Community | December 11, 2010 | 89 comments

Cancun Betrayal, UNFCCC Unmasked as WTO of the Sky/Real Solutions to the Climate Crisis Will Come From Grassroots Movements

source: http://www.pitchengine.com/free-release.php?id=109054

Image
JanforGore
Cancún, Mexico -- As representatives of Indigenous peoples and communities already suffering the immediate impacts of climate change, we express our outrage and disgust at the agreements that have emerged from the COP16 talks. As was exposed in the Wikileaks climate scandal, the Cancun Agreements are not the result of an informed and open consensus process, but the consequence of an ongoing US diplomatic offensive of backroom deals, arm-twisting and bribery that targeted nations in opposition to the Copenhagen Accord during the months leading up to the COP-16 talks.

We are not fooled by this diplomatic shell game. The Cancun Agreements have no substance. They are yet more hot air. Their only substance is to promote continued talks about climate mitigation strategies motivated by profit. Such strategies have already proved fruitless and have been shown to violate human and Indigenous rights. The agreements implictly promote carbon markets, offsets, unproven technologies, and land grabs—anything but a commitment to real emissions reductions.

The Voices of the People Must be Respected

Indigenous Peoples from North to South cannot afford these unjust and false ‘solutions’, because climate change is killing our peoples, cultures and ecosystems. We need real commitments to reduce emissions at the source and to keep fossil fuels in the ground. Because we are on the front lines of the impacts of climate change, we came to COP-16 with an urgent call to address the root causes of the climate crisis, to demand respect for the Rights of Mother Earth, and to fundamentally redefine industrial society’s relationship with the planet. Instead, the Climate COP has shut the doors on our participation and that of other impacted communities, while welcoming business, industry, and speculators with open arms. The U.S., Industrialized nations, big business and unethical companies like Goldman Sachs will profit handsomely from these agreements while our people die.

Women and youth in our communities are disproportionately burdened by climate impacts and rights violations. Real solutions would strengthen our collective rights and land rights while ensuring the protection of women, youth and vulnerable communities. While the Cancun Agreements do contain some language "noting" rights, it is exclusively in the context of market mechanisms, while failing to guarantee safeguards for the rights of peoples and communities.

The failures of the UN talks in Copenhagen have been compounded in Cancun. From the opening day to the closing moments of the talks, our voices were censored, dissenting opinions silenced and dozens ejected from the conference grounds. The thousands who rallied outside to reject market mechanisms and demand recognition of human and Indigenous rights were ignored.

The Market Will Not Protect Our Rights

Market-based approaches have failed to stop climate change. They are designed to commodify and profit from the last remaining elements of our Mother Earth and the air. Through its focus on market approaches like carbon trading, the UNFCCC has become the WTO of the Sky.

We are deeply concerned that the Cancun Agreements betray both our future and the rights of peoples, women, youth, and vulnerable populations. While the preamble to the Cancun Agreements note a call for "studies on human rights and climate change," this is in effect an empty reference, with no content and no standards, that will not protect the collective rights of peoples. The market mechanisms that implicitly dominate both the spirit and the letter of the Cancun Agreements will neither avert climate change nor guarantee human rights, much less the Rights of Mother Earth. Approaches based on carbon offsetting, like REDD, will permit polluters to continue poisoning land, water, air, and our bodies, while doing nothing to stop the climate crisis. Indeed, approaches based on the commodification of biodiversity, CO2, forests, water, and other sacred elements will only encourage the buying and selling of our human and environmental rights.

The Cochabamba People's Agreement Points the Way Forward

There is another way forward: the Cochabamba People's Agreement represents the vision of everyday people from all corners of the globe who are creating the solutions to climate change from the ground up, and calling for a global framework that respects human rights and the Rights of Mother Earth.

If any hope emerges from Cancun, it comes from the dramatic demonstrations we saw in the streets and from the deep and powerful alliances that were built among indigenous and social movements. The Indigenous Environmental Network joined thousands of our brothers and sisters to demand real climate solutions based in the rights of Indigenous Peoples, the rights of Mother Earth, and a just transition away from fossil fuels. We will continue to stand with our allies to demand climate justice.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   Current Tonight,   Earth and Science,   13 more
  2. tags:
    Environment,  Climate Change,  Renewable Energy,  Fossil Fuels,  10 more
  3.     
    |

89 comments // Cancun Betrayal, UNFCCC Unmasked as WTO of the Sky/Real Solutions to the Climate Crisis Will Come From Grassroots Movements

  • riverratt50
  • IceKat
  • riverratt50
  • IceKat
    • -1
      IceKat  

    • "Why can't you discuss the "science?"" - JanforGore

      You keep telling us the climate is broken, wrong or just not as it should be. You often tell us what we should be doing for the climate to be corrected, but why do you never tell us what climate is the correct climate? What climactic state do you really want?
      Why don't you tell us, at what period was the climate 'right'?

      Why do you never address these points?

      Maybe you can tell us what is the correct number of storms we should expect, and what is the correct intensity of those storms.
      And how about heatwaves. What should be the maximum allowed temperature for a heatwave?
      Can you tell us why reducing atmospheric CO2 will help to achieve these goals, when during the 19th century, when CO2 levels were considered to be at a 'safe' level, there were many disastrous storms, droughts, and heatwaves that equalled or surpassed the ones we have seen this century.
      What caused destructive weather during the 1700s and 1800s, and earlier? Why were those events seen as natural occurrences and yet you label any weather today that causes disruption as 'an effect of climate change'?

      Why can't you discuss the "science?"

    • 1 year ago
  • coolplanet
    • 0
      coolplanet  

    • I've followed and studied global warming ever since NASA's lead scientist James Hansen first sounded the alarm bell in 1988. I've read thousands of articles and dozens of books, both pro and con, since that time.
      What I see is that some 99% of climetologists and related scientists from every nation conclude that global warming is real, very serious and man-made. Most of the global warming deniers are American republicans who have a long history of lying to the public for their agenda of business as usual.
      Deniers are liars!
      What really motivates these people is a distain for science and a belief that Jesus will come to destroy the Earth and build a new one in its place. This was and still is their justification for genocide against native peoples and the destruction of our planet. They see it as their patriotic duty to pollute and attack anyone who thinks otherwise.

    • 1 year ago
  • MrMxyzptlk
  • coolplanet
    • 0
      coolplanet  
    • MrMxyzptlk:

      The Greenhouse Effect, which is that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere heat or cool the planet depending on ppm, was discovered by scientists over 100 years ago.

      I am not referring to the percentage of people who believe or disbelieve global warming. You are probably right with your numbers. I am referring to the percentage of scientists in the field of climetology and Earth sciences who are in consensus that global warming is real, a grave threat and man-made.

      I notice that the few scientists who question the data on global warming are staticians and engineers who have no training in climetology.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • 0
      IceKat  
    • coolplanet:

      "...NASA's lead scientist James Hansen first sounded the alarm bell in 1988..."

      Well I've had an interest in this field for a lot longer than that. But, isn't it a shame that Hansen, described by the NASA hierarchy as an 'embarrassment', has been proven wrong on almost everything that oozed from his mouth!

      "They see it as their patriotic duty to pollute and attack anyone who thinks otherwise."
      Then why is it the lunatic-left members on here who do the censoring and personal attacking of posters who present credible scientific evidence that counters their pseudo-religious beliefs?

    • 1 year ago
  • MrMxyzptlk
  • coolplanet
    • 0
      coolplanet  
    • IceKat:

      Hansen has remained an internationally respected climatologist at NASA to this day -- a position he's held for the past 40-some years.
      His numerous predictions about global warming climate change have all come to pass.
      Do you deniers actually believe that the more you lie and bluster somehow people will buy your bullshit?
      If you're sincerely interested in this subject you should read "Censoring Science: Inside The Political Attack On James Hansen" by Mark Bowen (Dutton 2008).
      But somehow I suspect you are part of the political attack on science, denying and lying to confuse the public for your quasi-religious agenda.

    • 1 year ago
  • coolplanet
    • 0
      coolplanet  
    • MrMxyzptlk:

      I don't require a scientist to tell me that worldwide weather patterns have gone berzerk in the past several decades. I am a gardener and have lived in PA, NY, HI and CA observing record breaking droughts, floods, heat and cold long predicted by climetologists. I have witnessed Spring arriving a month early and Fall coming two months late for over a decade now. SW PA has gone from USDA climate zone 6 to zone 7. Since the 1980s California is experencing droughts unseen in the geologic record going back millions of years. Hawaiian tradewinds shifted north about ten years ago leaving the Big Island trapped in a cloud of volcanic sulfur called VOG.
      Be honest with yourself. What is your true motive in attacking climate science?
      Is it merely political? Religious? Some sport?
      Or don't you like to be cold and wish it was warmer?

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • 0
      IceKat  
    • Image
    • coolplanet:

      "His numerous predictions about global warming climate change have all come to pass. "

      Presented here is a graph showing Hansen's 'global warming' prediction
      http://www.lesjones.com/www/images/posts/hansen-499x375.jpg

      He refuses to release his algorithms and methods of working. Why would a 'straight' scientist do that? His methods have been heavily criticised and he has had to correct a lot of his work when he has been discovered to have been using 'dodgy' methods of working.

      "A few months ago Hansen beclowned himself again when the NASA department he’s in charge of, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), claimed increased global temperatures in October despite record-shattering low temperatures. The change was caused by a seeming 10 degree year over year increase in the Russian October temperatures. In reality, the dramatic increase was a mistake. Someone had repeated Russia’s September data in October." - Les Jones.

      The man is a political activist who allows his beliefs to taint his 'work'.

      Here's a snippet from an article.
      "Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA’s vocal man-made global warming fear soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was “was never muzzled.” Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of man-made global warming fears.

      “I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man made,” Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009. “I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results,” Theon, the former Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch explained.

      “Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind’s effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress,” Theon wrote."

      Isn't it interesting how you find people who no longer have to rely on government funding suddenly change their views on man-made global warming?

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • coolplanet:

      With all due respect to you: Why do people feel the need to explain this to a bunch of trolls when it has been gone over ad nauseum here over and over and over again? We don't have time to sit here now to try to do something that is impossible to do. We don't have time to sit here and entertain the same disruptors that come into every single one of these threads with the same broken record rhetoric. Mr letterhead here DOES NOT CARE what you, I or anyone else here has to say on this. He is too ignorant to even understand it. All he knows is, when he speaks out against this just for the hell of it, he speaks out against the nemesis in his head and that makes him feel nice and warm and cozy as he sits here passing the time. Once he gets off this site to sit with his kid and watch downloaded porn as he refers to it, this washes all away.

      And forget the I love CO2 weathergirl/guy here., He she is so out there in their rabid revenge filled zeal to post anything that they think will rattle the only person whose threads he she actually gets attention in and to continually prove their intense dislike for the indigenous people stealing their heat money, that it has become a pathetic sideshow.

      There are many people out here who need to understand what we are up against, and I think they should really be the focus of our energy now. I don't plan on wasting time sitting here responding to them nor any of their backwards, science hating, prejudiced selfish cohorts here who do absolutely nothing to further real progress or change. Matter of fact, based on my observations of their comments here over all of these months, I can definitely see one common thread: they know climate change is affecting poor people in countries of color and since they have a great disdain for people of color, they would rather they all just die off. Those are not people I wish to converse with here or anywhere else, and frankly I don't understand why others who know their MO keep doing it as well. You will not be able to reason with the trolls on these sites. This is why the strategy has to change, so we can focus on getting out information to those who need to know it rather than wasting our time.

    • 1 year ago
  • Dagum
  • riverratt50
    • 0
      riverratt50  
    • coolplanet:

      "American republicans who have a long history of lying to the public"? As if Dems are so very very honest.

      The storm began with just four cryptic words. “A miracle has happened,” announced a contributor to Climate Audit, a website devoted to criticising the science of climate change.

      “RC” said nothing more — but included a web link that took anyone who clicked on it to another site, Real Climate.

      There, on the morning of November 17, they found a treasure trove: a thousand or so emails sent or received by Professor Phil Jones, director of the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia in Norwich.

      Jones is a key player in the science of climate change. His department’s databases on global temperature changes and its measurements have been crucial in building the case for global warming.

      RELATED LINKS
      Climate e-mail hack inquiry 'must be transparent'
      Flushing out the high priests of climate change
      Climate change data dumped
      What those emails suggested, however, was that Jones and some colleagues may have become so convinced of their case that they crossed the line from objective research into active campaigning.

      In one, Jones boasted of using statistical “tricks” to obliterate apparent declines in global temperature. In another he advocated deleting data rather than handing them to climate sceptics. And in a third he proposed organised boycotts of journals that had the temerity to publish papers that undermined the message.

      http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936289.ece

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  
    • coolplanet:

      No, THIS denier if that's your pet name for people that see through this scam believes that the climatologist got busted ADMITTING they manipulated the science to show warming in the favor of the UN so they could pass their bullshit cap and trade. And if people continue to believe you folks they would vote for cap and trade here in the US. That way the richest can buy additional cap from other rich corporations, so they still pollute and we pay the tax. This is all such a bunch of bullshit. I suppose the massive snow storm in the Midwest right now is because of the melting and warming....... If it don't make at least common sense then maybe you should cast a shadow of doubt on it.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • tverdell
    • tverdell  
    • This comment was removed by its owner.
  • riverratt50
  • JanforGore
  • tverdell
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  
    • tverdell:

      If you bothered to click on the links that I posted you will find countless other links that will lead your poor soul to the truth about this garbage. Good try I suppose, just very very limited in your approach.

    • 1 year ago
  • tverdell
    • tverdell  
    • This comment was removed by its owner.
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • tverdell:

      Well, a timeframe on that working together thing would be good. That was what these people came to Cancun to do and were summarilly ostracized, once again kept outside while the World Bank got control of the climate finance mechanism that should have included their feedback. Every year we see the same thing happening. Setting up a way for banks and corporations to make money off this is not leadership. To me leadership also encompasses taking responsibility for your own actions. So far this has not been the case regarding the industrialized nations spewing 90 million tons of emissions into the open atmosphere everyday.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -2
      riverratt50  

    • For every one story that backs Al Gore there are 100 that dispute it. Some people just can never learn to not believe everything they are told.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • riverratt50:

      FYI, the person in the picture above you holding the flag with those four letters on it which you probably don't even know the meaning of as well as thousands who marched in Cancun know this is real, and they are the focus of this post. Unfortunately, for you, it appears you are just too much into spambot revenge posting at the moment (which I truly hope relieves your frustration) and your zeal has blinded you to the topic at hand. The only ones who cannot discern reality from their regurgitated political rhetoric are robots like you who only use Al Gore as a crutch for your ignorance on this topic. People like you never fail to disappoint in proving to the world why the US is looked on and laughed at.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • 0
      riverratt50  
    • JanforGore:

      If you would have taken the time to read the article then you would have seen what it was about, but obviously you are too short sighted to see anything beyond the propaganda in which you believe in.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • riverratt50:

      What was it about? It wasn't about Al Gore or your grudge against me because I support him. You have already proven you have no knowledge on this by deferring to the denier 's crutch.

      Reposting my original comment form below: This is what it was about.

      What a profound disappointment. The mechanisms agreed to will only continue to prop up oil companies, agribusiness, and other corporations that will now invest in these mechanisms in order to continue polluting and spewing GHGs into the atmosphere by using carbon offsets in Indonesia (example) as a reason to then proclaim they are helping in the solution. Reports of indigenous and small groups being ostracized and not allowed to be heard here is also very distressing. This is not what a climate summit should be all about.

      The developing countries are already feeling the effects of climate change, and the indigenous people of these countries have the wisdom and solutions to best deal with this but they are being silenced and co opted by the Goldman Sachs of the world in collusion with the banks and governments looking to use climate change through the forests, and the rivers, and the air as a commodity while doing little to work to decrease GHG emissions to levels scientists are warning we must heed.

      Only through the human species looking at this from a moral perspective in line with economics and superceding politics will we be able to work to now adapt to the changes coming and those already upon us. We can only hope that the lessons learned both here and in Copenhagen serve as a spark for more grassroots action that can circumvent the false solutions put before us. To expect the very institutions such as the World Bank that precipitated this crisis to now solve it in continuing the status quo is ludicrous.

      We need to place a fee on the pollution at the source (instead of rewarding those making it through CDM) through a revenue neutral carbon tax that spurs transition to renewable energy sources thus decreasing GHG emissions adequately and making polluters accountable while not hurting consumers and or those who live a world away.

      __
      Was looking for your on topic comment of substance on this, but couldn't find it. Oh well.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
  • lamborghini
  • riverratt50
    • 0
      riverratt50  

    • Al Gore pushes "Green Investments"
      It's no secret that super investment advisor Al Gore has a huge financial stake in the Global Warming Scam. He regularly "recommends" Green Investments many in which he is heavily invested. Rather than what he calls "sub-prime carbon assets" like oil companies and mines. Al your so clever with words.
      And it looks like it's working. He recently purchased an $8,000,000 dollar California beach mansion. And is worth an estimated $100,000,000 dollars. I guess he needs it though to pay for all the Jet fuel as he flies around the world scolding the Co2 emitters. He makes Bernie Madoff look like a petty thief. He reminds me of the great televangelists who millions of people throw money at to listen to there B.S.
      Wise up Warmists your being fleeced and our government is complicit.

      http://global-warming-hoax-blog.blogspot.com/2010/10/al-gore-pushes-green-invest...

      Lot of good articles on this site, not all blogs. But most all facts backed up by links.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  

    • THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX

      The official position of the World Natural Health Organization in regards to global warming is that there is NO GLOBAL WARMING! Global warming is nothing more than just another hoax, just like Y2K and the global freezing claims in the 1960's and 70's were. Global warming is being used to generate fear and panic. Those behind this movement are using it to control people's lives and for financial gain.

      There are not many individuals, groups, or organizations willing to stand up against this fraud that is being perpetuated for fear of being persecuted, harassed, and ostracized by those who support global warming within the scientific and other communities. But fortunately, a few have decided to do the right thing and take a stand against this evil, proving just how unscientifically founded global warming is and exposing those who are behind it. Below, you will find links to information and articles showing the proof that global warming is nothing more than just a bunch of hot air (pun intended).

      The date that you see by each headline is the date when it was posted here. If you know of a news story, research, or information that should be posted here, please let us know and provide us with a link. The articles posted for previous years have been archived and links are provided to them; by year; at the bottom of this page.

      http://www.wnho.net/global_warming.htm

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  
    • Image

    • With even California's Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer admitting cap-and-trade legislation may be a decade away, 2010 is shaping up to be the year in which the global-warming hoax died, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

      "Climategate revelations that prominent global alarmists have manipulated climate data prove global warming was an ideological agenda masquerading as a scientific theory," Corsi wrote.
      The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, "expressed regret" in having to admit on the IPCC website that its 2007 warning that the Himalayan glaciers were "very likely" to melt by 2035 had no basis in fact.

      Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the Indian head of the IPCC, dismissed calls for him to resign over the retraction of the Himalayan glacier prediction, but the damage was still done, Corsi explained.

      "I know a lot of climate skeptics are after my blood, but I'm in no mood to oblige them," the beleaguered Pachauri told the Times in London. "It was a collective failure by a number of people. I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It's best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip."

      Graham Cogley, the Canadian scientist who exposed the IPCC glacier error, warned that Pachauri now was the one on thin ice.

      "People who want to undermine the science on climate change will be crawling over the report looking for another mistake like this and if they do find another one it will be curtains for Pachauri," said Fred Pearce, a British environmental journalist who has reported extensively on Gogley's refutation of the Himalayan glacier prediction. "The way he [Pachauri] has handled this glacier issue means he's now a sitting duck if anything else turns up."

      In 2007, when he shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for leading the global-warming charge, it would have been hard to predict how fast Pachauri would fall.

      Now, global media describe Pachauri with the tag of being a "controversial former railroad engineer" and a "lobbyist," rather than as "the world's leading climate scientist."

      "What is also abundantly clear is that Pachauri has used his U.N. position to become wealthy by advancing climate-change hysteria," Corsi noted.

      Investigative reporters Christopher Booker and Richard North have documented that since being elected to the IPCC chairmanship five years earlier, Pachauri has been appointed to more than 20 positions, including directorships and advisory roles to major banks and investment firms.

      "Dr. Pachauri insists that the millions of dollars he receives for these posts are all paid to his Delhi-based institute and not to him personally," Booker and North wrote in London's Telegraph. "But during the same period he also presided over a massive expansion of TERI's empire."

      "Whether Pachauri survives in his U.N. position is doubtful," Corsi wrote. "What is certain is that global-warming hysteria has been scaled back, perhaps permanently."

      Red Alert has predicted for months that the Obama administration would fail to pass cap-and-trade legislation this year.

      Corsi said, "Now there can now be absolutely no doubt about that prediction coming true."

      http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=123143

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -2
      riverratt50  

    • What they managed to do is show the world that they will stoop to any level imaginable in their campaign to control our lives and get everyone to do as they say, including scaring the heck out of any children who may dare have an option of their own. The brainwashing of our children is obviously very important to them if they’re willing to frighten them to this degree.

      http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php?extend.137

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +2
      JanforGore  

    • Oh thank you. The other spambots who know nothing about science or what this is doing to the people of whom this post is about have now been let lose to push this up even higher in the ratings by removing all doubt of their ignorance and stupidity. That's what you call killing two birds with one stone.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
  • riverratt50
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  

    • Facts and Fictions of Al Gore’s "An Inconvenient Truth"
      Admin, Wednesday 13 June 2007 - 20:43:55 // Comments are turned off for this item

      Introduction

      After Ponder the Maunder was first published, I received many emails from parents whose kids were required to watch Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.” They were worried because Al Gore was a politician, an occupation that people just don’t trust.

      I’ve watched his movie many times and researched most of his claims. The following essay is a summary of what I learned. I hope it helps.

      Kristen Byrnes

      http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php?item.11.4

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -2
      riverratt50  

    • Harsh weather has caused massive road closures across the Midwest, caused the cancellation of all inbound and outbound flights in a number of Midwestern airports and has collapsed the Metrodome in Minneapolis, Minn.

      The panels of the Metrodome roof started giving way around 5 a.m. and deflated after the storm, which dumped more than 17 inches of snow on the city, Chairman of the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission Roy Terwilliger told ABC News affiliate KSTP in Minneapolis - St. Paul.

      A Sunday NFL football game between the New York Giants and the Minnesota Vikings had already been pushed to Monday, as the Giants were stranded in Kansas City, unable to reach Minneapolis after the Twin Cities' airport was closed.

      Yep yep,. this is definitely the cause of global (warming?) ah, maybe just a little set back for the theory.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  

    • Cancun Climate Summit Ridiculed in World Press

      “The global warming scare may have been fun for the children while it lasted. But the time has come for the joke to be declared well and truly over,” opined Christopher Booker in a column entitled “Cancun climate conference: the warmists’ last Mexican wave” appearing in the Telegraph.

      “What we are seeing here is one of the greatest collective flights from reality in the history of the human race,” he noted. “As western Europe shivers to a halt and our energy bills soar through the roof, the time has come when we should all start to get seriously angry with our politicians for being carried away by all this claptrap.”

      "The Daily Mail, another prominent British newspaper, also revealed a massive hole in the warmists’ arguments as the Cancun conference was becoming increasingly shrill about the supposed warming. “For the past 15 years, global warming has stopped,” noted the report, calling this fact an “inconvenient” truth in honor of alarmist-in-chief Al Gore. “This isn’t meant to be happening. Climate science orthodoxy, as promulgated by bodies such as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU), says that temperatures have risen and will continue to rise.” “Little by little,” explained the article, “the supposedly settled scientific ‘consensus’ that the temperature rise is unprecedented, that it is set to continue to disastrous levels, and that it is all the fault of human beings, is starting to fray.” Next, it cited former climate luminaries - most of whom have since fallen in disgrace - admitting there was indeed a medieval warm period and that “there has been no statistically significant warming” since 1995, in the words of the now-discredited Climategate “scientist” Phil Jones. "

      "Of course, there are still numerous establishment organs pushing alarmist man-made global-warming theories in the United States - the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and the New York Times among the more prominent. Around the world, the situation is similar."

      "But the number of writers and publications taking a firm stand against the alarmists is steadily growing. Human Events and Canada Free Press have both published scathing pieces about the alarmists and their claims. And around the world, more and more media are risking the ire of bureaucrats and officials to expose the fraudulent warmist hypotheses."

      "The New American magazine predicted the slow death of the global-warming crusade in an article earlier this year as politicians who supported the hysteria began dropping like flies and the warmists were still licking their wounds from Copenhagen and a devastating series of scandals. But with so much invested in the scam, it will definitely not go down quietly or without a fight. For now, the embattled parade is scheduled to limp on in Durban, South Africa, next year. "

      http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/5392-cancun...

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +2
      JanforGore  

    • http://www.foe.org/reaction-climate-talks-cancun
      "REACTION TO THE CLIMATE TALKS IN CANCUN

      CANCUN, MEXICO -- Friends of the Earth U.S. had the following response to the close of UN climate negotiations in Cancun:

      Climate change is the greatest threat the human community has faced. The texts considered tonight are a wholly inadequate response, though they make progress in some areas.

      The texts fall radically short on the crucial question -- curbing climate pollution. Their embrace of the “pledge-based” paradigm, with rich countries polluting however much they like, could lead to a future in which temperatures rise by up to nine degrees [Fahrenheit], according to a recent UN analysis. This would devastate human civilization and the natural world. Impacts would be distributed unequally and unjustly.

      The texts come nowhere close to providing sufficient funding to developing countries to help them transition to clean economies and respond to climate change impacts. Such funding, known as climate finance, is not assistance: rich countries owe compensation to poor countries because the rich have polluted more than their fair share of atmospheric space.

      While parts of these texts are deeply disappointing, real progress has also been made. Friends of the Earth U.S. has spent much of the past year campaigning for the establishment of a global climate fund to facilitate the delivery of climate finance. While the fund established in this text is imperfect -- for example, its trustee will be the World Bank -- its creation does represent real momentum and potential. Structures for supporting adaptation to climate change impacts were also included in the text.

      The UN remains key to humanity’s collective response to this global crisis and it is important that the multilateral process is moving forward. However, the UN can only be as strong as the parties that compose it. We were unable to achieve needed progress in Cancun because of the opposition of the rich countries that are primarily responsible for climate pollution -- top among them the United States. Political change is urgently needed in these countries.

      That’s why what happened on the streets outside of the negotiations over the last two weeks is so important. The people, movements and civil society groups that produced the People’s Agreement of Cochabamba were present on the outside in Cancun, and they spoke out forcefully from a principled, moral position and demanded real progress and just policies that respect peoples’ rights.

      As Americans, we lament the fact that our President, Barack Obama, failed to follow through on his promise to be a leader in solving this problem. His deputies have threatened and bullied other countries into accepting the pledge-based paradigm, while the President himself has largely ignored climate change.

      And as citizens of the world, we must recognize the heroic leadership provided by developing countries on the front lines of climate change, most notably that of Bolivia, in the negotiations. We thank Bolivian President Evo Morales and Ambassador Pablo Solon for their leadership. At every turn, Bolivia has been a forceful and courageous advocate for what’s actually needed, standing in stark contrast to the rich countries that have abdicated their responsibility to future generations and selfishly pursued short-term convenience.

      We must now look to 2011. The texts approved here cannot be allowed to be the high water mark of the international community’s response to this crisis. Much stronger outcomes -- with the establishment of a binding, equitable, science-based, aggregate emission target for developed countries -- are needed next year in Durban.

      The texts produced today call into question the future of the Kyoto Protocol and its process for setting aggregate and individual country targets, as well as how appropriate levels of climate finance can be generated. Many rich countries tried to assassinate the Kyoto Protocol here, and it is now on life support. We continue to demand the establishment of a second round of developed country emissions reduction commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, and these commitments must be made in Durban. We also demand that rich countries provide climate finance that is commensurate with the need and with justice.

      Friends of the Earth U.S. will continue to contribute to the growth of the climate and social justice movements. We will continue to fight for concrete changes at the domestic level -- in terms of both politics and policy -- that compel the United States to play a more constructive role. We hope this leads to the fair and effective outcomes we did not achieve in Cancun."
      . ___________________
      The pace of action is being outpaced by the effects we see. Herein lies our greatest challenge.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  

    • "We need real commitments to reduce emissions at the source and to keep fossil fuels in the ground. "
      As there aren't many people left who actually believe that CO2 emissions are causing climate change, and as fossil fuels are being used more cleanly now, wouldn't it be a good idea to allow people who still rely on fossil fuels for warmth to use them?

      "We are deeply concerned that the Cancun Agreements betray both our future and the rights of peoples, women, youth, and vulnerable populations. "
      And what about the rights of people who remain vulnerable to the severe weather that has been in my country, and whose only source of warmth is energy produced from fossil fuels?
      While renewable energy is available within the UK it is neither plentiful nor reliable. Without conventional energy many more people would die from cold-related diseases.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  

    • Backroom deals and intimidation while reality stares us in the face. This is why the Bolivian environmental minister was so outraged. But hey, deniers should be happy... their oil company gods are working it for them all real good by playing both sides. It will be interesting to see just how many shills and companies that publicly denounce global warming is anthropogenic or even real, now invest in these geoengineering and CDM schemes (like dam building) to make a profit from it while trashing those who are actually working for real solutions.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      "...deniers should be happy... their oil company gods are working it for them all real good by playing both sides"

      It's so easy to attack those you call deniers and label them as oil-loving shills.
      Cancun wasn't a success because there is less political will to do anything about the so-called climate disaster.
      More and more people (including politicians worldwide) are seeing the reality of what the bent environmental fundamentalists have been pushing, and more are getting sick of the lies and deceit that has been discovered within the circles of those that attempt to drive the green agenda.
      The game is up - Cancun was proof of that.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  

    • "The Cancun Agreements have no substance. They are yet more hot air."

      Absolutely! As is the entire political hijacking of an event that was manufactured in the minds of politicians and misguided environmentalists.
      It didn't matter what was agreed upon in Cancun, nothing would have affected our climate in any way, but this wasn't about the climate really, was it?

      “U.N. warm-mongers are seeking to impose a global climate reparations tax on everything from airline flights and international shipping to fuel and financial transactions. At first, this punitive tax on progress is expected to net $100 billion annually, though that amount, like our energy costs, is expected to necessarily skyrocket.” - Investor’s Business Daily

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +2
      JanforGore  
    • Image

    • http://www.viacampesina.org/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&...:via-campesina-declaration-in-cancun-the-people-hold-thousands-of-solutions-in-their-hands&catid=48:-climate-change-and-agrofuels&Itemid=75

      Statement from La Via Campesina

      Excerpt:

      "Why did we go to Cancun?

      Current models of consumption, production and trade have caused massive environmental destruction. Indigenous peoples and peasant farmers, men and women, are the main victims. So our mobilization to Cancun, and in Cancun, sought to tell the world that we need a change in economic and development paradigms.

      We must go beyond the anthropocentric model. We must rebuild the cosmovision of our peoples, based on a holistic view of the relationship between the cosmos, Mother Earth, the air, the water and all living beings. Human beings do not own nature, but rather form part of all that lives.

      Given the urgency to reconceive the system, the climate and the earth, we denounce:

      That governments remain indifferent to global warming and instead of debating the policy changes necessary for cooling the planet, they are debating speculative financial schemes, new “green” economies and the privatization of the commons.

      False and dangerous solutions that the neoliberal system implements like the REDD+ initiative (Reduction of Emissions for Deforestation and Forest Degradation), the CDM (Clean Development Mechanisms), and geoengineering. These promote the commercialization of natural resources, and the purchase of permits to pollute, or “carbon credits”, with the promise of not cutting down forests and plantations of the South.

      The imposition of industrial agriculture through the implementation of genetically modified products and landgrabs that go against food sovereignty.

      Nuclear energy, which is very dangerous and in no way a real solution.

      The efforts of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization to facilitate the entry of huge transnational corporations in our countries.

      The impacts of Free Trade Agreements with the United States and the European Union-- trade and investment treaties that open the doors of our countries to transnational companies to take control of our natural resources.

      The exclusion of peasant and indigenous peoples in discussions on key issues that affect human life and the Mother Earth.

      The expulsion of members of our organizations from the official talks of the COP 16 due to their opposition to government proposals that promote a system of depredation that threatens to exterminate the Mother Earth and humanity.

      We do not agree with the simple idea of “mitigating” or “adapting” to climate change. We need social, ecological and climate justice, so we demand:

      Incorporation of the principles of the Cochabamba Accords of April 22, 2010 as a process that leads to real reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases and achieves social and environmental justice.

      Food sovereignty based on sustainable and agroecological peasant agriculture, given that the food crisis and the climate crisis are the same and both are consequences of the capitalist system"
      Cont.
      ____
      So the question is, is it even possible to have climate justice in a capitalist system? You would think so if it is truly about fair competition, pricing, and moral sustainable business standards. However, oil and agribusiness companies and their shills are really looking to make a bundle off geoengineering and CDMS. Probably why certain ones here always _on these threads.

      Preserving forests is always a good thing. However, tying it to a market mechanism that still allows corporations to pollute while also engaging in CDM schemes like dam building which despoils the environment through deforestation (and is also known as a source of methane emissions,) diverts water sources, effects agriculture, and displaces people, leaves the door open as to whether there will be a net decrease in emissions or not and the timeframe involved.

      Industrial nations need to take more responsibility for at source global warming pollution. Indigneous people already know how to preserve their land ( until it is taken and polluted by a Chevron or Exxon or Shell) but this then opens the door to even more for land grabs for biofuels, World Bank schemes and also allowing companies like Monsanto to continue deforesting lands to grow GMOs all under the guise of it being "sustainable agriculture" while still supporting the fossil fuel status quo.

      We must keep global temperatures below 2 degrees centigrade and emissions at 350 PPM or below. We are already at 385 PPM and with the schemes implemented there may well be some progress in areas this is not totally abused, but with not enough imput from industrialized nations regarding point source emissions, again, if we see no net decrease it will be all for naught.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      you don't need to go far to find the religious slant to this article.

      "We must go beyond the anthropocentric model. We must rebuild the cosmovision of our peoples, based on a holistic view of the relationship between the cosmos, Mother Earth, the air, the water and all living beings. Human beings do not own nature, but rather form part of all that lives."

      Their totalitarian aims are abundant.
      "We do not agree with the simple idea of “mitigating” or “adapting” to climate change."

      They want a new world order.
      "Assuming collective responsibility for Mother Earth, changing patterns of development and economic structures, and breaking down the power of transnational companies"

      Nothing but a complete restructuring of the world and its climate will satisfy these people. This is totalitarianism gone mad.

      "Reaching binding agreements that force all those who pollute the environment to be accountable for the disasters they cause and the crimes they have committed against mother nature. Likewise, require a reduction of carbon gases at the source--polluters should stop polluting."
      Sheer lunacy! I wonder what punishment I deserve for sitting in a house heated by a coal fire, breathing out CO2 and water vapour, and eating food that wasn't grown on my own doorstep?

      "No more harm to our Mother Earth! No more destruction of the planet! No more evictions from our territories! No more murder of the sons and daughters of the Mother Earth! No more criminalization of our struggles!"
      Absolutely... let's all have a free world where everything is perfect, including our climate (which we broke - apparently!) and everyone is safe, happy and has a good supply of organic food (which has been proven to be no more beneficial than other foods).

      Are these people dreaming?

      Small print: These are my own thoughts and I'm fairly sure they are on topic. However, JanforGore may see fit to have me censored again if she disagrees with me.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +2
      JanforGore  
    • IceKat:

      If I were truly that way then no one would know of you here and I would hardly have any threads on this site because you have pretty much infected many of them with your bile. You do nothing but despoil threads with your hateful prejudice just like your oil gods despoil this planet. You have already shown your disdain for indigenous and brownskinned peoples of this world. You are a disgrace as was this conference. And now you simply look just like a troll following me around because I dared to stand up to your disruptions and the petty personal attacks from the usuals here who never speak with substance. I am not intimidated by the likes of you nor did I do anything wrong, so get over it. How old are you anyway?

      The indigenous peoples of this world are the ones being SILENCED regarding solutions to this crisis exactly by people like YOU. They possess the wisdom necessary to effectively address this but are not being heard. Are you so outraged about that and the taking of their freedom TO LIVE? I bet not you hypocrite. They have been used, maligned, and had their resources plundered, drilled, polluted, stripped, and despoiled by the very people YOU support. So get ready for the fight to come, because the peoples of this world who have really been the victims of injustice aren't going to stand for it anymore. And please, take your psychobabble about "religion" somewhere else since you obviously don't possess the ability to even come close to what it means to truly respecting and understanding the symbiosis between Earth and mankind.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      "...because you have pretty much infected many of them with your bile"
      You mean I have presented counter-arguments? Because I have a different view of things doesn't mean I'm a bad person or wrong. I have no problem with you presenting your views - in fact I find most of them amusing - but it is only fair to allow differing points of view to be aired.

      The rest of your post is just an attempt to paint me as being the person I am not.

      The difference between us is I stand up for freedom of speech and for truth... and I'm fairly sure you are off topic here?

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • IceKat
    • -2
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      "The indigenous peoples of this world are the ones being SILENCED regarding solutions to this crisis exactly by people like YOU."

      Solutions to what crisis? You mean the crisis that is affecting places like the Maldives that are sinking due to rising sea levels, rising because we put CO2 into the atmosphere?
      If so, haven't you asked why the are building an airport on the coast? Is that being built with money provided by western countries that was taken from citizens of those countries in the form of green taxes?

      Or how about the story from Africa you posted some time ago. the one that showed poor people being swamped by desertification due to man pumping the atmosphere with CO2. Only when looking further did we discover that the desertification was being caused by the villagers themselves, and not some mythical man-made climate change.

      Why are you against technology that has helped make deserts more fertile, has made food production easier, and has brought local food production possible?

      Why do you want a change in the climate that might cause glaciers to re-freeze and halt their retreat? That would stop the supply of water to many people who rely upon melt-water for their needs, or is that what you want?

      You expect us to have some sort of pseudo-religious belief that your world is being destroyed by modern man and his evil ways. Why would you want to eradicate all the advances man has made in the past century? The life-span of humans has increased markedly and life has become more comfortable and pleasant. Why are you against this?

      You keep telling us the climate is broken, wrong or just not as it should be. You often tell us what we should be doing 'for' the climate to be corrected, but why do you never tell us what climate is the correct climate? What climactic state do you really want?
      Why don't you tell us, at what period was the climate 'right'?

      Why do you never address these points?

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • IceKat:

      Of course, leave out that I reposted it. Stop filling my threads with your putrescence. It makes you look petty. But at least you now know how a Climate Scientist feels.

    • 1 year ago
  • IceKat
    • -1
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      Yes you reposted the story, but you deleted the original story including all the comments. You delete comments you don't like or agree with.
      You are anti-free-speech.

      Why are you against free speech JanforGore?
      Why do you think your views are more important than that of others?
      What gives you the right to censor what other people write?

    • 1 year ago
  • lamborghini
  • IceKat
  • JanforGore
  • IceKat
    • -1
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      I know all about the post delete button but I would never dream of censoring other peoples' comments if I disagree with them.

      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

      But you, JanforGore are against free speech. That proves a number of things; that you have already lost the argument, that you are totalitarian in your views, and that you have even less credibility than I thought you had - and that is saying something.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • maasanova
    • -1
      maasanova  

    • Why aren't Westerners like people from the UK, Europe and the US suffering from the effects of climate change? Isn't all of this damaging Co2 supposedly coming from our developed nations?

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • IceKat
    • -1
      IceKat  
    • JanforGore:

      If you don't like the comments - delete them. That's what appears to be your latest tactic.
      JanforGore is against free-speech.

      Why don't you actually answer maasanova's point?

    • 1 year ago
  • lamborghini
  • lamborghini
  • IceKat
    • -1
      IceKat  
    • lamborghini:

      So if I write anything that goes against what JanforGore writes I'm harassing?

      Have I missed something here; is this a forum where people are invited to comment freely on stories that members of the public post, or am I only supposed to write comments that support wholeheartedly the views of the poster?

      This is interesting, though, because the only places where free speech is suppressed appears to be left-wing blogs and forums - those that actively promote the global warming agenda.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • IceKat
  • JanforGore
  • maasanova
    • -2
      maasanova  
    • JanforGore:

      I don't claim to know about the science of global warming and climate change, I have to rely on people that have done their research. But I though my question was a pretty fair question.

      You are pretty well informed on the matter, however you are biased against the dozens of scientists (not on the dole) who have come out and concluded that the global warming agenda is nothing but another version of wealth redistribution. Not only that, but it will continue to allow the casino economy to flourish under new derivatives and speculative-type markets.

      Plus this is the second failure in a row on global warming talks. I know that there is a lot of money invested in this new carbon infrastructure but even you now should realize that this thing is more of a sham than it ever was. I mean they aren't even trying to hide that it's a sham anymore.

    • 1 year ago
  • riverratt50
    • -1
      riverratt50  
    • IceKat:

      Oh, don't worry about it. She's a tree huggin', fish kisser that has no clue. She gets led down paths as a follower because leader have to be open minded thinkers. Al Gore was close minded and still is and so is she. You can't change that. She don't even know the benefits of co2 because all her tree huggers have told her it's. baaaadddd. like good sheeeeppp..

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • maasanova:

      And what do you think the post was about? Do you see me agreeing with the outcome? It doesn't however mean that global warming is a sham as you have tried to brainwash people into thinking. Those like you who do this in my mind are then no better than the corporations now using it to seek profit from it at the expense of those at the frontlines of the effects of it. We need truly sustainable agriculture, solar energy, reforestation and programs that forward true environmental and social justice through stewardship and not just economic schemes that faciiltate polluters getting richer while the climate continues to suffer because this is real. Unlike the propaganda spewed by those who rant that it isn't real simply to facilitate their own political agenda, and those who simply wish to only do what will fill their own pockets. You all belong in the same group of enablers as far as I am concerned.

    • 1 year ago
  • maasanova
    • -2
      maasanova  
    • JanforGore:

      Well I have to admit that you've come a long way on the issue of global warming and how politicians and special interest groups have come to hijack the movement and I commend you for that.

      However it's time to come full circle and realize that the movement was a sham from day one.

      The fact that they are dragging out these indigenous people is a crude display of typical leftist propaganda.

      "Approaches based on carbon offsetting, like REDD, will permit polluters to continue poisoning land, water, air, and our bodies, while doing nothing to stop the climate crisis. Indeed, approaches based on the commodification of biodiversity, CO2, forests, water, and other sacred elements will only encourage the buying and selling of our human and environmental rights."

      So are the issues that they have stopping the polluting of air, water, land or or stopping the climate crisis?

      See that right there is a prime example of how the issues are being clouded. It's just more muddying of the waters by infusing different issues into one confusing mess.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • riverratt50
    • 0
      riverratt50  
    • Image
    • JanforGore:

      It is better to deserve honors and not have them than to have them and not deserve them.”—Mark Twain.

      Twain’s observation is precisely the issue with the Nobel Peace Prizes given to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC are now completely discredited because the ‘scientists’ at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia controlled the data, the computer models and the press releases officially known as the Summary for Policymakers (SPM).

      Their prizes were obtained for work deliberately falsified then used for policies that creates unnecessary hardship rather than peace. Equally disgraceful is how one prizewinner, Al Gore, distorted and falsified the distortions and falsifications of the other prizewinner, the IPCC.

      Gore was already discredited, especially when his carbon footprint was found too big for his mouth. Other discredits include; the millions he made from his misdirection on carbon; failure to answer questions or participate in debate; character assassination of scientists who raised legitimate questions; the false claim that “the science is settled”, and failure to correct the major errors in his movie “An Inconvenient Truth”. Gore must have created a major dilemma for the IPCC and CRU.

      Yes it is a Hoax, you don't have to listen to her maasanova. She's just like her buddy Al. Can't admit when he is wrong and defeated by true science.

      http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/

    • 1 year ago
  • MrMxyzptlk
  • lamborghini
  • sffsmessiah
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  

    • What a profound disappointment. The mechanisms agreed to will only continue to prop up oil companies, agribusiness, and other corporations that will now invest in these mechanisms in order to continue polluting and spewing GHGs into the atmosphere by using carbon offsets in Indonesia (example) as a reason to then proclaim they are helping in the solution. Reports of indigenous and small groups being ostracized and not allowed to be heard here is also very distressing. This is not what a climate summit should be all about.

      The developing countries are already feeling the effects of climate change, and the indigenous people of these countries have the wisdom and solutions to best deal with this but they are being silenced and co opted by the Goldman Sachs of the world in collusion with the banks and governments looking to use climate change through the forests, and the rivers, and the air as a commodity while doing little to work to decrease GHG emissions to levels scientists are warning we must heed.

      Only through the human species looking at this from a moral perspective in line with economics and superceding politics will we be able to work to now adapt to the changes coming and those already upon us. We can only hope that the lessons learned both here and in Copenhagen serve as a spark for more grassroots action that can circumvent the false solutions put before us. To expect the very institutions such as the World Bank that precipitated this crisis to now solve it in continuing the status quo is ludicrous.

      We need to place a fee on the pollution at the source (instead of rewarding those making it through CDM) through a revenue neutral carbon tax that spurs transition to renewable energy sources thus decreasing GHG emissions adequately and making polluters accountable while not hurting consumers and or those who live a world away.

    • 1 year ago
  • Dagum
    • -1
      Dagum  
    • JanforGore:

      This is what it was all about to people at the top of the movement from the get go.

      Grass roots movements are easily hijacked by the elites who use the movements to serve their own power grabbing agenda. The grass root members advocate and work hard to achieve the elites and leaders agenda, thinking it is their own. They don't realize until too late that they were used.

      See the teaparty for further illustration.

    • 1 year ago
  • lamborghini
  • JanforGore
more from Community:
from the community

top videos