From your article...


Every bit of that is disingenuous. Every bit of that is a lie. Why?

Because it has ALL been both mandated by the gov't and subsidized by US taxpayer $$, such as the gov't "phasing out incandescent light bulbs" and the Obama administration intentionally targeting and destroying the profitability of the US coal industry via gov't regulations....which the propagandist who wrote this tripe so conveniently left out of his screed.

None of that happened due to free market forces. None of that happened with private investment money, and in fact billions in taxpayer $$ has been lost due to incompetence, fraud, and waste (see: Solyndra) along the way.

But it IS oh-so very typical and demonstrative of how the lying, hypocritical fraudsters mash their thumb down on the scale of the debate and claim "we're winning!".

As stated, "climate change" fraud is ALL about the $$ to be made, it's not about "saving the planet".



You wanna know why my voice is credible? Because we skeptics stand to gain exactly nothing from our skepticism, save preserving the truth.

You wanna know why the fear-mongering warmulits aren't credible? Because they and their green lobby stands to make billions, if not trillions, off of their lies, collusion, and fraud, plus they get to pretend they are "saving the planet" and pat themselves on the back in the process.

Next?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Just one big, fat, disgusting fly in that ointment...

....unlike warmulist theory, use of tobacco in causing cancer was medically (ie. scientifically) proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Moreover, there was no profit to be made from bringing down Big Tobacco, unlike "green alternative energy" (which aren't so "green" after all....see: how electric cars are made and related manufacturing by-product toxicities. Speaking of, there's a reason why electric car batteries are made in China, and it's not just because they are cheaper. Indeed, it's funny how the greenies never mention a peep about pollution in other countries vs. all the CO2 they spew about the USA...much the same as US feminists don't ever say a peep about China's or the ME's abuses of women, or how leftist musical acts will boycott NC because of religious laws but will happily continue to play countries where homosexuals are regularly oppressed, to cite yet another of the plethora of leftist hypocrisies).

Meanwhile, anthropomorphic climate change is unproven scientific theory. Moreover, even it it was ultimately proven to be true beyond any reasonable doubt, it will be even more of a stretch to prove that it would be the sole cause of any of the fear-mongering predictions made over it, unlike smoking tobacco.

Of course (and this can't be overstated), unlike bringing down Big Tobacco, there are huge and on-going profits to be made in bringing down "Big Oil".

Keep trying. I'm having fun destroying your arguments and demonstrating how scummy the "green movement" and it's leftist progenitors really are.

By the way, anyone reading this thread will not fail to notice your inability and refusal to respond to the criticisms of your alarmist's progaganda, Fly.

Keep ****ing into that wind!

lol

What anyone who is able to think critically will see is that your assertions are so demonstrably false that they don't warrant a response. Here is just one example.

Makes you wonder why the deniers funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010, and why all those politicians are getting those campaign contributions from fossil fuel special interest groups.

Any more pilot job openings at Koch Industries?

AGW skeptics get a lot of help from celebrity hypocrites with energy-hog airplanes and houses, "not in my backyard" windmill advocates, and well-connected Solyndra boondogglers. Perhaps a good cause should not be discredited by untrustworthy advocates, but that's how it works in the real world. People don't trust the other side either, so they will choose to do nothing.

are you taking about one person, scientists, or what? You are making a lot of generalizations that won't hold up to scrutiny. You are also associating things that have no relationship. Once again, what is your basis for saying that a=b? (Someone flys a jet, therefore climate change is not true)??