81 Replies to “Now I’ve Seen it All”

  1. Albatros,
    desmogblog are the attacks dogs of the Suzuki Foundation.
    The science does not support your position.
    If the science were actually there, would smearing people who dare disagree really be necessary? (ala desmogblog)
    a climate crisis….ha ha!
    You remind me of the RAN gal in the Penn and Teller program who couldn’t answer a single question they asked her.

  2. This is embarrassing. At least if you’re going to have a seven-year-old shill for you (‘wonder what they paid her, or how they paid her: in carbon credits?) you write a script the poor little tyke can read.
    This is not cute. This is not smart. This is child exploitation and her parents/parent/guardians/guardian/caregiver should be hanging his/her/their head/s in shame for allowing The Suzuki Foundation to use her to advertise their product, a very lucrative product at that.
    Hey, little Miss Apocalypse, look into the camera! It won’t hurt you. And then run for your life! David Suzuki and his ilk will.

  3. “Politicking and the fate of the planet aside, Chris Goodwin was worried about the more tangible consequences of Bondar’s curriculum review.
    “Does this mean more homework for us?” the nine-year old asked.” …-
    Now I’ve Seen It All: Bondar in Space; Meet Paul Hellyer, Bobby.
    Big Bobby Klobber, er, Bondar, has seen Earth from space; says that Earth is 83% green and TO is at the Centre. …-
    Bondar hopes kids can lead pro-environment charge
    TORONTO (CP) – Canada’s first woman in space said Thursday that she’s leading a review of how environmental studies are taught in Ontario schools
    in the hopes that children will help change the
    destructive habits of their parents. …
    “One of the major problems is how big oil industries are exploiting government and strong-arming their gas-guzzling SUVs onto the market,” 13-year-old Brendan O’Brien told Bondar, Ontario Environment Minister Laurel Broten and Education Minister Kathleen Wynne.”
    “I think that’s really wrong and I think there should be a tax on SUVs. It would be a good step in the right direction,” said O’Brien.
    Broten acknowledged that’s one of many possible “tools to change behaviour.”
    Alexei Batten said Canada has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to environmental innovation. The 14-year-old noted that large cities like London have congestion charges to discourage driving while their trains run on green fuels.
    “This affects our generation,” Batten said. “The adults right now are the ones who can help shape our future and then it’s up to us. If we don’t learn now, we’ll just have the same problems in the future.”
    Alexandra Latinovic, 11, warned that “if we don’t care about the environment, it’s going to kick back at us.” …-
    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2007/03/01/3682203-cp.html

  4. Saskboy,
    You seem well indoctrinated. Canada has no real right wing comics on TV. I thought we need a Canadian version of Colbert. Someone who will make jokes on what the left holds so dear- Kyoto, abortion, gay marriage, multiculturalism, government ineptitude, etc. The CBC or CTV can’t do this well as they are way too politically correct.

  5. “we need a Canadian version of Colbert.”
    Although I agree with you in principal, being an American, I have to say that Colbert is capital L Liberal. He mocks conservatives. Show me a clip where he mocks lefties and maybe you can change my mind, but from what I have seen he is par for the course on Comedy Central, or should I say Commie-dy Central.

  6. ET- I said my bit about the kid and that I stand by that. The fact is oil companies are sponsoring disinformation in attempts at confusing the global warming issue. I’d love to see independent reviewed studies that state man has no effect on climate, but there aren’t any to find. There is studies that suggest a portion of the warming we are experiencing is natural and even Suzuki doesn’t deny this, but it’s not supposed to be happening this quickly.
    I posted a short list of peer-reviewed articles that talk about global warming; do you have a list of published articles that refutes the climatologists? I’m not talking about a newspaper article from National Post or the Calgary Sun either.
    Keep looking, there is more than just a list of articles posted.

  7. This is child abuse/exploitation pure and simple.
    Doc Fruit Fly is totally off the tracks and his credibility melt down approaches. I love that moment when a pompous demagogue gets deflated…it makes me warm all over 😉

  8. If the majority of people demand the government do something about the damaging effect a select few have on the planet …
    Who are these “select few?” China? India?

  9. So, albatros, pro-lifers having their kids at pro-life demonstrations (you know, the ones that get a few thousand attendees while the pro-“choice” get front-page coverage for their dozen protesters) is fine with you? I’ll have to remember this thread for future reference. BTW, I just shovelled 4″ of global warming in Toronto.

  10. albatross – you support a parent exploiting his child. That, in my view, is shameful. However, that’s your decision.
    I disagree with your comment about ‘oil companies sponsoring disinformation’. After all, Suzuki is sponsoring disinformation; he’s not an oil company. So, a lot of sites/people are misinforming the public. I think you have a political agenda to focus only on ‘oil companies’.
    Valid studies do NOT suggest that ‘a portion’ of climate change is natural. As I’ve repeatedly said, climate change has been a basic fact of the universe since the universe began. That’s not a portion.
    As for your statement that ‘it’s not supposed to be happening this quickly’ – that is invalid. Why? Because it is unscientific. Climate change is a complex, not a simple linear action, and therefore, it is impossible (got that?) to accurately predict the nature of, the speed of, the extent of, climate change. It is absolutely false to state that ‘it shouldn’t be happening this quickly’.
    My god – we can’t even predict the weather three days in advance; we can’t predict climate change either.
    By the way, climate change, as a complex process, involves scientists in all disciplines – not just ‘climatologists’. It has, and I repeat the word, HAS to involve scientists in biology, chemistry, physics – as well as archaeologists, paleontologists etc.
    No-one is arguing that man has no effect on the environment; that would be like saying that bees have no effect on the environment; of course they do. The argument of sceptics against Kyotoism (and I certainly am sceptical) is that man’s interaction with the environment is not the major cause of climate change and climate change in itself, is not apocalpytic.
    There are tons of articles that deal with climate change – after all, most adaptive variations of plants and animals are reactions to climate change, whether it is a change in beak size to deal with larger seeds, etc. Check out articles on evolution and adaptation in eg, Science.
    For rapid reading, you can even check out Wikipedia’s list of sceptics.
    Check out the notion of ‘heartbeat’ of climate change in the Oligocene, showing a periodicity of glaciations. (Science Dec 2006). The ‘earth seems to ‘breathe’ on time scales ranging from the annual to the orbital. We hypothesize that in all cases these cycles are driven by the expansion and contraction of biosphere productivity in response to changes in solar insolation” p 1897). Check out the palaeocene-eocene thermal maximum when Greenland was subtropical. Check out the miocene warmth, the next phase of pliocene cooling and so on.
    Check out ‘Environmental Geography, 2006/50; 899-910,(Khilyuk, L and G. Chilingar, just one of many which is sceptical of humans as the major cause of climate change.
    You have, for some reason, removed your perspective from a scientific one to a dogmatic one. You refuse to see a parent exploiting a child; you refuse to acknowledge that our universe is complex and not mechanical, and that, not only are there multiple causes, but, we cannot predict a complex system.

  11. Peer review just means someone has read what others have written, based on what the writers reviewed based on -you get the drift. I want to see the original material. All those that support articles that have been peer reviewed, and probably never read by those supporting them, means these supporters can’t read for themselves.
    A perfect example of not being able to read or understand, check out the comments at the g&m re the terror bill vote. Funny how many got that bill and the Security Certificate issue mixed up.
    I wouldn’t be afraid to guess that the majority of those 2500 scientists, or algor, or suzuki, have actually read any of the original material. A said it was good so B, being a friend of A tells C it is great.
    Lets see the info on the original experiments or computer models, and lets see if any other unconnected lab can duplicate the same findings. From what I have read over the years, no one has been able to do it.

  12. Would leaving some oil in the ground really destroy the Canadian economy? I mean, what was our economy before oil, and why won’t that work to keep us going?
    Posted by: Saskboy at March 1, 2007 5:20 PM
    ————-
    “We have to leave it in the ground and stop the tar sands …”
    That’s not “some,” it’s “all.”
    What was our economy before oil? Farming, forestry, fishing, beaver pelts, and er um, oil. That’s right, we’ve been taking oil out of the ground since before Confederation.
    Back then of course it was back breaking labour, outhouses, limited opportunities, freezing in the dark, etc. – a pretty miserable exitence if you ask me.
    Are they not teaching the benefits of industry to kids these days? Again I suggest they take these people who want to wreck the economy and give them what they wish for. That’ll cure them of it.

  13. Albatross: “Right now we are in a climate crisis…”
    Really? I guess you’re looking for any silly fearmongering excuse to parade around in red tights. You have a “little red book II” to go with that outfit?
    I think the climate crisis you’re referring to has to do with the increasing volume of hysteria and the growing credibility hole emanating from Kanada’s Kyoto Klan.
    Your sickening support of the KKK’s exploitation of children just underlines the crisis you’re really referring to.

  14. “Eventually you will be legislated into falling in line and will have no choice in the matter.”
    Because that’s what it’s really about isn’t it? If you disagree, screw you, we’ll legislate you out of your opinion.

  15. You can be certain that when they start using kids in this fashion it’s beause it has become a religion.
    The irony is that people like Suzuki would scoff at the notion that the earth is the centre of the universe, yet he is behaving in exactly the same manner as those who once thought it was.

  16. Kyotologists support child abuse as part of their new found religion. Also support the buying of indulgences for past sins, (carbon credits) so they can continue to sin, while making it impossible for non believers to sin. Wonder what else this father forces his daughter to to get his attention. Her friends probably got Barbie houses, she gets a cardboard house. Wonder is she uses a slate and chalk in school so as not to waste paper.

  18. Lets get this streight.
    If you follow the LIEberal plan under DeYawn, Albeta will shut down all oil production. The oil componies will be taxed to death, and Canada will profit by following Little Miss Apoliclypse.
    Well right now the people in Ontario and Quebec have a taste of what it will be like under the LIEberals with DeYawn as leader – no gasoline. And if the LIBerals have their way no gas exports would take place east of Thunder Bay or our biggest trading partner USA.
    And this is the result of only one gasoline producing plant shutting down as a result of a fire? The LIEberals want to send us back into the horse and buggy days. We had a name for that it was called “the Bennet Wagon” in which horses pulled the cars. But then horse farts will still cause global warming – therefore shoot the horses and polluting cows. That’s three strikes against Albetra – oil, cows, and horses. No wonder seperation is raising it head again in Albetra, and will increase if DeYawn and his LIEberal team get back into power.
    I think SUZUKI should use the cleanest form of transportation Canada will be left with – a bicycle. Yes, let him peddle his way back to BC and prove that he is willing to make a sacerfice. [No dubble seater] If he does this, then perhaps I might get out my unicycle and joun him. What he is doing now gives him as much credibility as a LIEberal. DeYawn should say he will impliment Suzuki’s advice and send us back into the Dark Ages.
    Clown Party of Canada

  19. After watching that clip I felt like I needed a shower.
    Suzuki has the morals of a slug, to exploit this child in this fashion. Ditto, albatros, if you’re cool with it also.
    By the way, albatros, if the science for AGW is indeed so “solid”, then why do you and your ilk rely upon fraudulent data such as the “hockey stick curve” to win converts? Or rely on “consensus” when trying to apply the scientific method, when any opposing scientific thoughts are expunged? Or publicly denigrate and slander leading climatologists who oppose the groupthink and have theories to the contrary? Why do you support meteorologists who publicly proclaim that other meteos should have professional credentials pulled if they don’t publicly swear fealty to global warming? Or otherwise try to squelch any form of opposing thought or debate? Why are you all so terrified of an inquisitive public considering something other than the hysteria of the AGW crowd?
    Do you ever question why, when the meteorologists can’t get the weather predictions correct for the next two weeks, that we should risk our industries and economies in the blind faith that these same people (who were dead wrong on global cooling, the population explosion, DDT & others) will be spot-on in their predictions spanning the next hundred years?
    Does that not strike you as a bit naive?
    What about you, personally, alby? How much do you “walk the talk” on global warming? Indeed, do you walk, bike or take the bus, or do you have a car? Is it a hybrid or a smart car? Would you be cool with $5 or $10 for a liter of gas, “in the name of fighting global warming”?
    How big is your dwelling? Do you use air conditioning in either your home or vehicle? Only use your computer sparingly to save on those CO2-spawning watts?
    Do you think – assuming there is even a shred of truth to the theory that man is causing AGW – that bankrupting our economy and sending $billions to China to help them build almost 600 coal-fired generating stations (and sweetening Maurice Strong’s personal fortune in the process) will make the world a better place?
    Do you really blindly swallow everything an environmental shill (and well-paid one, at that) such as Suzuki huffs is the truth,     especially considering that the science of global warming is not even close to his field of expertise? Do you ask your barber to perform surgery on you, or fix your teeth?
    Do you really believe in Al Gore, Saviour of the Environment, because he filmed a highly-slanted piece of anti-capitalist propaganda designed to frighten clueless moviegoers into accepting what could be one of the greatest money-laundering scams in the last hundred years? And how do you reconcile Gore’s credibility on reducing GHG when he uses more electricity in one month in a 20-room mansion, than the average American family uses in one year? Do you really buy into the idea that silver-spoon fed liberals like Gore et al can live the life most normal people would only dream of, yet find the chutzpah to tell you that you should be schlepping around in a ’86 Honda Accord and not use your air conditioning in the summer? Or for that matter, Suzuki, who swans around the country in a diesel-belching 50-foot bus that’d seat fifty, but only houses little more than a tenth that capacity?
    Do you have a job, alby? Maybe even in the industrial sector? Ever wondered where you’ll work if your company can’t afford extortionate carbon taxes or “carbon credits” and goes feet-up?
    No need to answer, alby, because I truly couldn’t care less. But you might want to give it some thought before you keep blindly following eco-maniacs like Suzuki that would ruin our economy and standard of living over a scheme that relies upon junk science, fear and propaganda to make its mark. And to attract its marks.
    Or maybe it’s just time for you to troll someplace else, eh?
    mhb23re
    [at gmail d0t calm]

  20. ET, your source is Wikipedia and a blog? No need to waist time on you any longer.
    Oh yes and the kid, get over it, she was having fun. You sound as if she was being sexually abused. Of course it is con’s habit of over exaggerating any perceived attack on their money/oil.

  21. No, albatross – my sources are scientific journals. You have chosen to ignore these references. Why? I am presuming that’s because you haven’t heard of such scientific journals as SCIENCE etc.
    You also ignored the data from those articles. Why? Because they refute your dogma?
    I mentioned Wikipedia for a list of sceptics about AGW. Check out the list and read their articles. You might learn something.
    What blog?
    As for the child – I repeat my point. Her father was exploiting her. Your assumption that she was ‘having fun’ is without validity and irrelevant. She was being used – in her image as a ‘pure innocent’ to present an activist propaganda whose meaning she could not understand. That’s exploitation. The fact that you cannot see this and choose to ignore it, reveals a lack of basic ethics in your own perspective.
    mhb has some good comments and questions for you. How about answering them?

  22. ET I made an error in my search. What came up was a blog not a journal.
    Anyway I found the article you were referring to on Geobase and read it. Interesting stuff but some major errors in what he writes. In it he compares the natural output of CO2 with human output of CO2. He points out that man’s output is negligible in comparison. The problem is he is comparing 4.5 billion years of natural carbon output with 200 years of human activity. He also forgets to mention that the CO2 that went into the atmosphere, didn’t stay in the atmosphere for 4.5 billion years. In fact some of the carbon that went into the atmosphere in those 4.5 billion years is the same carbon we put back into the atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels.

  23. Lets get this perfectly clear – it’s SOLAR WARMING, not global warming.
    Are you a SOLAR WARMING DENIER?

  24. albatross – keep reading the scientific journals
    And think about your own errors. Whether CO2 is accumulated over X or Y years, it doesn’t stay, in either case, as inert. The earth is a complex process and highly adaptive.
    No, he isn’t comparing a long time span with a short time span but a natural with an anthropogenic output, and, as I’m sure you know, the natural output is far more than the human. The small amount of human output cannot be defined as the major cause of a natural cycle – ie, of climate change. You are ignoring the natural aspect of climate change – which is not caused by CO2 (natural or human) emissions but by other factors (solar relation).

  25. Suzuki, Gore, and nimbus 9 creatures like albatross are attempting to assume control of our planet as their own personal possession based on political ideology and an unproven, yet sacrosanct hypothesis. As if its stewardship has been granted to them and them alone.
    How perverse is the stunted, still arrogant mind.

  26. This was posted on David Swanns website;
    My comment was;
    I think this is despicable that the Liberal Party of Alberta is using children to promote a political message. This smacks of Nazi Germany and the Hitler Youth or the brainwashing of the communists in China and Soviet Russia and the East Bloc.
    To me this is just out and out child abuse bordering on something else.
    If you clowns had any credibility before, you have completely lost it as far as I am concerned.

  27. This is also on David Swanns Blog; My comment was:
    I think this is despicable that the Liberal Party of Alberta is using children to promote a political message. This smacks of Nazi Germany and the Hitler Youth or the brainwashing of the communists in China and Soviet Russia and the East Bloc.
    To me this is just out and out child abuse bordering on something else.
    If you clowns had any credibility before, you have completely lost it as far as I am concerned.

  28. Sorry for the double post.
    Just Googled Keith Wiley (little Gillian’s “father” who scripted this for her in exchange for helping her build a playhouse. (This whole thing just stinks)
    I was shocked (not) to find out he is the communication director for the United Nurses of Alberta and has been very active in the fight against better health care in Alberta (aka private medicine).
    He has had a “long career in political journalism”.
    I am absolutely disgusted but not shocked by this lefty behaviour.

  29. ET there is a carbon balance. If left alone the earth’s natural mechanisms removes CO2 from the atmosphere at about the same rate the earth puts it in the atmosphere. When man starts putting his own carbon into the atmosphere he alters that balance and when he cuts down trees he alters that balance even more.

  30. irwin daisy, take off the tinfoil hat nobody is trying to take over the world. The fact is, people who are fighting for the health of the planet are doing it for your children too. They are attempting to protect the planet from those who wish to rape it for profit and greed.
    Is it going to kill you to drive a more efficient car, recycle or change your light bulbs, furnaces, water heaters, household appliances to more efficient types.

  31. Albatross,my kids dont want your help.If you are foolish enough to beleive all this BS go ahead,you are the idiot.Dont try to make idiots out of the rest of us.If you have the money to send to China go ahead,and they will gladly spew more vomit into the air from their new furnaces ,paid by you gullible fools.Its climate,not ghg,its pollution not ghg.I can agree with cleaning up the water system and some of the lakes that have been polluted by industry and fining them heavily,but quit the BS about GHG.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation