-- Climate Deniers’ Paris Event Sparsely Attended, Journalists Kicked Out, by Nick Surgey

-- Apocalyptic Capitalism, by Chris Hedges

object
The Koch Brothers & Their Amazing Climate Change Denial Machine

Climate Deniers' Anthem

In a new video spoof by our friends at Funny or Die, infamous conservative billionaires, the Koch brothers, pay celebrities to sing a climate change deniers' anthem to rival "We Are the World."

See who you recognize then share the video with friends to help fight back against the Koch brothers and all those blocking bold action on climate change.

Statistics: Posted by admin — Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:11 am

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:54 am

UNREPENTANT: not sorry for having done wrong <she was unrepentant about selling her ex-boyfriend's prized guitar>. Synonyms impenitent, shameless, unashamed, unrepentant. Related Words: compassionless, cruel, merciless, pitiless, ruthless, unmerciful; evil, immoral, iniquitous, nefarious, reprobate, unregenerate, unrighteous, vicious, vile, villainous, wicked; callous, cold-blooded, hard-hearted, heartless, inhuman, inhumane, obdurate, soulless, unfeeling.

-- Unrepentant, by Merriam Webster Dictionary

-- Demeaning as a Lifestyle: The Sadistic Aggressive, by Dr. Simon

New light on the putative value of intelligence dossiers issued by Tony Blair’s office in Number 10 Downing Street was not long in coming. In September 2002, Blair published amid great fanfare his dossier purporting to demonstrate that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq currently possessed weapons of mass destruction. This was entitled “Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception, and Intimidation,” and it was clearly crafted to provide a pretext for waging unprovoked and aggressive war against Iraq. This dossier was exposed as a fraud in two distinct waves of demystification. The first exposure took place in February 2003, when it emerged that entire sections of this report, which had been billed as the most up-to-date evaluation that could be offered by the very formidable capabilities of MI-6 and the rest of the British intelligence machine, had simply been lifted, plagiarized without attribution, from older documents in the public domain. The Iraq dossier had been concocted by Blair and his media guru Alistair Campbell, a figure who combined the worst of image-mongers like Michael Deaver and Karl Rove, using materials provided by British intelligence. Parts of Blair’s dossier had been stolen from articles written by Sean Boyne of Jane’s Intelligence Review, who was horrified by the nefarious use to which his work had been put. “I don’t like to think that anything I wrote has been used as an argument for war. I am concerned because I am against the war,” complained Boyne. Another source from which Blair had lifted material verbatim was a thesis entitled “Iraq’s Security and Intelligence Network,” published in September 2002 by a graduate student, Ibrahim al-Marashi, a California resident. Al-Marashi was equally indignant, commenting that “this is wholesale deception. How can the British public trust the government if it is up to this sort of tricks? People will treat any other information they publish now with a lot of skepticism from now on.” And not just from now on; it is our contention here that this disbelief in regard to Tony Blair’s work product should also be applied retrospectively.

The British Parliament was appalled by Blair’s mendacity, which was so crude that the coded titles of the Microsoft Word documents that made up the dossier had been allowed to remain visible on the Number 10 Downing Street web site. Many pointed to Alistair Hamilton as the dervish of spin behind the entire sordid operation. Former Labour Party Defense Minister and current Member of Parliament Peter Kilfoyle observed that Blair’s deception merely “adds to the general impression that what we have been treated to is a farrago of half-truths. I am shocked that on such thin evidence that we should be trying to convince the British people that this war is worth fighting." Labour MP Glenda Jackson added “It is another example of how the Government is attempting to mislead the country and Parliament. And of course to mislead is a Parliamentary euphemism for lying.” (Daily Mirror, February 8, 2003)

Blair’s nonchalance in cribbing together dossiers on subjects of vast importance also attracted the barbs of British wits. AheadOfNews.com spoofed Blair’s plagiarized Iraq dossier by writing that “a spokesman for Prime Minister Tony Blair acknowledged recently that the report, ‘Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception, and Intimidation,’ had been cobbled together from a variety of sources, including old term papers, Readers Digest, and several tabloids. John Miller, Undersecretary for Cutting- and-Pasting, explained that ‘plagiarized’ sections of the report included spelling errors, such as ‘weapons of mass distraction,’ and ‘Untied States’ found in the originals. 'Our deceptions might have succeeded,’ he said, ‘except for our bloody incompetent proofreaders.'” (February 12, 2003) Blair’s Iraq dossier was an international laughingstock, but that had not prevented Colin Powell from praising it in his infamous speech to the United Nations Security Council.

But Blair’s dossier was in the end no laughing matter: it contributed to the deaths of perhaps 15,000 people in Iraq within a year. It also brought tragedy to one of the British intelligence officials who had collaborated in its creation.

In June, 2003, when the Iraq war had already begun to go badly for the aggressors, BBC News broadcast a story by correspondent Barnaby Mason reporting that Blair and Campbell had personally supervised the concoction of the Iraq WMD dossier, sending proposed drafts back to the Joint Intelligence Committee “six to eight times” to be “sexed up” through the addition of more lurid and sensational details. One of these details was thought to be Blair’s fantastic claim that Iraq had WMD which could be launched within 45 minutes. Blair delivered this warning in such a way as to suggest that Iraq would be capable of striking the UK within 45 minutes, despite the fact that Iraq possessed no delivery systems capable of doling this.

The response of the Blair regime to this report was to promote a witch-hunt to ferret out the source inside the government who had leaked such embarrassing material to Barnaby Mason. Officials of the British Defense Ministry allowed journalists to read them lists of persons suspected of being the leaker, and were willing to confirm the identity of their prime suspect as soon as the journalists mentioned his name. In this way, the Defense Ministry in effect betrayed one of its own employees, Dr. David Kelly. A few days later Kelly was found dead in a forest near his home, with his wrists slashed. His death was quickly ruled a suicide. After Kelly’s death, a UN diplomat recalled that he had asked Kelly back in February 2003 what would happen if Tony Blair went through with his plan to join Bush in attacking Iraq. “I will probably be found dead in the woods,” was Kelly’s prophetic reply.

-- 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA, by Webster Griffin Tarpley

Gridlock: the stoppage of free vehicular movement in an urban area because key intersections are blocked by traffic. 2. the blocking of an intersection by vehicular traffic entering the intersection but unable to pass through it. 3. any situation in which nothing can move or proceed in any direction: a financial gridlock due to high interest rates.

-- Gridlock, by dictionary.reference.com

This raises the question of the violent revolt against the universal homogeneous state, which is what Strauss regards as inevitable and desirable: "Yet there is no reason for despair as long as human nature has not been conquered completely, i.e., as long as sun and man still generate man. There will always be men (andres) who will revolt against a state which is destructive of humanity or in which there is no longer a possibility of noble action or of great deeds." (Strauss 209)

When the real men revolt against too much peace, progress, and prosperity, what will be their program? Strauss: "They may be forced into a mere negation of the universal and homogeneous state, into a negation not enlightened by any positive goal, into a nihilistic negation. While perhaps doomed to failure, that nihilist revolution may be the only great and noble deed that is possible once the universal and homogeneous state has become inevitable. But no one can know whether it will fail or succeed. (Strauss 209, emphasis added)

What can be understood by nihilistic negation and nihilist revolution? In the nineteenth century, nihilism was an ideology of terrorism; the crazed bomb-throwers who assassinated statesmen and rulers across Europe and America (including President McKinley) were atheists, anarchists and nihilists. In the twentieth century, the nihilist revolution was synonymous with some of the most extreme factions of fascism and Nazis. "Long live death!" was a slogan of some of them. With these lines, Strauss has opened the door to fascism, murder, mayhem, war, genocide, and most emphatically to terrorism. And he is not shy about spelling this out.

-- 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA, by Webster Griffin Tarpley

Friends,

There are times when words are hard to come by, and when you find them they feel inadequate.

I’m writing you from France, with a heavy heart. Following Friday's attacks in Paris, the mood here is tense. People are angry, and many are afraid. Many of our staff members are in Paris to get ready for the climate talks in a couple of weeks, and they are feeling the pain of this moment sharply.

I am heartbroken -- for the lives lost in Paris, and for those lost in Beirut and Baghdad, which also suffered devastating attacks late last week. Clearly the world is hurting in many places right now.

As we’ve struggled to find the right words and the right response to Friday night’s attacks, one thing rises to the top for me:

The upcoming Paris Climate Summit is, in a sense, a peace summit -- perhaps the most important peace summit that has ever been held.

We need global solidarity more than ever right now, and that is, really, what this movement is all about. Even as climate change fans the flames of conflict in many parts of the world -- through drought, displacement, and other compounding factors -- a global movement that transcends borders and cultural differences is rising up to confront this common existential threat.

Let’s hang on to that solidarity and love. Let’s learn from it. Especially at a time like this.

Friday night’s events were horrific, and we must clearly and unequivocally condemn such violence. Their aftermath has also been frightening though, and we should stand in equal condemnation of the instinct to meet violence with more violence. It is a cycle as old as it is ugly: after tragedy comes the rush to judgement, the scapegoating, the xenophobia and Islamophobia, the blame.

There is a real danger here that those already impacted by both the climate crisis and the wars that are so intimately bound up with it -- migrants, refugees, poor communities, and communities of color -- will be further marginalized.

If there is a thing we must resist, it is our own fear and short-sightedness. No government should use a moment like this to increase the burden of hatred and fear in the world -- sowing suspicion, calling for war, and reducing people’s civil liberties in the name of security. This is a mistake we've seen too often before, compounding tragedy with more tragedy.

The Paris Climate Summit, scheduled to begin in just a couple of weeks, will proceed. The government is promising heightened security measures, which is understandable but also worrisome.

We don't yet know what Friday night's events mean for our work in Paris. The coalition on the ground is committed to working with the French authorities to see if there is a way for the big planned march and other demonstrations to safely go forward. We fully share their concerns about public safety -- just as we fully oppose unnecessary crackdowns on civil liberties and minority populations.

We do know that this global movement cannot and will not be stopped:

The Global Climate March -- a worldwide day of action scheduled for November 28th and 29th -- will also proceed, no matter what. We can think of few better responses to violence and terror than this movement's push for peace and hope.

We hope you’ll join us at the end of the month.

There couldn't be a more important time to work for climate justice, and the peace it can help bring.

With love and determination,

Nico and team at 350.org

-- Paris, by Nicolas Haeringer - 350.org

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the Commission's view—honest, equitable, and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine.

-- Fairness Doctrine, by Wikipedia

Consider for a moment just how terrifying it must be to live life as a true believer on the right. Reality is scary enough, but the alternative reality inhabited by people who watch Glenn Beck, listen to Rush Limbaugh, or think Michele Bachmann isn't a joke must be nothing less than horrifying.

Research suggests that conservatives are, on average, more susceptible to fear than those who identify themselves as liberals. Looking at MRIs of a large sample of young adults last year, researchers at University College London discovered that “greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala” ($$). The amygdala is an ancient brain structure that's activated during states of fear and anxiety. (The researchers also found that “greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex” – a region in the brain that is believed to help people manage complexity.)

That has implications for our political world. In a recent interview, Chris Mooney, author of The Republican Brain, explained, “The amygdala plays the same role in every species that has an amygdala. It basically takes over to save your life. It does other things too, but in a situation of threat, you cease to process information rationally and you're moving automatically to protect yourself.”

The finding also fits with other data. Mooney discusses studies conducted at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in which self-identified liberals and conservatives were shown images – apolitical images – that were intended to elicit different emotions. Writing at Huffington Post, Mooney explains that “there were images that caused fear and disgust -- a spider crawling on a person's face, maggots in an open wound -- but also images that made you feel happy: a smiling child, a bunny rabbit.” The researchers noted two differences between the groups. The researchers studied their subjects' reactions by tracking their eye movements and monitoring their “skin conductivity” – a measure of one's autonomic nervous system's reaction to stimuli.

Conservatives showed much stronger skin responses to negative images, compared with the positive ones. Liberals showed the opposite. And when the scientists turned to studying eye gaze or "attentional" patterns, they found that conservatives looked much more quickly at negative or threatening images, and [then] spent more time fixating on them.

Mooney concludes that this “new research suggests [that] conservatism is largely a defensive ideology -- and therefore, much more appealing to people who go through life sensitive and highly attuned to aversive or threatening aspects of their environments.”

-- Why is the Conservative Brain More Fearful? The Alternate Reality Right-Wingers Inhabit is Terrifying, by Joshua Holland

Being a captain of industry is supposed to mean never having to admit a mistake—swearing they are as innocent as a new-born baby.

-- Republicans and Democrats: What's the Difference? by Pete Dolack

HUSTLE: transitive verb. 1a : jostle, shove; b : to convey forcibly or hurriedly; c : to urge forward precipitately; 2a : to obtain by energetic activity <hustle up new customers>; b : to sell something to or obtain something from by energetic and especially underhanded activity <hustling the suckers>; c : to sell or promote energetically and aggressively <hustling a new product>; d : to lure less skillful players into competing against oneself at (a gambling game) <hustle pool>

-- Hustle, by Merriam Webster

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:54 am

-- Karl Rove Returns to Oz, by Charles Carreon

-- Exxon Mobil Investigated for Possible Climate Change Lies by New York Attorney General, by Justin Gillis and Clifford Krauss

Now only an expert can deal with the problem
Because half the problem is seeing the problem
And only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

So if there's no expert dealing with the problem
It's really actually twice the problem
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

Now in America we like solutions
We like solutions to problems
And there's so many companies that offer solutions
Companies with names like Pet Solution
The Hair Solution. The Debt Solution. The World Solution. The Sushi Solution.
Companies with experts ready to solve the problems.
Cause only an expert can see there's a problem
And only an expert can deal with the problem
Only and expert can deal with the problem

Now let's say you're invited to be on Oprah
And you don't have a problem
But you want to go on the show, so you need a problem
So you invent a problem
But if you're not an expert in problems
You're probably not going to invent a very plausible problem
And so you're probably going to get nailed
You're going to get exposed
You're going to have to bow down and apologize
And beg for the public's forgiveness.
Cause only an expert can see there's a problem
And only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

Now on these shows, the shows that try to solve your problems
The big question is always How can I get control?
How can I take control?
But don't forget this is a question for the regular viewer
The person who's barely getting by.
The person who's watching shows about people with problems
The person who's part of the 60% of the U.S. population
1.3 weeks away, 1.3 pay checks away from homelessness.
In other words, a person with problems.
So when experts say, Let's get to the root of the problem
Let's take control of the problem
So if you take control of the problem you can solve the problem.
Now often this doesn't work at all because the situation is completely out of control.
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

So who are these experts?
Experts are usually self-appointed people or elected officials
Or people skilled in sales techniques, trained or self-taught
To focus on things that might be identified as problems.
Now sometimes these things are not actually problems.
But the expert is someone who studies the problem
And tries to solve the problem.
The expert is someone who carries malpractice insurance.
Because often the solution becomes the problem.
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

Now sometimes experts look for weapons.
And sometimes they look everywhere for weapons.
And sometimes when they don't find any weapons
Sometimes other experts say, If you haven't found any weapons
It doesn't mean there are no weapons.
And other experts looking for weapons find things like cleaning fluids.
And refrigerator rods. And small magnets. And they say,
These things may look like common objects to you
But in our opinion, they could be weapons.
Or they could be used to make weapons.
Or they could be used to ship weapons.
Or to store weapons.
Cause only an expert can see they might be weapons
And only an expert can see they might be problems.
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

And sometimes, if it's really really really hot.
And it's July in January.
And there's no more snow and huge waves are wiping out cities.
And hurricanes are everywhere.
And everyone knows it's a problem.
But if some of the experts say it's no problem
And other experts claim it's no problem
Or explain why it's no problem
Then it's simply not a problem.
But when an expert says it's a problem
And makes a movie and wins an Oscar about the problem
Then all the other experts have to agree that it is most likely a problem.
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

And even though a county can invade another country.
And flatten it. And ruin it. And create havoc and civil war in that other country
If the experts say that it's not a problem
And everyone agrees that they're experts good at seeing problems
Then invading that country is simply not a problem.
And if a country tortures people
And holds citizens without cause or trial and sets up military tribunals
This is also not a problem.
Unless there's an expert who says it's the beginning of a problem.
Cause only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

Only an expert can see there's a problem
And see the problem is half the problem
And only an expert can deal with the problem
Only an expert can deal with the problem

-- Only An Expert, by Laurie Anderson

-- The Malleus Maleficarum, by Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger

The sociopath will always accuse you of doing the very thing that they are guilty of themselves. They do this to deflect the attention from them. Examples of this are: Accusing you of cheating; Accusing you of being dishonest or lying; Accusing you of talking about them; Accusing you of doing whatever it is that they are guilty of themselves. The sociopath has a bizarre ability to be able to make YOU feel guilty and feel like you have to defend yourself… for things that he has done. You see the sociopath is actually fairly intelligent. He knows that whilst you are busy defending yourself, and proving your innocence, you will be confused, and will forget about the real issue, the truth that you are close to uncovering about the sociopath.

Bullshit Bingo: It’s all a game to the sociopath. Life is a game. With little inside themselves, they spend most of their life playing stupid mind games. Accusing you of things that they have done themselves is something that they will do over and over again. The result for you the victim is: Feeling confused; Feeling violated; Feeling misunderstood; Feeling unheard; Feeling guilty. Likely he will also say ‘everyone thinks, or says….’ – so you feel isolated too. Afterwards, after wasted hours protesting your innocence, you think: How did that happen? The truth is right there. You are relieved that the constant questions and accusations have stopped. There is peace again. Once again, the sociopath has managed to manipulate the situation, and deflect blame back onto you. You have spent another few hours of your time, stressed, anxious and defending your corner. You feel that yet again there was yet another problem that didn’t need to be there. Some other issue, that didn’t need to be there. But for the sociopath, it isn’t like that. He is playing a game. Playing a game with your mind and your heart.

There are two things that are important to the sociopath: Winning; Control. If you were to catch him out in a lie, he would neither win, or be in control. So he will do anything that he can do, to win the game, and control the game. That is all that it is. The sociopath probably doesn’t even realise the effect that this has on you. After all, he never thinks about your needs, and this is in terms of both good and bad things. He, like always, is thinking about himself, not about you, your welfare or your needs. It is all just a game. A stupid, mindless game. That could continue for the rest of your life if you let it.

Isn’t it time to move forward? To stop playing the stupid game with the sociopath, who could play forever. If you let him. The sociopath doesn’t feel too much, but he does feel satisfaction from: Winning; Being in control. Maybe right now it is time to stop playing the game. To finish the game. Stop playing. It is now time to focus on you. On your needs and your welfare. After all. when you were with the sociopath, so much of your time and energy was wasted, defending yourself, and playing pointless mind games, nobody was taking care of your needs. Endless stress and endless drama. that is the relationship with the sociopath. There comes a time, when the only thing to do, is to put in place no contact rules, stick to them, and focus on you, and loving yourself and creating your own beautiful world. A world where there isn’t someone constantly trying to pull you apart. You deserve so much better

-- The Sociopath Will Always Accuse YOU of What They are Guilty of Themselves, by datingasociopath.com

The last contextual feature is humor. Viewers interpret violence that is cast in a humorous light as less devastating and less harmful (Gunter, 1985). Humor also may seem like a reward for violence. For these reasons, the presence of humor in a violent scene can increase the chances that viewers will imitate or learn aggression from such a portrayal. Indeed, studies have revealed that exposure to violence in a humorous setting increases aggressive behavior (Baron, 1978; Berkowitz, 1970). Humor can also desensitize viewers to the seriousness of violence (Jablonski & Zillmann, 1995).

-- Children and Media Violence, edited by Ulla Carlsson and Cecilia von Feilitzen

AD HOMINEM (ABUSIVE)
argumentum ad hominem

(also known as: personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, needling [form of], refutation by character)

Description: Attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making.

Logical Form: Person 1 is claiming Y; Person 1 is a moron; Therefore, Y is not true.

Example #1: My opponent suggests that lowering taxes will be a good idea -- this is coming from a woman who eats a pint of Ben and Jerry’s each night!

Explanation: The fact that the woman loves her ice cream, has nothing to do with the lowering of taxes, and therefore, is irrelevant to the argument. Ad hominem attacks are usually made out of desperation when one cannot find a decent counter argument.

Example #2: Tony wants us to believe that the origin of life was an “accident”. Tony is a godless SOB who has spent more time in jail than in church, so the only information we should consider from him is the best way to make license plates.
Explanation: Tony may be a godless SOB. Perhaps he did spend more time in the joint than in church, but all this is irrelevant to his argument or truth of his claim as to the origin of life.

Exception: When the attack on the person is relevant to the argument, it is not a fallacy. In our first example, if the issue being debated was the elimination of taxes only on Ben and Jerry’s ice cream, then pointing out her eating habits would be strong evidence of a conflict of interest.

Tip: When others verbally attack you, take it as a compliment to the quality of your argument. It is usually a sign of desperation on their part.

Variation: Needling is attempting to make the other person angry, taking attention off of the argument and perhaps even making the other person look foolish.

-- Ad Hominem (Abusive), by logicallyfallacious.com

-- Don't Panic Over Predictions of Climate Doom -- Get the Facts on James Hansen, by Marc Morano

But the prosecutor, Christiane Burkheiser, dismissed Fritzl's last-minute confession as a cynical ploy to win a more lenient sentence. She said: "I don't see it as a confession but rather as an attempt to improve his position, to gain advantage through a show of weakness. "At the last curtain call in the last act of this drama he is showing his true face in trying to exploit people's gullibility. Do not be deceived. Do not be manipulated."

-- Josef Fritzl Burst Into Tears and Changed Plea After Seeing Daughter Elisabeth in Court, by Gordon Rayner and Caroline Gammell

-- Think Sarcasm is Funny? Think Again: Sarcasm is Really Just Hostility Disguised as Humor, by Clifford N. Lazarus, Ph.D.

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:53 am

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:53 am

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:53 am

His fellow scientists call him a fraud, a charlatan and a showman, but Fred Singer calls himself "a realist."

Singer, an 84-year-old Princeton-trained physicist, is the grandfather of the global warming skeptics who dispute the established scientific consensus that global warming is real, that it is caused by the pollution humans are pumping into the atmosphere, and that it will be catastrophic if measures are not taken immediately.

"All bunk," Singer told ABC News in his characteristically blunt fashion. "I'm not really looking for popularity, you know."

Singer seems to enjoy being provocative.

"I hate to tell you this, but polar bears like to eat tiny little seal pups," he told a conference of global warming skeptics recently.

Singer does not deny the planet is warming, but says man is not the cause, and argues, against overwhelming scientific evidence, that a warmer planet will actually be beneficial for mankind and other species on the planet.

Polar bears, though, are not likely to benefit. They are starving because the Arctic ice cap is shrinking, which is cutting them off from seal populations, and some scientists have suggested they will be extinct in the wild before the end of this century if the warming trend is not reversed.

This is not the first time Singer has set himself against mainstream scientific opinion. He has also challenged the dangers of second-hand smoke, toxic waste and nuclear winter.

"He's kind of a career skeptic," said Kert Davies, a global warming specialist at Greenpeace. "He believes that environmental problems are all overblown and he's made a career on being that voice."

Davies says skeptics like Singer, many of them funded for years by the oil and coal industry, have been able to delay government action on global warming by a decade or more by convincing the public through a disinformation campaign that there was an ongoing debate among scientists about global warming.

"That's how people will remember Fred Singer, as someone who tried to slow down the reaction to global warming," Davies said. "And in the end that is going to cost lost lives, lost species and major economic damage around the world."

Singer responds by asking, "Suppose the other side is wrong.... They're forcing us to make tremendous economic sacrifices that will force people into poverty in the world, make life miserable for our children and grandchildren."

But scientists say there is no "other side." The debate about global warming is over, they say.

ABC News showed Singer's most recent report on global warming to climate scientists from NASA, from Stanford University and from Princeton. They dismissed it as "fabricated nonsense."

Singer insists he is not on the payroll of the energy industry, but admits he once accepted an unsolicited check from Exxon for $10,000.

-- Global Warming Denier: Fraud or "Realist"?, by Dan Harris, Felicia Biberica, Elizabeth Stuart and Nils Kongshaug

-- My Adventures in the Ozone Layer, by S. Fred Singer
-- Fred Singer, by Wikipedia

I have left environmental activists till last. There are well-intentioned individuals who are sincerely concerned about what they perceive as a critical danger to humanity. But many of the professionals share the same incentives as government bureaucrats: status, salaries, perks, and power. And then there are probably those with hidden agendas of their own -- not just to “save the environment” but to change our economic system. The telltale signs are the attack on the corporation, the profit motive, and the new technologies.

Some of these “coercive utopians” are socialists, some are technology-hating Luddites; most have a great desire to regulate -- on as large a scale as possible.

-- My Adventures in the Ozone Layer, by S. Fred Singer

-- The Rise of a "Democratic" Fascism, by John Pilger

[Kim Jong Il] Just imagine it.
All around the world, there will be massive exprosions.
With nobody to guide them,
the people will break out into panic and rioting all over the earth.
The true nature of humanity is unreashed.
Dog eats dog, as everyone attacks everyone
and fends only for themselves.
Grobal stabirity unravels.
By the time my show is over, it will be far too rate.

-- Team America, directed by Trey Parker

-- National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), by Henry Kissinger

-- Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson

-- What Dilemma? Moral Evaluation Shapes Factual Belief, by Brittany Liu and Peter H. Ditto

-- Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States: A State of Knowledge Report From the U.S. Global Change Research Program, by U.S. Global Change Research Program. Authors: David M. Anderson, Donald F. Boesch, Virginia R. Burkett, Lynne M. Carter, Stewart J. Cohen, Nancy B. Grimm, Jerry L. Hatfield, Katharine Hayhoe, Anthony C. Janetos, Jack A. Kaye, Jay H. Lawrimore, James J. McCarthy, A. David McGuire, Edward L. Miles, Evan Mills, Jonathan T. Overpeck, Jonathan A. Patz, Roger S. Pulwarty, Benjamin D. Santer, Michael J. Savonis, H. Gerry Schwartz, Jr., Eileen L. Shea, John M.R. Stone, Bradley H. Udall, John E. Walsh, Michael F. Wehner, Thomas J. Wilbanks, Donald J. Wuebbles

-- The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics, by Victor and Victoria Trimondi
-- The CIA's Secret War in Tibet, by Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison

-- Misogyny by Wikipedia

The 14th Dalai Lama has been a friend to American interests for his entire adult life, since he abdicated his throne in order to save his people from the dangers of .... Well, okay, it didn't turn out very well for the Tibetans, but he did save his skin, his stash of cash, and a lot of reactionary Tibetan oligarchs who came with him. Fortunately, the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of America was able to provide him with employment as soon as he arrived in India. Since then, he has reliably made himself a thorn in the side of the Chinese, giving the United States the leverage it has needed to build an arms-length trading relationship that now supplies us with enough borrowed money to buy all the microchips, flat screens, cell phones and cheap clothing we could ever want. While his aspirations to someday "return to Tibet" are unlikely to be fulfilled, his mission on behalf of America has been far more successful, and with the installation of numerous "tulkus" on the boards of nonprofit organizations throughout the United States, the exchange has been more than fair. His country has infiltrated ours, and our country has used his people to the best advantage. For this, we commend him, and with heartfelt thanks award him the Cross of Secret Achievement.

-- Thanks From a Grateful Nation: Awarding the Cross of Secret Achievement to the Dalai Lama, by Charles Carreon

-- Fear Fans Flames For Chemical Makers, by Patricia Callahan and Sam Roe

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:52 am

-- The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, by Naomi Oreskes

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:52 am

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:50 am

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:50 am

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:49 am