, the bank has a problem."

-attr. to D. Trump.

113

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:42:27pm

re: #109 Obdicut

Nah. That's engineering, copying Western tech.

[...]

Orbiting the moon, putting a man in space, ICBMs, nuclear submarines and power plants, amounts to a bit more that "copying Western tech".

However, it is also quite true that they do hack and steal a great deal of Western technology. But even this takes a level of sophistication.

The same is true about Russia, while there is no question the US and the Western world is the leader in technology, research and innovation, it is not true that China and Russia lack technology of their own.

114

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:47:24pm

re: #110 brent

Brent, please use the "Reply" or "Quote" buttons - it will make it easier for others to consider or respond to your comments, especially on a busy thread.

115

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:47:45pm

re: #113 Bagua

Orbiting the moon, putting a man in space, ICBMs, nuclear submarines and power plants, amounts to a bit more that "copying Western tech".

Given that those things were all done by the West first, I'm not sure how you feel that proves your point. China has innovated in a lot of engineering areas, but not really in what you've mentioned, no.

The same is true about Russia, while there is no question the US and the Western world is the leader in technology, research and innovation, it is not true that China and Russia lack technology of their own.

Good thing I didn't say they lacked technology, then, isn't it? I'm talking about hard science.

116

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:53:00pm

re: #109 Obdicut

Nah. That's engineering, copying Western tech.
They do not produce good front-rank science. Democracy really is needed to do good science on all fronts. China is fine on engineering, but it sucks at producing science.

So what if they are stealing Western technology? They are very good at it and they are allowed to get away with it.
I saw an article this morning that China is already the world's largest producer of wind turbines and solar panels.

117

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 12:53:48pm

re: #116 Spare O'Lake

What does your comment have to do with what I'm talking about, please?

I can't follow the connection.

118

Spare O'Lake Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:27:18pm

re: #117 Obdicut

What does your comment have to do with what I'm talking about, please?

I can't follow the connection.

They steal our scientific knowledge. They read our journals. Your point was, as I understood it, that the deniers would somehow influence Chinese policy or science, or that the Chines would be misled by the deniers. Which is of course utter tripe.

119

coscolo Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:30:33pm

re: #47 publicityStunted

Problems of too few resources, too much garbage? - turning waste into fuel is a process that solves both. I hope there are at least some large, powerful corporations looking into it so it can actually get done.

Xcel Energy already has two trash-burning power plants in MN, one is near Redwing, the other further down the Mississippi. I've heard of municipal power plants doing the same thing. Couldn't find a link on Xcel's website tho'.

120

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 1:38:36pm

re: #118 Spare O'Lake

Why is it utter tripe, though? You're just asserting that.

121

Bagua Thu, Dec 17, 2009 2:13:48pm

re: #115 Obdicut

No, you are just being argumentative. I've already said that Western science is superior, but it is also true the Chinese and Russians have and do real science of their own. Historically, China has made many technological innovations ahead of the West, ditto for Russia. They are behind us, but they are not primitive.

122

danS Thu, Dec 17, 2009 2:18:36pm

Not much of an argument you've got there, Charles.

Skeptics get the BNP and the Saudis while Warmers get Chavez, Mugabe and almost every anti-American loon on the planet.

So who're you gonna choose?

123

Varek Raith Thu, Dec 17, 2009 2:27:18pm

re: #122 danS

Wow, sure, ok. You've totally convinced me, or some such.
/

124

danS Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:04:59pm

re: #123 Varek Raith

Wow, sure, ok. You've totally convinced me, or some such.
/

I'm sorry, there must be a misunderstanding. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything.

125

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:06:52pm

re: #124 danS

I'm sorry, there must be a misunderstanding. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything.

Yeah, there is a misunderstanding, all right -- if you think that after 69 posts about global warming in the past 60 days, this one post represents my "argument."

But of course, you know it doesn't.

126

The Mongoose Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:25:29pm

I respectfully disagree with the end of Charles' post.

It seems terribly unfair to lump all AGW skeptics in with scum like Griffin and Islamic fundamentalists. Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe don't represent AGW's promoters, and should not be said to do so, as many right-wing sites are doing today.

It seems an unflattering tactic, no matter which side is using it.

127

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:29:10pm

re: #126 The Mongoose

I respectfully disagree with the end of Charles' post.

It seems terribly unfair to lump all AGW skeptics in with scum like Griffin and Islamic fundamentalists. Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe don't represent AGW's promoters, and should not be said to do so, as many right-wing sites are doing today.

It seems an unflattering tactic, no matter which side is using it.

Of course, I didn't actually do that, but if it makes you feel better to destroy a straw man, have at it.

128

The Mongoose Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:35:41pm

I understand your point. I did not mean to create a straw man. I read your last line as indicating that highly disreputable people (Griffin, IsloFundies) are on board with AGW skepticism/denial and that this tarnishes that cause.

I just didn't like the association, any more than the counter-argument about Mugabe and Chavez that I mentioned. Perhaps others are making it more ridiculously (ie "AGW promoters love Mugabe LOL!!!!1!"). They probably are.

I suppose I am growing frustrated with the vitriol on all sides at the moment. I would not presume to put words in your mouth and apologize if I did so. I still do not love the last line of the post and felt I should say so.

All the best.

129

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 3:56:49pm

re: #128 The Mongoose

I understand your point. I did not mean to create a straw man. I read your last line as indicating that highly disreputable people (Griffin, IsloFundies) are on board with AGW skepticism/denial and that this tarnishes that cause.

I don't think the "cause" of climate change denial could possibly be any more tarnished than it already is.

130

danS Thu, Dec 17, 2009 4:02:46pm

re: #125 Charles

Charles, I was referring to this specific post and not your wider argument about GW. Your view on the subject is quite clear.

My point is that there are a lot of rational/moderate skeptics who aren't motivated by this or that political agenda. So saying :"look who agrees with you skeptics, therefore you're wrong" is not a valid argument IMHO. And it doesn't prove anything on the existence/non existence of GW .

In contrast, Your older posts regarding the evolution/creationist debate were much more convincing; with links to some very enlightening, robust, detailed scientific debunking (that biology lecturer, James Randi etc.)
I can't find any of that sort nowadays and that's a shame.

131

Obdicut Thu, Dec 17, 2009 4:06:31pm

re: #121 Bagua

Please show where I said they were primitive?

China does not produce innovative hard science across a broad area. Deny it if you want.

132

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 4:32:35pm

re: #130 danS

I can't find any of that sort nowadays and that's a shame.

Then you must not want to see it.

133

stayfrosty Thu, Dec 17, 2009 6:04:23pm

In my humble opinion, we should let the science speak for itself. When politicians inject themselves into science so readily, it becomes nothing but politics.

Do I personally believe that man in contributing to climate change? Yes. But I realize there are skeptics from every walk of life, and not all of them are skeptical for political ends. So, saying because A believes C and B believes C means A and C are allies is pretty fallacious in my humble opinion.

In fact, I remember a post here a few years back comparing Al Gore to Osama bin Laden because they both believed in AGW. That's the only part of this discourse I don't like.

Hopefully that didn't come across as personal, because it definitely wasn't.

134

Charles Johnson Thu, Dec 17, 2009 6:11:49pm

re: #133 stayfrosty

In fact, I remember a post here a few years back comparing Al Gore to Osama bin Laden because they both believed in AGW. That's the only part of this discourse I don't like.

You're probably referring to this post:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

I was an uninformed idiot on the subject of AGW then, and I explained why I changed my mind here:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Hint: facts and knowledge are persuasive.

135

stayfrosty Thu, Dec 17, 2009 6:17:56pm

re: #134 Charles

Fair enough. And I understood why you made the change and respect your honesty about how you came to change your views. It's not very often someone as outspoken as you has the veracity to do such a thing. But specifically, it's the common thread, the all 'A are C and all B are C so all A are B' thing that gets me.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to show me the information.

136

stayfrosty Thu, Dec 17, 2009 6:19:00pm

Jeez, why do you get a down-ding just for asking a sincere and honest question? How are debates supposed to occur here?

137

The Mongoose Thu, Dec 17, 2009 6:54:34pm

re: #135 stayfrosty

Fair enough. And I understood why you made the change and respect your honesty about how you came to change your views. It's not very often someone as outspoken as you has the veracity to do such a thing. But specifically, it's the common thread, the all 'A are C and all B are C so all A are B' thing that gets me.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to show me the information.

Same here, on all of the above. And the thanks are sincere, even if I see things much like stayfrosty on this. I'm sure he's sincere as well.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

BNP Leader Griffin: Climate Change is a ‘Hoax’, World Leaders Are ‘Mass Murderers’

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud