So sacrosanct the liberal media believes its mission to be, that they
haven’t even bothered to hide their bias. CNN’s environmental editor
Barbara Pyle, as quoted in the July 1990 issue of American Spectator, actually bragged: “I do have an axe to grind...I want to be the little subversive person in television.” Time magazine’s science editor Charles Alexander, at a September 16, 1989 global warming conference, confessed: “I would freely admit on this issue we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy.”
In 1970, the first Earth Day generated the following quotes:
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is
taken against problems facing mankind.” - George Wald, Harvard Biologist
“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this
nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” -
Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist
“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to
enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration
and possible extinction.” - New York Times editorial, the day after the
first Earth Day
“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small
increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until
at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death
during the next ten years.” - Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University
biologist
“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.” - Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day in 1970.
Read more:
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/04/genocidal-green-quotes.html
"Connect the dots' propaganda campaign:
Clearly, due to the timing and the reference he made to “People are starting to connect the dots.”,
the poll conducted by Anthony A. Leiserowitz of Yale University is just
a tool that is connected to this 350.org “climatedots.org” campaign, it
isn’t science, it is blatant advocacy disguised as science of the brand
Dr. James Hansen practices.
When people believe it is ethical to lie to promote their cause, they cannot be trusted to tell you the truth. The result is actually deep harm to their cause. And why do scientists have 'causes' anyway? And do you need to lie for a cause that is well supported by facts?
On 24 February, the Scientific American carried a revealing blog by John Horgan entitled, Should Global-Warming Activists Lie to Defend Their Cause? Horgan
is the Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens
Institute of Technology. He analyzes his question in the context of a
discussion he held in a freshman humanities class. The subject was the
morality of Dr. Peter Gleick’s use of identity theft to steal documents
from the Heartland Institute. Horgan is a promoter of the theory of
anthropogenic global warming (AGW), and he is clearly at pains to
rationalize the implications of Gleick’s caper.
This Sunday marks the 42nd anniversary of Earth Day. Over the years,
the day has become more focused on political activism and less on
personal decisions that individuals can make to help the environment.
Hundreds of thousands of self-identified environmentally-conscious
people travel to Washington, DC to demand that the federal government act to “protect” the environment.
Most
of these activists want the government to impose more environmental
regulations on businesses. But many of them fail to realize that big
businesses are also lobbying
for regulations to reduce CO2 emissions. Big businesses often pretend
to be environmentally-friendly but their underhanded motives aren’t as
pure. They know full well that strict environmental regulations will
close down many small businesses which will result in less competition
in the market place. Big businesses despise competition from the little
guys.
Major corporations are not the worst polluter on the planet. The title goes to the U.S. Federal Government. According to blogger W.E. Messamore,
The federal government is the single largest consumer
of energy with 500,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles. In 2009 alone,
the government’s bill for utilities and fuel totaled $24 billion, so
it’s no surprise that the government’s carbon footprint is 123.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year.
123.2 million metric tons! How could anyone trust the largest polluter on the face of the Earth to protect the environment?
 | | |
| http://www.americanclarion.com/6065/2012/04/20/earth-day-holy-day-left/ |
I would be green, but I already have a religion.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tell me what you think. I can take it.=)