CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20727
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:00 am
 


Title: UN Report "Errr, ok, there is no global warming"
Category: Environmental
Posted By: Benn
Date: 2012-12-29 21:33:03


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7837
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:00 am
 


So what's next to panic the population with. Global Pandemic, Nuclear War, Food Shortage, Sun Spots, erectile dysfunction. :roll:

Whatever the fuck it is someone is gonna make a ton of money off it......again.

BTW, Now we know why our favorite Nobel Prize Weiner bought beach front property. XD


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3839
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:09 am
 


Something most ordinary folk already knew for a long time, it more to do with politics than science. Where would be the multibillion green industry be if it wasn't for the exaggerated threat.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7837
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:27 am
 


Exactly [B-o]


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23759
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:57 am
 


The funny part will be to watch the Legion of regularly scheduled UN bashers who consistently point out its absolute irrevelance (recall the reaction to the recent reports on Canada from the UN) that will suddenly leap onto the UN bandwagon because it says something they agree with.

Come noe... let's make up our mind about the source here.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3839
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:09 am
 


Yeah, will be interesting :)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10000
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:13 am
 


Nice spin of the article on thread title, Benn. Your choice of thread title proves the actual content of the article: that the truth doesn't matter. :roll:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15780
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:01 am
 


The UN isn’t irrelevant, it’s just fucked and totally dysfunctional. With Human Rights committees led by oppressive and despotic nations as one of the many bright and shining lies.

Peace keeping has decayed into funding forces of badly trained, poorly led and equipped Third World armies (Bangladesh and Pakistan have the biggest UN missions) that are seen more as cash generators than peace keepers by the ‘donor’ nations.

On climate change, you had to be suspicious when we were all getting fed BS by the likes of Al Gore and numerous flaky Hollywood types were trying to convince us of ‘facts’.

Facts stand up for themselves.

I think it’s pretty obvious the planet is going through climate change. I just don’t want to fund Samsung windmills Inc or help Al Gore get his third swimming pool off carbon credits.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23759
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:16 am
 


When something becomes as dysfunctional and fucked up as you suggest, then I'd submit it's irrelevance might be there. Certainly, the same group that denies climate change also tends to deny UN relevance...until the UN comes out with something that they agree with.

Then it's quote time.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 404
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:18 am
 


Here is what the IPCC has to say about it,

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/statement/St ... R5_SOD.pdf

...'The unauthorized and premature posting of the drafts of the WGI AR5, which are works in progress, may lead to confusion because the text will necessarily change in some respects once all the review comments have been addressed. It should also be noted that the cut-off date for peer-reviewed published literature to be included and assessed in the final draft lies in the future (15 March 2013). The text that has been posted is thus not the final report.

This is why the IPCC drafts are not made public before the final document is approved. These drafts were provided in confidence to reviewers and are not for distribution. It is regrettable that one out of many hundreds of reviewers broke the terms of the review and posted the drafts of the WGI AR5. Each page of the draft makes it clear that drafts are not to be cited, quoted or distributed and we would ask for this to continue to be respected.'

But then the denier sites like Watts etc. have no real interest in science, or even context.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15780
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:38 am
 


Gunnair wrote:
When something becomes as dysfunctional and fucked up as you suggest, then I'd submit it's irrelevance might be there. Certainly, the same group that denies climate change also tends to deny UN relevance...until the UN comes out with something that they agree with.

Then it's quote time.



You disagree that the UN is dysfunctional?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23759
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:28 am
 


EyeBrock wrote:
Gunnair wrote:
When something becomes as dysfunctional and fucked up as you suggest, then I'd submit it's irrelevance might be there. Certainly, the same group that denies climate change also tends to deny UN relevance...until the UN comes out with something that they agree with.

Then it's quote time.



You disagree that the UN is dysfunctional?


No, I disagree that it is still relevant. As I stated, when something becomes as dysfunctional and fucked up as you suggest, that I posit that it ceases to be relevant

edit for clarity.


Last edited by Gunnair on Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7341
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:36 am
 


kilroy wrote:
Here is what the IPCC has to say about it,

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/statement/St ... R5_SOD.pdf

...'The unauthorized and premature posting of the drafts of the WGI AR5, which are works in progress, may lead to confusion because the text will necessarily change in some respects once all the review comments have been addressed. It should also be noted that the cut-off date for peer-reviewed published literature to be included and assessed in the final draft lies in the future (15 March 2013). The text that has been posted is thus not the final report.

This is why the IPCC drafts are not made public before the final document is approved. These drafts were provided in confidence to reviewers and are not for distribution. It is regrettable that one out of many hundreds of reviewers broke the terms of the review and posted the drafts of the WGI AR5. Each page of the draft makes it clear that drafts are not to be cited, quoted or distributed and we would ask for this to continue to be respected.'

But then the denier sites like Watts etc. have no real interest in science, or even context.


I'm sure when it comes time to release the final report the UN will have twisted straight facts into thousands of knots and the report will reflect what is politically convenient, not reality.

My faith in the UN is bordering on zero. Dysfunctional, irrelevant, and worse than useless.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22897

Warnings: (20%)
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:48 am
 


I wish somebody would explain to me how global warming is politically expedient? Who gains from falsely claiming global warming? What I see is political leaders paying lip service to it while doing little about it, because nobody wants to be the sucker whos going to ruin their economy first.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7341
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:01 am
 


andyt wrote:
I wish somebody would explain to me how global warming is politically expedient? Who gains from falsely claiming global warming? What I see is political leaders paying lip service to it while doing little about it, because nobody wants to be the sucker whos going to ruin their economy first.


Third world countries wanted to use global warming to develop a wealth transfer scheme. The developed nations were supposed to give away money and technology while mothballing our emissions-heavy industries (which would then relocate themselves to countries free of emissions targets).

Sounds like they stood to gain to me. Until the developed world wised up and started demanding that the so called "developing countries" face emissions targets as well. All of a sudden they weren't so keen on it.

Wonder why.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 101 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5 ... 7  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.