Tigerman, I will repeat your own quote for you since you seem to have missed the irony the first time-- the essential contradiction of your "position".
You say: Fear is the emotion all political causes play on.
and then you quote:
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and hence clamourous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L Mencken
So you missed my point. You, more than any other person on this entire forum, are obsessed with an imaginary hobgoblin. "Government evil! Government bad! Laws oppress us! Everyone who disagrees with my anti-government view supports Hitler or Stalin."
I would suggest broaden your views a little. You're kind of obsessed.
There is global warming, but it is better called climate change, and it has been going on since the start of time- and there is so much controversial scientific views- There are scientists that think it may be partly due to the "fact" that the Sun's rays vary in intensity, the Earth is tipping on its axis slightly,that there are normal fluctuations over time, blaah, blaah, blaah!
There has been articles written that even if all the countries met their Kyota ageements, that would not affect the Earth's warming. The other thread has probably 20 pages of differing views. In the National Post on Friday- 1) Al Gore banned the media from making notes at his Montreal speech, and told them they were not welcome at his Toronto speach. 2) Data collected by weather satellites since 1979 "little evidence of atmospheric warming- zero 3) There is no compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes are underway. Perceptions of increased extreme weather events are potentially due to increased reporting. There is too little data to reliably confirm these perceptions. It is all a load of bull !
What one should concern themselves with is the poisons that are being spewed into the atmosphere!
[quote][cite] wolfboy:[/cite]Tigerman, I will repeat your own quote for you since you seem to have missed the irony the first time-- the essential contradiction of your "position".
You say: Fear is the emotion all political causes play on.
and then you quote:
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and hence clamourous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L Mencken
So you missed my point. You, more than any other person on this entire forum, are obsessed with an imaginary hobgoblin. "Government evil! Government bad! Laws oppress us! Everyone who disagrees with my anti-government view supports Hitler or Stalin."
I would suggest broaden your views a little. You're kind of obsessed.[/quote]
How many bodies do you figure thse government of Canada is responsible for this year alone?
The state must have murdered 50,000 people in Afghanistan alone that we had no business killing.
There is nothing imaginary about that.
How many people will be arrested and have thier lives ruined over what they choose as their own medicines?
There is nothing imaginary about that.
A Manitoban went to jail for selling wheat to the wrong person, there is nothing imaginary about that.
That the government of Canada collects tax money at the point of agun, there is nothing imaginary about that.
The government is the most prolific killer history knows, there is nothing imaginary about that.
So you can live like a serf on your knees bowing to your betters if you like, for myself, I choose another path in life. I choose liberty.
[quote][cite] rosencrentz:[/cite]There has been articles written that even if all the countries met their Kyota ageements, that would not affect the Earth's warming. The other thread has probably 20 pages of differing views. In the National Post on Friday- 1) Al Gore banned the media from making notes at his Montreal speech, and told them they were not welcome at his Toronto speach. 2) Data collected by weather satellites since 1979 "little evidence of atmospheric warming- zero 3) There is no compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes are underway. Perceptions of increased extreme weather events are potentially due to increased reporting. There is too little data to reliably confirm these perceptions. It is all a load of bull ![/quote]
I'm afraid that you're the one getting a load of bull if you believe what the National Post writes about climate change. Seriously, it's just as biased as something put out by Greenpeace.
So I can't speak to your first point (although given Al Gore's love of publicity, I have a hard time believing it), but the second two points are totally wrong. Was this an op-ed piece in the Post by any chance?
Anyways, if you want to look at the facts (untainted by a political agenda), may I suggest RealClimate - a site written by climate scientists for those interested in the actual facts?
The National Post is probably the least objective mainstream news media in Canada. Every day for three years or so, their headline was "Kyoto to Cost Jobs" or "Economy to Suffer Under Kyoto", etc.
And when the recent war between Israel and Palestine broke out, their front page contained a picture of several Israeli flags flapping in front of the sun, with the headlne "UN Supports Israel."
Now, regardless of your political views, there's nothing objective about that. If you get your info about global warming from Michael Coren and Robert Fulford then you're getting one very biased side of the issue. The side that says: "Everything's Fine! Keep consuming!"
And as Zander points out, if you're so concerned about the poisons being spewed, you might make the easy connection between that and the massive problems with our natural environment.
And Tigerman, you're so out there it's pointless to debate or refute your ideas. Yep, gov't racks up the body counts--and so do your freedom-loving heroes in industry. If you understood anything about the world beyond your narrow views, you would realize that gov't and industry are in it so deep that they're one and the same-- Paul Martin and Dick Cheney being the two easiest examples. But hey, best just to repeat your one single mantra and feel like you're smarter than the rest of us sheep.
[quote][cite] wolfboy:[/cite]The National Post is probably the least objective mainstream news media in Canada. Every day for three years or so, their headline was "Kyoto to Cost Jobs" or "Economy to Suffer Under Kyoto", etc.
And when the recent war between Israel and Palestine broke out, their front page contained a picture of several Israeli flags flapping in front of the sun, with the headlne "UN Supports Israel."
Now, regardless of your political views, there's nothing objective about that. If you get your info about global warming from Michael Coren and Robert Fulford then you're getting one very biased side of the issue. The side that says: "Everything's Fine! Keep consuming!"
And as Zander points out, if you're so concerned about the poisons being spewed, you might make the easy connection between that and the massive problems with our natural environment.
And Tigerman, you're so out there it's pointless to debate or refute your ideas. Yep, gov't racks up the body counts--and so do your freedom-loving heroes in industry. If you understood anything about the world beyond your narrow views, you would realize that gov't and industry are in it so deep that they're one and the same-- Paul Martin and Dick Cheney being the two easiest examples. But hey, best just to repeat your one single mantra and feel like you're smarter than the rest of us sheep.[/quote]
Different does not mean smarter. Einstein was a very brilliant man, but he had no special insight on how to raise children or how to govern planet Earth.
It all depends on what appeals to the individual and liberty appeals to me a lot more than government does.
For instance, I agree wholeheartedly that big business and big government go hand in hand. Why do you think I call for the end of government intervention in the economy? What does business want from government? Pretty simple, they want every nickle they can extract from that pool of money the government gathers through taxation which amounts to 50% of the producitive labor of every woker in the country.
And if that pool of money didn't exist?
Businessmen would have to scheme of ways to extract it from the citizens without having the coercive force of the state to lend them a helping hand.
And it's not like the ideology I support has no base. There are lots of Libertarians and more swell the ranks with every government failure.
Watch Lou Dobbs tommorrrow night.
Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, Republican of Texas will be his guest. Ron is testing the waters for a run at the Republican Nomination for President.
Ron thinks crazy things like that the government should only do what the Constitution authorizes.
Ron voted against the war in Iraq on every turn.
Here is what a lot of what I would have to say to the Country would sound like if I were ever elected.
Have a look at this man's record. He is likely the only person in Congress who can go toe to toe with the Chairman of the Fed in understanding economic nuiances.
The man stands for a "gold standard" so that the government can not just print money and inflate away the earning power of savers.
Ron Paul is a Jeffersonian and the best hope that liberty has had for better than 100 years. Politicians like Dr. Paul are few and far between.
Well, I like Jefferson and Emerson and Thoreau and all those old-time Yank freethinkers, though I don't know much about this Paul fellow.
I'm very suspicious of the idea, though, that change can be wrought through government--the idea that electing another leader will fix things. That's why I'm always so suspicious of party politics--it confuses "rooting for the home team" with a real, reasoned approach to how change can be created in the world. Not that you're suggesting that view w/ your ideas re Paul, though...
And I committed the dreaded "AD HOMINEM" fallacy of logic, contending with your character rather than your ideas. D'oh.
I think if we keep doing this long enough we'll become skilled debaters.