Our Betters In Academia

Another nugget from the people who bring us “global warming”…

“One of the main findings of the report, Consuming Australia*, is that the more people earn, the more they spend…”

One assumes they’ve already volunteered for planet-saving salary rollbacks.
h/t

18 Replies to “Our Betters In Academia”

  1. I refuse to beleive anything coming out of the Leftist propaganda machine until its leaders and followers start a mass migration to Cuba, Iran and North Korea. Until then, they can all kiss my ass, and if they try their “revolution” on me, be prepared to eat some serious lead, pinkos.

  2. Let;s just get it over with and list the cu;prets responsible for global warming and the destruction of the earth as we know it:
    1) Affluent conservatives, westerners, Christians, Cucasians
    2) capitalists of any color
    3) anyone in a class that the people’s worker party deems decadent.

  3. The more one earns, the more one spends?
    Who woulda thought it! Jeez, these people are deep!

  4. Typical of propaganda “research”. Its getting to the point where the old guard of scholarly journals have been hollowed out and infested by propagandists, like a termite tree. One good breeze and the whole lot comes down.
    I prophesy a time in the near future when a lot of these journals will be reduced to the scientific status of Mother Jones, while all real science is published on the web, complete with full data sets.
    We as consumers of scientific information need to understand that these people who produce this crap are not stupid. They’re CROOKED, and they are currently getting exactly what they want by publishing this kind of crap. Aided and abetted by the journal editors, owners and reviewers.
    Time for some 800 pound chickens to come home and roost on these people.

  5. Dr. Tim Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, guests on
    Late Night Counsell (cfra.com) am580,
    Monday, August 27/07 at 10 p.m. Eastern

  6. Well, duh! Of course clueless afluent city-dwelling consumers hit the environment hardest.
    I want environmental tarrifs: 100% on all Chinese-made goods…until they stop with the one-a-day coal plants.
    Now, won’t that make the Liberals squirm! Of course, I don’t expect the Conservatives to do it (they’re captive to the “capitalist pigs, right?), but I have a dream…

  7. WL Mackenzie:
    The list you give is obviously who they are trying to blame. What scares me is the closer and closer they seem to be edging towards the inevitable “final solution.” Since everything we do is a problem, in order to bring a halt to this alarming crisis, they’re going to have to start killing people. The groups you list will be the first.
    They haven’t come right out and said it…but they’re getting closer.

  8. “More water is used to produce a single serve of beef than the average Sydneysider uses during an entire week of showers”
    It seems to me that the article quotes the amount of water input and not output. These people talk as if the water is gone. It is not, it is returned to use through the same water cycle that we all learned about in Grade three:
    Runoff->evaporation->Precipitation-> Repeat as necessary
    I am all for conservation, but when only one side of a mass balance is presented, the engineer in me goes ballistic.

  9. Let’s just gather in one place and nuke ourselves if it saves one… I was going to say ‘moose’, but they are bad for the planet too. Everything is bad for the planet. How do they know is the big question. Has Gaya spoken to them? I don’t think anything makes difference for a large liquid rock, it probably has yet to notice a thin layer of fungus on its surface, mayhap in the next X billion years.

  10. Since most of the world’s wealth is produced through consumption of goods and services the implication is … let’s work toward a world of poverty.
    We can change the name of Earth to Africa. It will all be just like that. Andy takers?
    The elites just cannot think their proposals through to their logical conclusions. They are mentally defective as well already know. Can they be stopped? Certainly not through logical means.
    Bryceman 3:24 m has it right.
    .

  11. Leftards sure are good at stating the obvious.
    But what they don’t point out is the relationship between the amound of GDP per capita a nation earns and the number/quality of environmental protections.
    Rich people can afford to meandre around in their greenpeace social clubs while poor people have to earn their next meal or they die. Poor people don’t have the LUXURY of caring about the environment as they’re trying to feed and house their families.
    It’s not even that most leftards are evil (although a lot on the far left are,) it’s that they’re stupid and can’t put things into perspective.

  12. This ranks right up there with Patrick Ewings ” We make lots of money , but we spend lots of money too … ”

  13. More analytically undigested and poorly attributed journo spew. I think Wendy is out of her element, but, on deadline trying to meet her “Environment Reporter” case load which I’m sure is overwhelming the woman.
    Hey, the human body is 90% water, how can we adequately atone for this?
    This is one sinner that won’t be denied salvation. Memo to my self in the morning: cut out eating anything but what I find on the beach and phone daughter to take grandson’s juice box out of his school lunch. Amen.

  14. “Betters” in academia? What a riot.
    Those who can, do – those who can’t, teach (does not apply to hard sciences, engineering, business or other useful disciplines – they’re too busy doing real stuff, as opposed to the “social” sciences and other non-productive or useless studies).

  15. In other breaking news….The more you eat the more you shi….well you get it.
    Bryceman makes a good point but the answer is easy.
    Soylent Green.
    Can the Soylent Green Party be far off?
    Syncro

  16. Phantom you illiterate twit, as usual and in typical redneck fashion, you took the whole thing out of context.

Navigation