Head VS head

medicineman

New Member
LOL! I quite agree. Bring on your 'revolution.' Although I fail to see how much of a threat a bunch of Welfare Queens and entitlement mentality brokedicks can pose.

Me? I'll stand with the Oath Keepers.

I can understand if you feel underprivileged because my parents took responsibility and were able to send me to a good school. I was raised to believe that one took care of one's own.

But what should truly alarm you is that I am not using that education, at least not in the way most people think I should. Since I sold my business and moved away from the big city I have found peace working for as little pay as possible. I will not contribute one cent more than necessary to support your 'perfect' society. And I can keep this up as long as the looters are in charge. I live quite well on very little.

Shrugging worked out very well.
So, admitting the spoon thing, eh? How could I have expected less. What oath was that, Johnny, the fuck you, I've got mine. It is and always will be a class warfare thing. People like you have a special place on my list. People like you that intrinsically think they are superior to others, piss me off. You are the poster boy for "elitism". One day, not too far in the future, there will be a peoples revolution. I may not get my chance to find you, but there will be a thousand to one on my side of the war, you will go down in a ball of flames. Better get your bullet-proof vest while they are still available. BTW, this is not a threat, just a statement of conditions. Man the pitchforks boys, the elites must go.
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
I guess you forget that it was basically the unions that allowed the workers to rise to middle class, send their children to colleges and better themselves. Yeah, screw the unions, eh? Oh how nice it must be to be you


the unions were good in the begining now they are more of a scourge than a help

most people I think can agree about that one. kind of how the NAACP used to be respected till it was highjacked by the radicals just like the unions
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
So, admitting the spoon thing, eh? How could I have expected less. What oath was that, Johnny, the fuck you, I've got mine. It is and always will be a class warfare thing. People like you have a special place on my list. People like you that intrinsically think they are superior to others, piss me off. You are the poster boy for "elitism". One day, not too far in the future, there will be a peoples revolution. I may not get my chance to find you, but there will be a thousand to one on my side of the war, you will go down in a ball of flames. Better get your bullet-proof vest while they are still available. BTW, this is not a threat, just a statement of conditions. Man the pitchforks boys, the elites must go.
Golly gee Med, I'm quaking in my boots. :twisted:

The oath I refer to is the one I believe you took as well; to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Look it up. Give it a Google. I'm sure the Leftists will be yelping about us soon enough.

It's kind of hard to churn up a howling mob when the individual moblets can't manage to pry their lard-asses off the couch. It's the natural progression once one has eaten too many Moon Pies and drank too much grape soda. But if you come looking for me there won't be anything to seize; except my personal freedom. Needless to say, I'm terrified. :roll:

Whenever you are ready to start your 'revolution' is fine with me. The sooner we take out the trash, the sooner we can have our Republic back.
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
may as well post this here for your guys. expand your mind the world is a vampire



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM


6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.



FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY


10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.



OVERSOCIALIZATION


24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]

26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.

28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.



THE POWER PROCESS


33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).

34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.

35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.

36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.



wanna read the rest?



http://www.ed.brocku.ca/~rahul/Misc/unibomber.html
__________________
I thought I recognized this piece. He was a brilliant man and I do wonder whether or not he was right about technology. Of course I would never condone his actions but his thinking was impressive never the less.Had he not discredited himself by his heinous actions who knows what he could have done. Fing genius', gotta keep an eye on them.
 

Parker

Well-Known Member
It's kind of hard to churn up a howling mob when the individual moblets can't manage to pry their lard-asses off the couch. It's the natural progression once one has eaten too many Moon Pies and drank too much grape soda.
Amen brother, down with high fructose corn syrup!!!!! Those are the same lardasses who are 50 pounds overweight (1 in 3 Americans are obese) and complain about their high cost of health care.
 

The Warlord

Well-Known Member
This whole thread is silly. Ranting about a "Peoples Revolution". The peasants are gonna rise up! Oh No! Johnnys an "elitist" cause his folks could afford to pay for Skewl! the revolutions gonna get him! Rise up and overthrow the opressors! Histories next Stalin or Mao will be here to lead us to victory over the Capitolists running dogs soon Comrade! They'll re-destribute the wealth! Great idea. a shinning Utopia. Course we'll all live like migrant farm workers do.

It's laughable. Really.
 

medicineman

New Member
This whole thread is silly. Ranting about a "Peoples Revolution". The peasants are gonna rise up! Oh No! Johnnys an "elitist" cause his folks could afford to pay for Skewl! the revolutions gonna get him! Rise up and overthrow the opressors! Histories next Stalin or Mao will be here to lead us to victory over the Capitolists running dogs soon Comrade! They'll re-destribute the wealth! Great idea. a shinning Utopia. Course we'll all live like migrant farm workers do.

It's laughable. Really.
Keep on laughing. I won't be able to come on here and tell you "I told you so" because this site will be down, but I hope I see all of you when the fun and games begin, I've got mine, fuck you, right? I mean, who really knows. Most Americans are really spoiled. It would take a lot to get them off their asses and into the streets, something like a real long mortgage crises where they couldn't get a home and had no means of support, sound familiar. When the food shortages start happening, well maybe then. "What, you're out of High fructose corn syrup", Bang Bang Bang.
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Careful now Parker. Better watch out Warlord.

Keep it up and you will find yourself on Doctor Quinn's list!
Keep on laughing. I won't be able to come on here and tell you "I told you so" because this site will be down, but I hope I see all of you when the fun and games begin, I've got mine, fuck you, right? I mean, who really knows. Most Americans are really spoiled. It would take a lot to get them off their asses and into the streets, something like a real long mortgage crises where they couldn't get a home and had no means of support, sound familiar. When the food shortages start happening, well maybe then. "What, you're out of High fructose corn syrup", Bang Bang Bang.
Your people's revolution poses about the same risk of occurring as global warming. Which means no chance.

Funny - when the administration issued a warning about extremist nutjobs agitating for an uprising, it was Conservatives they had in mind. It is refreshing to see you are not completely in lockstep with the powers that be. :-P
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Careful now Parker. Better watch out Warlord.

Keep it up and you will find yourself on Doctor Quinn's list!

Your people's revolution poses about the same risk of occurring as global warming. Which means no chance.

Funny - when the administration issued a warning about extremist nutjobs agitating for an uprising, it was Conservatives they had in mind. It is refreshing to see you are not completely in lockstep with the powers that be. :-P
Global warming isn't happening? Wow, that'd be news to the thousands of refugees whose islands are now underwater due to rising sea levels.

It's also news to us here, in Virginia, where our four distinct seasons have started running together ( 70+ degree weather in the middle of winter is now common) and the plants that USED to thrive here will no longer grow at all (check out how the hardiness zones have changed in the last decade if you don't believe me, VA used to be 50/50 zone 6 and zone 7... now there's very little zone 6 left, as it's all retreated to the north where it's cooler).

Might want to get off Rick Berman's cock and take a look at what's ACTUALLY happening to the climate.
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Global warming isn't happening? Wow, that'd be news to the thousands of refugees whose islands are now underwater due to rising sea levels.

It's also news to us here, in Virginia, where our four distinct seasons have started running together ( 70+ degree weather in the middle of winter is now common) and the plants that USED to thrive here will no longer grow at all (check out how the hardiness zones have changed in the last decade if you don't believe me, VA used to be 50/50 zone 6 and zone 7... now there's very little zone 6 left, as it's all retreated to the north where it's cooler).

Might want to get off Rick Berman's cock and take a look at what's ACTUALLY happening to the climate.
What's actually happening like in An Inconvenient Truth, or was that The Day After Tomorrow? LOL!

Sucker.

I had to Google Rick Berman. Umm... okay.

Eleven years and no increase in global temperatures. Eleven years!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8299079.stm
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
What's actually happening like in An Inconvenient Truth, or was that The Day After Tomorrow? LOL!

I had to Google Rick Berman. Umm... okay.

Eleven years and no increase in global temperatures. Eleven years!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8299079.stm

What's actually happening, as in WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING, some of which I just described to you and you obviously ignored.


Global surface temperature has increased ≈0.2°C per decade in the past 30 years, similar to the warming rate predicted in the 1980s in initial global climate model simulations with transient greenhouse gas changes. Warming is larger in the Western Equatorial Pacific than in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific over the past century, and we suggest that the increased West–East temperature gradient may have increased the likelihood of strong El Niños, such as those of 1983 and 1998. Comparison of measured sea surface temperatures in the Western Pacific with paleoclimate data suggests that this critical ocean region, and probably the planet as a whole, is approximately as warm now as at the Holocene maximum and within ≈1°C of the maximum temperature of the past million years. We conclude that global warming of more than ≈1°C, relative to 2000, will constitute “dangerous” climate change as judged from likely effects on sea level and extermination of species.

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/39/14288.abstract

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/

Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late-19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S. and parts of the North Atlantic) have, in fact, cooled slightly over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#q3


That BBC article keeps referencing IPCC, but nothing in the article matches up with the ACTUAL IPCC report:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fourth_Assessment_Report#Warming_of_the_planet


Cold days, cold nights, and frost events have become less frequent. Hot days, hot nights, and heat waves have become more frequent. Additionally:

  • Eleven of the twelve years in the period (1995-2006) rank among the top 12 warmest years in the instrumental record (since 1850, towards the end of the Little Ice Age).
  • Warming in the last 100 years has caused about a 0.74 °C increase in global average temperature. This is up from the 0.6 °C increase in the 100 years prior to the Third Assessment Report.
  • Urban heat island effects were determined to have negligible influence (less than 0.0006 °C per decade over land and zero over oceans) on these measurements.
  • Observations since 1961 show that the ocean has been absorbing more than 80% of the heat added to the climate system, and that ocean temperatures have increased to depths of at least 3000 m (9800 ft).
  • "Average Arctic temperatures increased at almost twice the global average rate in the past 100 years."
  • It is likely that greenhouse gases would have caused more warming than we have observed if not for the cooling effects of volcanic and human-caused aerosols. See global dimming.
  • Average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely the highest in at least the past 1300 years (a time near the beginning of the Little Ice Age).
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
The Pacific island-nation of Tuvalu is the first country to have evacuated some of its citizens because of the sea-level rise driven by global warming. The highest point on the eight coral atolls that make up Tuvalu’s 26 square kilometres of territory sits only five metres above sea level. Almost a quarter of the nation’s population have already been evacuated and the remaining 8000 Tuvaluans may also have to leave in future years.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/703/36535

With sea levels rising, residents of the islands which comprise the Carteret atoll off the coast of Papau New Guinea are fast becoming some of the first refugees of [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]global [COLOR=blue ! important]warming[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/global-warming-creates-worldrsquos-first-climate-change-refugees-1653863.html

Those of us who track the effects of global warming had assumed that the first large flow of climate refugees would likely be in the South Pacific with the abandonment of Tuvalu or other low-lying islands. We were wrong. The first massive movement of climate refugees has been that of people away from the Gulf Coast of the United States.
Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall in late August 2005, forced a million people from New Orleans and the small towns on the Mississippi and Louisiana coasts to move inland either within state or to neighboring states, such as Texas and Arkansas. Although nearly all planned to return, many have not.
Unlike in previous cases, when residents typically left areas threatened by hurricanes and returned when authorities declared it was safe to do so, many of these evacuees are finding new homes. In this respect, the U.S. hurricane season of 2005 was different. Record-high temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico surface waters helped make Hurricane Katrina the most financially destructive hurricane ever to make landfall anywhere.


http://www.earth-policy.org/index.php?/plan_b_updates/2006/update57


BONN, Germany (AFP) – Tens of millions of people will be displaced by climate change in coming years, posing social, political and security problems of an unprecedented dimension, a new study said on Wednesday.
Estimates of the likely numbers range from 25 to 50 million people by 2010, while the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) has pitched a figure of 200 million by 2050.


http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/10/global-warming-200-milllion-refugees-by-2050/


Though they have no official status, environmental refugees are already with us. They are people who have been forced to flee their homes because of factors such as extreme weather, drought and desertification. There are already more of them than their "political" counterparts - 25 million, according to the last estimate, compared to around 22 million conventional refugees at their highest point in the late 1990s. By 2050, mostly due to the likely effects of global warming, there could be more than 150 million.
In 2001, 170 million people were affected by disasters, 97% of which were climate-related, such as floods, droughts and storms. In the previous decade more than 100 million suffered drought and famine in Africa, a figure likely to increase with global warming. Many times more were affected by floods in Asia.
According to one study, at least five small island states are at risk of ceasing to exist.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/oct/15/guardiananalysispage.climatechange
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
so doobs what country has the best model government right now in your opinion?

There isn't one, honestly. I think the US could have the best government, IF we could come to terms with our own corruption and implement a system of reforms to address the problems that exist (namely those who care only about their own personal gain and not about the welfare of the nation). The longer we continue on our current path, the harder that will become.

Right now, we're a corporatocracy. The wealthy industries control the government, and the people are allowed the illusion of democracy in the form of the occasional "ballot". We don't have a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people". We have a government "of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations".

We all know that most wealthy corporations are not at all concerned about the average citizen, aside from how they can separate that citizen from their hard-earned money. All you have to do is take a look at the industry lobbyists and the lengths they will go to in order to protect their corporate interests.

Check out these web sites:

www.fishscam.com

www.sunlightscam.com

www.mercuryfacts.org

www.sweetscam.com

www.howmuchfish.com


These are all web sites paid for by industry lobbyists to dupe the public into thinking that mercury in food is OK, tanning beds don't cause skin cancer, and high fructose corn syrup is GOOD FOR YOU (it's made from corn, right? It's a vegetable!), DESPITE scientific evidence to the contrary on all counts. What's disturbing is that many people fall for these tactics.
 

Hotforhitler

New Member
I think we have too many jews in politics. All they do is steal your money and force their zionist agenda on you!
This is the real problem people, wake up
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member

Big P

Well-Known Member
There isn't one, honestly. I think the US could have the best government, IF we could come to terms with our own corruption and implement a system of reforms to address the problems that exist (namely those who care only about their own personal gain and not about the welfare of the nation). The longer we continue on our current path, the harder that will become
Right now, we're a corporatocracy. The wealthy industries control the government, and the people are allowed the illusion of democracy in the form of the occasional "ballot". We don't have a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people". We have a government "of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations".

We all know that most wealthy corporations are not at all concerned about the average citizen, aside from how they can separate that citizen from their hard-earned money. All you have to do is take a look at the industry lobbyists and the lengths they will go to in order to protect their corporate interests.

Check out these web sites:

www.fishscam.com

www.sunlightscam.com

www.mercuryfacts.org

www.sweetscam.com

www.howmuchfish.com


These are all web sites paid for by industry lobbyists to dupe the public into thinking that mercury in food is OK, tanning beds don't cause skin cancer, and high fructose corn syrup is GOOD FOR YOU (it's made from corn, right? It's a vegetable!), DESPITE scientific evidence to the contrary on all counts. What's disturbing is that many people fall for these tactics.

well see i completly agree the corruption must be stopped but to me i dont blame the corporations, just like I couldnt blame somone for taking my wallet if I left it on the floor at walmart.


if you let them people will always line thier pockets its the responibility of elected officials to not do Bribes or whatever they like to call it quid pro cuo or whatever

anyway its thier responsibility to not be corrupt and it is our responsibility to vote them out of office if they are, but it seems impossible to stop them at this point but Im with you guys, lets killem!!! :mrgreen:j/k :shock:maybe
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member



well see i completly agree the corruption must be stopped but to me i dont blame the corporations, just like I couldnt blame somone for taking my wallet if I left it on the floor at walmart.


if you let them people will always line thier pockets its the responibility of elected officials to not do Bribes or whatever they like to call it quid pro cuo or whatever

anyway its thier responsibility to not be corrupt and it is our responsibility to vote them out of office if they are, but it seems impossible to stop them at this point but Im with you guys, lets killem!!! :mrgreen:j/k


It's not the same as leaving your wallet on the floor. These corporations are essentially bribing our elected officials in order to get them to cast their votes for the corporate interest, rather than the interest of the individual citizens that make up the constituency.
The corporations are just as much to blame as the elected officials who allow themselves to be bought by said corporations. Let's not forgot those among US who parrot the corporate agenda without even realizing they are essentially standing up for those who seek to destroy them, they should share the blame, as well, to a lesser extent since they are unwitting pawns in the grand scheme of things.

The real problem with simply "voting them out of office" is that, unless the system is radically altered, another corporate puppet will take their place.

In a perfect world, money isn't the great motivator.

Unfortunately, we live in a world that's far from perfect, and money makes that world go 'round.
 
Top