Creepy Propaganda from Copenhagen

facebooktwittergoogle_plusby feather

If you haven’t seen the short film which Copenhagen organizers used to “start off” their summit, be prepared for your head to explode. You might want to cover your carpet and walls with plastic. I’ll wait….(insert jeopardy theme song here…)

I’ve seen propaganda films, many of them from WWII and the Cold War Era. And the purpose of those films is to drum up support for various causes. The United States made them to help fund the war with the purchase of war bonds and to promote the rationing of goods to ensure America was victorious in WWII. The Nazi’s used them to promote hate against Jews and the rest of Europe. We know it works, if you bombard people with bias and cut out the truth you can convince anyone that your cause is right and just.

Unfortunately, the propaganda film that kick started COP15 isn’t just a bias scare tactic, it comes on the heels of the greatest scandal in scientific history, Climategate. If you’ve been living in a cave in Afghanistan with Osama Bin Ladin here’s the deal on Climategate: hackers gained access to the email accounts of some the top global warming researchers. (PoliticaMath has a great visual on the CRU emails) The emails blatantly state that the data global warming researchers were using to convince the world of an impending environmental holocaust were doctored. As in, made up. As in, not true. As in, A LIE. Big shocker there. (sarcasm)

When I saw this video this afternoon, I couldn’t believe it. The level of Global Warming propaganda is scary!! See for yourself:

Please help save the world….from the climate-frauds in Copenhagen!!!!

4 thoughts on “Creepy Propaganda from Copenhagen

  1. I find it funny that you all stupid republicans like to instill fear when it comes to the healthcare debate and terrorism but when it comes to something like climate change your just a bunch of nay sayers. lol Good read a science book you idiots

  2. “Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.

    It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.

    A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.

    Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.

    But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if this evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.

    The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.

    All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.

    It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.

    Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet–with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.

    Harleigh Kyson Jr.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *