Update: full text
If you want to see the full exchange of the NAS members who try to collect money for their anti-skeptic "outlandishly aggressively partisan" propagandistic campaign - from themselves and the corporations (5:1) - see this 17-page
All the brainwashing tricks and types of frauds, cherr-picking, censorship, lies, libels, and distortions have already been used by them in the past: but they won't work again because most of the public has learned something during the last 3 months and has already acquired a kind of "immunity" against these types of deception that they won't "unlearn" anytime soon.
Selected, unfiltered, and one-sided ads won't help them in any way because it will be clear that these ads fail to be impartial. And the detailed content won't impress anyone, either. That's because they don't have any real counter-arguments against the observations revealed in the last 3 months (and before that) - simply because no such counter-arguments exist. They're not interested in the content - how the climate actually works. They're only interested in the methods how to promote a particular "type" of reasoning and particular results. It has worked for years. But it won't work again.
They can't fix this "subtle" problem by collecting $15,000 after an e-mail conversation. The problem is much deeper than something that can be bought for $15,000. The problem is that their lives are built upon lies and this fact has been getting increasingly self-evident to everyone.
Original text: written on March 5th, 2010
Some people seem to be unwilling to accept that the era of the global warming panic that couldn't even be questioned is over.
In 1967, Paul Ehrlich predicted that hundreds of millions of people would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s. Later, he updated his prediction and argued that most of the U.S. population would starve to death before 2000.
His whole career has been built on making absolutely preposterous statements of this kind.
Of course, he always had to suffer by the knowledge that most people have always realized that he is a kook, a lunatic obsessed with doomsdays, and a parasite on the Academic system. Is there a method for him to prove that he was right and most Americans would prematurely disappear from the world? Maybe.
The number of people who continue to be as mad as Paul Ehrlich is strictly finite but it is still much greater than one. For example, Mr David Adam, a green ink-spiller in the Guardian, has made a "shocking" revelation:
Mr Adam, do you really think that in March 2010, it's still possible to defend the idea that energy experts are devils who can't ever be listened to or invited anywhere? Do you want to defend a complete isolation - or elimination? - of the energy companies? Have you lost your mind? Is The Guardian aware that they're employing a crazy person?
I can imagine that this poor guy will soon complain that he is getting unfriendly e-mails and exchanges with the other people. Will you really be surprised? You are trying to attack the dignity - if not the existence - of one of the most important sectors of the economy that everyone else needs to survive. What else would you expect than unfavorable messages if not something worse, moron?
Bonus: how the media propaganda is organized
I was led to watch a one-hour program, Behind the News: Propaganda and the CFR, released in February 2003 by the John Birch Society.
While the formulations sometimes look like a movie with conspiracy theories, all the facts they claim actually survived my tests. And it's pretty fascinating: I didn't know so many things! The main place where the news are "improved" and "homogenized" all over America is claimed to be The Council on Foreign Relations which includes most of the important figures in all the MSM media.
The program explains how the Americans have been fed lots of nonsense during the decades - nonsense optimized to introduce the "world government" which was always a major goal of the CFR. In the 1930s, the NYT readers would be constantly learning how nice guy Joseph Stalin was. It helped to legitimize him. In 1968, after the Tet offensive which was a great military success for the U.S., the media have essentially given the war to the Vietnamese communists.
One also learns the history of the "global cooling" scare in the 1970s (nice authentic segments!), global warming, the role of fear in the media, and even the reason why so many people in the U.S. hate the Serbs so much - something I was really shocked by. Ten years ago, everyone was being fed fabricated pictures of concentration camps (which were really places to feed the people) and a undernourished person (who actually had a genetic disease).
The media would deliberately hide the Chinagate, namely communist Chinese funding of the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign in exchange for some critical U.S. technology given to China. There are lots of examples how "all" the media in the U.S. have deliberately distorted various stories, cut the critical pieces of stories etc., in order to erode people's confidence in their freedom and local self-governance and to improve the chances of a world government.
It's a powerful stuff.
If you want to see the full exchange of the NAS members who try to collect money for their anti-skeptic "outlandishly aggressively partisan" propagandistic campaign - from themselves and the corporations (5:1) - see this 17-page
collective e-mail exchange (PDF)It's kind of amazing that they don't see what's important here. All of their focus is on the tricks how to brainwash the people and force them to believe the "best science" that this group can offer. But their "best science" is no longer good enough.
review by Myron Ebell (HTML)
review by NY Times / Greenwire / E&E (HTML)
All the brainwashing tricks and types of frauds, cherr-picking, censorship, lies, libels, and distortions have already been used by them in the past: but they won't work again because most of the public has learned something during the last 3 months and has already acquired a kind of "immunity" against these types of deception that they won't "unlearn" anytime soon.
Selected, unfiltered, and one-sided ads won't help them in any way because it will be clear that these ads fail to be impartial. And the detailed content won't impress anyone, either. That's because they don't have any real counter-arguments against the observations revealed in the last 3 months (and before that) - simply because no such counter-arguments exist. They're not interested in the content - how the climate actually works. They're only interested in the methods how to promote a particular "type" of reasoning and particular results. It has worked for years. But it won't work again.
They can't fix this "subtle" problem by collecting $15,000 after an e-mail conversation. The problem is much deeper than something that can be bought for $15,000. The problem is that their lives are built upon lies and this fact has been getting increasingly self-evident to everyone.
Original text: written on March 5th, 2010
Some people seem to be unwilling to accept that the era of the global warming panic that couldn't even be questioned is over.
In 1967, Paul Ehrlich predicted that hundreds of millions of people would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s. Later, he updated his prediction and argued that most of the U.S. population would starve to death before 2000.
His whole career has been built on making absolutely preposterous statements of this kind.
Of course, he always had to suffer by the knowledge that most people have always realized that he is a kook, a lunatic obsessed with doomsdays, and a parasite on the Academic system. Is there a method for him to prove that he was right and most Americans would prematurely disappear from the world? Maybe.
The Washington Times (click)have revealed e-mails showing that right now, he may have finally found out the magic formula. Together with Stephen Schneider and others, such as Paul Falkowski, the director of an energy institute at Rutgers who wants to replace fossil fuels by biofuels from duckweeds (aquatic plants) that will be growing on the surface of all ponds and oceans in the world (yes, he's another nut), Ehrlich decided that it's time to destroy the climate skeptics - i.e. most of the world's population. One of the participants of the project described its goal as
an outlandishly aggressively partisan approach to gut the credibility of skeptics.Very nice. I just wonder whether the participants have also found a method to do these things while hiding that they're a criminal cabal that deserves to be put in jail if not on an electric chair.
The number of people who continue to be as mad as Paul Ehrlich is strictly finite but it is still much greater than one. For example, Mr David Adam, a green ink-spiller in the Guardian, has made a "shocking" revelation:
Climate emails inquiry: Energy consultant linked to physics body's submissionIf you don't understand the "juice" of the title, he is complaining that it must be a sin for the Institute of Physics to have listened to one expert in the energy industry - among many witnesses they have listened to! Holy crap. If I were doing such things where the practical consequences of possible policies - mainly for the energy industry - are far more important than the underlying science as a pure theory, then most of the people I would invite would be economists or energy experts.
Mr Adam, do you really think that in March 2010, it's still possible to defend the idea that energy experts are devils who can't ever be listened to or invited anywhere? Do you want to defend a complete isolation - or elimination? - of the energy companies? Have you lost your mind? Is The Guardian aware that they're employing a crazy person?
I can imagine that this poor guy will soon complain that he is getting unfriendly e-mails and exchanges with the other people. Will you really be surprised? You are trying to attack the dignity - if not the existence - of one of the most important sectors of the economy that everyone else needs to survive. What else would you expect than unfavorable messages if not something worse, moron?
Bonus: how the media propaganda is organized
I was led to watch a one-hour program, Behind the News: Propaganda and the CFR, released in February 2003 by the John Birch Society.
While the formulations sometimes look like a movie with conspiracy theories, all the facts they claim actually survived my tests. And it's pretty fascinating: I didn't know so many things! The main place where the news are "improved" and "homogenized" all over America is claimed to be The Council on Foreign Relations which includes most of the important figures in all the MSM media.
The program explains how the Americans have been fed lots of nonsense during the decades - nonsense optimized to introduce the "world government" which was always a major goal of the CFR. In the 1930s, the NYT readers would be constantly learning how nice guy Joseph Stalin was. It helped to legitimize him. In 1968, after the Tet offensive which was a great military success for the U.S., the media have essentially given the war to the Vietnamese communists.
One also learns the history of the "global cooling" scare in the 1970s (nice authentic segments!), global warming, the role of fear in the media, and even the reason why so many people in the U.S. hate the Serbs so much - something I was really shocked by. Ten years ago, everyone was being fed fabricated pictures of concentration camps (which were really places to feed the people) and a undernourished person (who actually had a genetic disease).
The media would deliberately hide the Chinagate, namely communist Chinese funding of the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign in exchange for some critical U.S. technology given to China. There are lots of examples how "all" the media in the U.S. have deliberately distorted various stories, cut the critical pieces of stories etc., in order to erode people's confidence in their freedom and local self-governance and to improve the chances of a world government.
It's a powerful stuff.
Ehrlich, Schneider et al.: preparing a pogrom against skeptics
![Ehrlich, Schneider et al.: preparing a pogrom against skeptics]()
Reviewed by DAL
on
March 06, 2010
Rating:
No comments: