Y2Kyoto: Five Drowning Polar Bears

That's a good one.

How does one know when a Hoax is nearing the end ?

When the world mocks it.

How does one know when it is being buried for good ?

When the lawsuits begin.

Now THAT! was a well done YouTube clip. It takes brains and knowledge to produce the good ones.

Priceless. Thumbs up to the creator of this. Waiting/hoping for the lawsuits to start up post-haste.

Hahahahaha

Thanks

Posted by: ron in kelowna at December 26, 2008 3:05 PM

Hope you're right Ron. If so, we're halfway there.

Funny video .... I was singing along when I wasn't laughing out loud.

I hope all had a Merry Christmas; well, at least not a lonely one ... Just joking I had a surprisingly pleasant one this year.

Very nice. May we will have an Al Gore drought this year.

The Minessotans For Global Warming have done several good vids.

I think it was the drowning Polar Bears that detached Al Gore and the Warmists from the general populace; the believers still believed and campaigned strongly, Polar bar to the fore. But it was too much saccarine and outright blatant propagandist distortion for most.

Then came high gas prices and the general populace realized that green policies are designed to produce high energy prices.

Then came ... winter; cold in both North and South Hemispheres.

We still need the Grand Dissillusionment of the indoctrinated youth. Maybe the law suits start with Public Education Boards.

I'm sending the link to everyone I know. Funny how we all knew that song even before it was written.

My son's friend is home from his first semester of University. I remember vividly having a conversation with him a year ago about global warming. He, and all the kids in the group, expressed skepticism of AGW. At a party, on the weekend, he told my son that the Polar Bears are dying because.... Global warming is causing too much melting, and the bears are getting wet, so they're freezing to death.

After one semester of brainwashing, he's already lost his power of analyzing. In four years, he's going to be a total vegetable. Did I say four years? I meant seven, he's going to be a doctor.

Thnaks I enjoyed that.

I've often wondered when the Rico act will come into play with Gore and his scam. It certainly fits the bill, if anyone has the guts.

I'll have to show this to my 8 year old granddaughter, who's in grade 3.

I ask her periodically if she is being taught about global warming at school yet.

So far the answer has been no, so I follow that up with "so they haven't talked about fat Al Gore either?"

My wife gets angry when I say that but I tell her that I'm waiting for the day my granddaughter repeats it to her teacher, I'd like to be a fly on the wall.

and christmas just gets worse.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/24/2454262.htm?section=

save us oh Obama , save us

We mock global warming and the Goreacle all the time, there's ample evidence out there to disprove it, but politicians still ignore us. Wake up, "leaders"!

The scariest thing, Soccermom, is that these guys know what the score is - and if they don't, then who should, eh?

Not a peep comes out of a major politician's mouth without an army of reviewers and psychologists analyzing everything to the nth detail and determining the effects of every word and every action as it plays to the ignorant masses... so if they don't know, then who should?

These politicians also read the internet - likely with a similar percentage to the general population - surely "we the people" have not been the only ones to give up the TV and the newspapers for the superior reliability of small-fry internet media. Dubya has an internet connection at the Whitehouse, I'm sure. I even herd he took reeding, righting and rythmatic in skool.

Surely those who reside in such environmentally friendly domiciles as are typically found on Sussex Drive, Pennsylvania Avenue or Downing Street (all are definitely "green" buildings, I assume), have also read the skepticism about Global Warming - surely it is not only us that have discovered that only 600 of the over 2,000 at the UN's astounding "consensus" were actual scientists. Surely it is not only us lowly mooks who know that even out of that 600 that ARE scientists, there is still nothing that resembles a true consensus. Surely the PM's and the Presidents of the world are aware of the growing number of scientists willing to risk considerable professional and financial damage to themselves by speaking out against Global Warming.

Surely they know.

Surely nobody stuck Shillary Clinton in front of a microphone and let her chirp her Gender Wage Gap Myth, which has been disproven so soundly as that there IS actual consensus, and just let her merrily chirp "her book," based on several proven falsities, without fact checking and further psycho-analyzing how the gullible masses would react.

Surely SOMEONE close to her knew that she was speaking pure crap.

If they didn't, then who should?

There is obviously a dark agenda going on here, one that people think cannot be proven to be treason because it is implemented incrementally, rather than all at once. However, devising a scheme for stealing $10/day from your employer every day for 10 years, still equates embezzling over $25,000 from your employer and that is what you will be charged with - you will NOT simply get charged with pinching $10 (2500 times). You get the crowbar hotel for a serious crime.

Same goes for treason, which is what plots like this are. Sure, it is in small increments, but total up the increments (Trudeau's career, for example), and you do indeed get a clear picture of treason - and that is how these people ought to be viewed.

It is very suspicious that the media kept so silent about the ex-Veep clamoring for the diminished sovereignty of his nation - as such a thing clearly dimishes the US Constitution, which politicians swear to uphold in order to sit in office - as it is the fabric of their nation in every sense of the word. Same goes for Shillary and her desire to create a "living" constitution (she took Trudeau 101a in college, I assume). Constitutions are designed to be immoveable. That is what makes it a a constitution, duh. And yet, Shillary continually moans on about the need for a living constitution - and that actually does get pretty close to treason, when you stand back and look at it.

Surely an investigation ought to be done, and yet it is not.

Surely SOMEONE who advises a nation's Prime Minister or President has taken Political Science 101, and understands that the UN's Covenant on Human, Social and Economic Rights openly declares that rights are only given to citizens at the leisure of the STATE, (Pure Totalitarianism) and that therefore, any involvement of our nation or that of any nation recognizing a national consitution whereby rights are granted by an absolute such GOD (out of the reach of man and his "state"), and that by endorsing UN treaties, and indeed, even the validity of the UN to exist, does indeed put forth an enormous ethical problem for our Western leaders - a problem that is entangled with treason against the Constitution.

Surely these powerful people have SOMEONE advising them of the nature of these things.

Surely they actually DO hire intelligent people who DO understand both sides of the argument. I am sure that our politician's advisors are much better informed about BOTH sides of the argument than the nitwit lefties who show up on blogs to squeal their media driven shtick at us people who actually look beyond the TV for answers (or at least demand to read news articles citing a minimum of three sources, rather than the generic "Associated Press".)

Surely these people know.

And so what's up?

It is obvious that they don't care. Just like they didn't care about the overwhelming opposition to the Bailout. And that was one of the MOST unifying outcries that the American people have EVER given... and it was completely ignored.

Surely someone in Congress read the internet and knew that the MSM was lying, and that the VAST majority of Americans wanted no part of a bailout. And yet, they ignored the people, and went against their will anyway.

George Orwell studied governments for his whole life, as well as how to influence them and make them do the will of the people - or at least, do what is in the best interests of the people. (The will of the people is not always good either - and the problem with Democracy is that it turns Statesmen into Politicians).

What Orwell concluded in the end was, NOTHING will affect the behaviour of government until they become afraid of losing their own power. NOTHING!

Case in point: The Liberals losing their political funding = Liberals losing a form of their power = Liberals scrambling like chickens with their heads cut off to "maintain their power."

Note that NOTHING has put the Liberals into action like this for the rest. But when confronted with a LOSS of power, they will do absolutely anything to maintain that power.

Of course, money is not the only thing which threatens the power of the government. (In fact, 40.9% of the eligible population not voting has considerable implications to the validity of government as well, given that we now live in a
universal democracy).

The suffragettes did not get the vote for women by writing polite and reasonable letters. Hell no! They were vicious! They threatened assasinations, they set fires, they threw rocks through windows. They scared the crap out of people.

The gay rights movement did not get their way by sitting down at a table and reasonably discussing the pros and cons of their proposals, while being considerate of the other point of view. They absolutely did not! In the early 70's, they went completely psycho on the American Psychological Association, holding violent protests, and threatening its members until finally the APA capitulated and removed that homosexuality is a psychological deviation from its books, along with all of the research with it (in regard to excessive homosexual fixations with dominance and submission - something VERY evident in said communities today). They were vicious, and they scared the crap out of people - and they got their way.

How dishonorable of them.

And yet, here we sit today.

And they are rewriting the dishonor of their actions, and reinterpreting it as honorable - as is the spoils that goes to any victor.

David Suzuki screeches murder at anyone daring to knock the fruitfly off his shoulder, and suggests they be imprisoned - and HE is the idiot that gets heard.

Where are the people screeching for the imprisonment of David Suzuki for attempted treason against Canada? Think about how that would make that idiot stop and think - if he even started worrying that 1/4 of the Canadians he met while walking down the street believed he was a traitor, might color his views a little, don't you think?

Nothing will stop the drive for global warming until politicians fear something negative coming to their own lives.

Or so says George Orwell.

That made me cry. Polar bears are so misunderstood.

Syncro

Brillant and god bless my GMC Alvalanche!

The persistently bogus thing shown in all Al Gore Global Warming clips is the shots of glaciers calving (you know, the large blocks of ice breaking off the end of a glacier and falling into the sea). That is actually a consequence of glacial advance, ie the glacier is growing. The bits fall off because of enormous shear forces as water levels rise and fall with tides and swells.

Gee, Al. Why would you show clips of growing glaciers in a film about shrinking glaciers? Unless you're a complete moron, or a commie with an agenda.

Ummmmm,bcf,,,him and is ilk are the commie/sosialists.The maroons(useful idiots) are the one's who belive it.

Well done! I thought it way hilarious. Only hope I can laugh as hard in 20 years.
Jim

Well done! I thought it way hilarious. Only hope I can laugh as hard in 20 years.
Jim

Posted by: J. Banner at December 26, 2008 10:43 PM

Depends on how much Kool-Aid you drink,Jim ~P

Yep, AGW just got dealt a crippling blow with the latest winter blast from the True North Strong and Free.

Yeah, they sure don't make apocalypses like they used to. These guys just can't get their science right or should I say pseudo-science.

I mean if you're going to design a flagrant tax grab at least pick a time when you aren't having the worst snow storm record in about 40 odd years.

But like they say in comedy timing and delivery are an art form.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden(Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

Why is Gore's mocking his only 2 girl friends, Alice (his left hand) & Molly (his right).

Funny,

Of course Gore could be demonstrating how he milked two male polar bears, and then they could swim again...

It seems that many of you who have chosen an opinion that negates the realities of climate change lack a broad understanding of the general concepts. Your argument is therefore not precise...that is it does not address the whole debate, rather a distorted reality. The situation our planet is currently facing can't be pinned down to one term...like the ever popular AGW. We are in the midst of a mass extinction at a significantly increasing rate...that's fact, not "conspiracy" or "scare tactic. We release many times more CO2, methane and other gases into the atmosphere than all natural sources. that's a fact...look it all up. Our climate is changing at a very fast rate compared to most known historical climate changes...that's a fact. Media propaganda doesn't change any of these facts. You clearly have a problem with the SECONDARY SOURCES you use to base your opinion...that's a problem with that media source, not with the realities of the health of our planet. Try using PRIMARY SOURCES to help bolster the strength of your opinions. Also, a general understanding of the issue might help too.

We release many times more CO2, methane and other gases into the atmosphere than all natural sources. that's a fact...look it all up.

Posted by: Deeznuts at December 28, 2008 5:30 AM

I took your advice, and looked it all up.

Didn't change my life one bit.

Well I'm glad you're so content...I don't recall claiming it would change your life. Climate change...and to consider the short-term...climate instability...is still affecting millions...not to mention all of the other undesirables produced...habitat destruction, health degradation, oil wars..ect...it's all connected.

Deeznuts- Open your eyes old chap. They're the "primary source". You're idea of PRIMARY SOURCES is likely Al Gore's movie.

Are you really making a connection between climate change and habitat destruction? Growing human population is causing all those "undesirables". The only way to stem that is something called genocide. Is that what you're advocating? I'll bet that, deep down, you've already decided who should go, and who should stay.

What's the primary source? A primary source is NOT a newspaper article about a scientific study. That's a secondary source...it is subject to the bias' of the journalist on top of the bias' of the researchers who conducted the study. A journal article itself is the primary resource. Al Gore's movie is not a primary source...nor does it play a role in my opinion. This seems to be a common strategy of those on the "myth" side of the debate...focus on Al Gore, assume he's the basis of the "environmental movement" and debunk him. Al Gore and climate change are not one and the same...for those who care to delve deeper into the facts about our planet, Al Gore is insignificant and of neglible influence.

My eyes are open bro...I have a post secondary education in "life science"....biology and geography. I read journal articles, I research before I form an opinion.

Am I really making a connection between climate change and habitat destruction? Is this a trick question? Please tell me you're not trying to state that there is no connection. Tell me...if half the rain forest gets cut down, and tropical rainforests have the highest degree of speciation in the world, and they have a very significant role in the earth's water cycle as well as gas balance (releasing oxygen and storing carbon) then how would that NOT equal out to be both habitat destruction and climate change??

Sure, growing population is a huge factor...but what's behind the ever growing population...which occurs in 3rd world nations...it's the same forces that lead to pollution, habitat destruction, ect...corporate globalization.

Hmmm... it seems that a typical Canadian moose burps and farts as much gas into the atmosphere per year as a typical car emits by driving 13,000kms.

(Or, so says the Scandanavians - those paragons of political correctness): http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,501145,00.html

Therefore, it seems to me that if the left were really for fighting global warming, they would lobby to have the Gun Registry completely scrapped and they would be supporting the good gov't paying a $250 bounty per moosehead.

After all, ridding the earth of one of these damaging creatures is OBVIOUSLY a larger contribution that I can give to reducing greenhouse gas emissions than if I were to, say, purchase a Prius.

Come on, you Global Warming Zealots, get your thinking caps on and figure out ways to make your whacky agenda appealing to us right wing nuts clinging to our bibles and our guns... because obviously screeching at us isn't getting us to buy your wares.

That's two areas I've given you which could "sell" your environmental agenda to "the right." (End No-Fault Divorce & A Rifle in Every Closet). Why is communism the only solution? Huh?

On the thirteen day of Christmas Al Gore gave to me mercury filled cfl light bulbs.

WOW...are you serious?! Moose? This is ridiculous.

As far as greenhouse gas emmissions go...

"In the modern era, emissions to the atmosphere from volcanoes are only about 1% of emissions from human sources.[14][15]"

"Natural sources of carbon dioxide are more than 20 times greater than sources due to human activity,[17] but over periods longer than a few years natural sources are closely balanced by natural sinks such as weathering of continental rocks and photosynthesis of carbon compounds by plants and marine plankton. As a result of this balance, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide remained between 260 and 280 parts per million for the 10,000 years between the end of the last glacial maximum and the start of the industrial era.[18]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

So combine this with deforestation, the pillaging of the seas, pollution, and habitat destruction...we are releasing greenhouse gases while we're destroying the systems that capture them.

I know this is a "conservative" blog..whatever that's supposed to mean...seems like it means there's a predetermined "mind set" or set of opinions. Not very conducive to logical debate, rather to ignorance.

I don't label myself as "left or right". And as far as the media goes...it only takes a "left" stance because it sets the standard for how liberal society should view the world. Y'all need to read some Chomsky. And who said anything about Communism?

The amount of mercury in cfl's is so minute to even mention it is lame. Get real...the incadescent light bulb is an old invention, and by less sustainable than cfl's.