lmao

Artful Dodger: well said.

gogul:

Together we can make Scotland better. http://www.snp.org/

It's to be raging to have no single line of reasonable news from hungary in the english language. Shame on you.

gogul: Go Scotland!!!

Artful Dodger: An absolutely beautiful place, imagine the highlands forestet climate change, noo not true lol

gogul:

November 28, 2011
Another blow for warmist fraud: Canada pulling out of Kyoto Protocols
Thomas Lifson


Canada is reported to be planning tom announce it is leaving the Kyoto Protocols, intended to reduce CO2 emissions in the hope of halting global warming, which hasn't occurred in the last decade, according to theories which lack actual scientific proof. The private Canadian CTV television network reports:
Canada will announce next month that it will formally withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, CTV News has learned.
The Harper government has tentatively planned an announcement for a few days before Christmas, CTV's Roger Smith reported Sunday evening.
The developments come as Environment Minister Peter Kent prepares for a climate conference in Durban, South Africa that opens on Monday, with delegates from 190 countries seeking a new international agreement for cutting emissions.
Issues on the agenda include extending the Kyoto emission targets, a move being championed by Christiana Figueres, head of the UN climate secretariat.
Kent said in the House of Commons on Nov. 22 he won't sign a document at the Durban conference that extends the Kyoto targets.
"Canada goes to Durban with a number of countries sharing the same objective, and that is to put Kyoto behind us," Kent said
The global warming emperor has no clothes, and now a member of the G-8 is going to be saying so, if this report is correct.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/11/another_blow_for_warmist_fraud_canada_pulling_out_of_kyoto_protocols.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#ixzz1f0s4ICtL

November 28, 2011
Global Warming Bubble is Popping
James Lewis


Hoo, boy, as Mad Magazine used to say.
Remember that old Market Crash of 2008? It started very slowly when some investors got suspicious about empty mortgages (wonder why?) wrapped in layers and layers of tin foil, then told some others about their doubts, and more and more and then BANG! Markets panicked, John McCain lost, Obama won on sheer unmitigated gall and nothing more.
In math-physics this is called a "phase change, "and it doesn't just happen with water molecules locking together to make ice crystals and acres of Lake Michigan all going Crack! when the water temps drop below zero C. It also applies to avalanches, demand-and-supply markets (including political ones), and scientific "consensus" based on dubious evidence.
The 5,000 internal emails among "scientists" in the UK -- Climategate 2.0 -- are proving to be the tipping point. This story is now moving at warp speed.
In the UK the Prime Minister's office has just run up the white flag of surrender.
The BBC Organ of Propaganda is now a target of the British press, who seem to remember what news coverage is for. See here.
Excellent blow-by-blow coverage is being provided by Climate Depot.
The UK Daily Mail has actually been doing real journalism -- a disappearing commodity in Crony Socialism.
Here are today's MailOnline headlines:


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/11/global_warming_bubble_is_popping.html#ixzz1f0woq7sE

Artful Dodger: The BBC is engaged in a cover up!!..... .... maybe they just remember the effects of Acid Rain on the UK and Europe and therefore side on those who think pollution can effect our climate.

You've heard of that nice side effect of pollution haven't you?

Rain that'll kill trees. Or has that part of of human pollution history been missed in the USA??

"The UK Daily Mail has actually been doing real journalism"

Then their view that American Conservatism is nuts and corrupt holds true then?

The Canadian government dismissed the Kyoto Protocol on climate change as a thing of the past on Monday, but declined to confirm a media report that Canada will formally withdraw from the protocol before the end of this year.

"Kyoto is the past," Environment Minister Peter Kent told reporters in Ottawa, describing the decision by Canada's previous Liberal government to sign up for the protocol as "one of the biggest blunders they made".

Andrew MacDougall, a spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper declined to comment on Canada's plans, but said a protocol that doesn't include major greenhouse gas emitters China and the United States "will not work."

"Canada will not sign on to a new agreement that does not include all major emitters," he said.


>>it seems your sources lie Art<<

(V): Sure Jules. That must be it. "MY" source lies and of course, "YOUR" source is spot on.

10) "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand."

9) "I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible."

8) "The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit."

7) "When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union -- like public housing in the United States -- look decrepit within a year or two of their construction..."

6) "There is all the difference in the world, however, between two kinds of assistance through government that seem superficially similar: first, 90 percent of us agreeing to impose taxes on ourselves in order to help the bottom 10 percent, and second, 80 percent voting to impose taxes on the top 10 percent to help the bottom 10 percent -- William Graham Sumner's famous example of B and C decided what D shall do for A. The first may be wise or unwise, an effective or ineffective way to help the disadvantaged -- but it is consistent with belief in both equality of opportunity and liberty. The second seeks equality of outcome and is entirely antithetical to liberty."

5) "When the United States was formed in 1776, it took 19 people on the farm to produce enough food for 20 people. So most of the people had to spend their time and efforts on growing food. Today, it's down to 1% or 2% to produce that food. Now just consider the vast amount of supposed unemployment that was produced by that. But there wasn't really any unemployment produced. What happened was that people who had formerly been tied up working in agriculture were freed by technological developments and improvements to do something else. That enabled us to have a better standard of living and a more extensive range of products."

4) "Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else's resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, if you want knowledge to be properly utilized, you have to do it through the means of private property."

3) "Inflation is taxation without legislation."

2) "The great danger to the consumer is the monopoly -- whether private or governmental. His most effective protection is free competition at home and free trade throughout the world. The consumer is protected from being exploited by one seller by the existence of another seller from whom he can buy and who is eager to sell to him. Alternative sources of supply protect the consumer far more effectively than all the Ralph Naders of the world."

1) "(T)he supporters of tariffs treat it as self-evident that the creation of jobs is a desirable end, in and of itself, regardless of what the persons employed do. That is clearly wrong. If all we want are jobs, we can create any number -- for example, have people dig holes and then fill them up again, or perform other useless tasks. Work is sometimes its own reward. Mostly, however, it is the price we pay to get the things we want. Our real objective is not just jobs but productive jobs -- jobs that will mean more goods and services to consume."

"There is a new paper on Science Express that examines the constraints on climate sensitivity from looking at the last glacial maximum (LGM), around 21,000 years ago [Schmittner et al (2011)] (SEA). The headline number (2.3ºC) is a little lower than IPCC’s “best estimate” of 3ºC global warming for a doubling of CO2, but within the likely range (2-4.5ºC) of the last IPCC report. However, there are reasons to think that the result may well be biased low, and stated with rather more confidence than is warranted given the limitations of the study."

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/11/ice-age-constraints-on-climate-sensitivity/#more-9939


-Since October we know that 2010 the worldwide co2-emissions soared as fast as never before, for 6 %.
-At the same time we heard about the surface of the arctic ice (smaller as ever).
-A new study shows on the basis of the heatwaves and forest fires in Russia 2010, that the global warming trend is influencing the weather system.
-The IPCC presented a survey warning of strong rains, droughts, sea level and more heavy storms on nov. 18.
-According to prognoses, most of all it's the south of Africa threatened by floods, water shortages and bad harvests.
-The efforts to climate protections are bigger in emerging countries as in our crashing countries (lol joke, sort of).
-The UN-Climate conference in Durban is not a ecological happening. Lots of governments send their responsible for foreign affairs and economic policy, not their environment secretaries.

The human contribution to climate still stands by my informations, but that's not even the point. Our governing class is still grinding us down to a nub.

Artful Dodger: I'd rather trust Reuters then a blogger who takes his "facts" from Daily Mail. If we are to trust the word of the Daily Mail, then you have to accept (as your blogger does) as fact the view of the paper on Palin, Bachmann and many of your heros being complete morons living in la la land. :)

(V): probably an other expert of the internets. I'd rather thrust google news than bbc..

Übergeek 바둑이: "Atheists see objective truths as just being without the need for a creator or giver. The sun IS. Science can describe how a sun is formed, how it functions, etc. Science cannot prove whether God made the sun or not, because science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. Thus the atheists says: the SUN is and there is no need for any God to have created. Whether the atheist is right or wrong is a matter of faith."

I think God takes this with a shrug ;)

He is an American hero!

Artful Dodger: Could you please explain to me just what exactly is the above and how does it work?

I keep hearing it on TV progs and am curious....
thanks :)

Bernice:
http://www.401k-and-ira-retirement.com/
It's an investment retirement account that an employer may or may not match contributions usually up to a certain percentage. If the employer matches contributions, it can be a great investment. If not, it carries virtually the same risks as IRA accounts.

"one of the foremost lie detector experts in America said about Herman Cain.”

That lie detector expert is an Atlanta private investigator who WGCL enlisted three weeks ago to analyze Cain’s denial of Sharon Bialek‘s sexual harrassment allegations.

Using “$15,000 software,” the P.I. concluded that Cain was not lying when he denied Bialek’s allegations at a press conference held after she came forward. On the other hand, the software listed Bialek’s account of Cain reaching for her genitals as having a “high risk” for lying."

There is no evidence that this lie detector software can reliably detect lies or truth from video. It is BS!

Dark Prince:

People do things that they regret later in life.

Herman Cain will of course deny involvement with those women because he wants to be president.

In a perfect world people would be able to distinguish his private life from what he can offer as a poltiician, but people are swayed by personal details in a candidate's life.

I think that somebody in the Republican party wants Herman Cain out of the election. It has been claimed that the inital leaks of Cain's indiscretions came from the Perry campaign. At this point the one who benefits the most is Romney.

Regardless of that, Herman Cain would alienate the Hispanic vote because he openly proposed building an electrified fence across the border with Mexico. That would alienate the 17% of the voters who are Hispanic.

If Herman Cain were to be nominated for the Republican party, Obama is sure to win. "Here is the man who harrassed all those women, kept a mistress for several years, and wants to build a fence to keep Hispanics out." The voting public might not be as discerning, and reelect Barrack Obama easily.

Herman Cain refuses to concede. He keeps denying the allegations, in spite of several women coming forward to disclose the nature of the settlemetns that occurred out of court. If Herman cain was smarter, he would simply own up to his mistakes, apologize, and then point out to the fact that in spite of his mistakes, he has the capacity to be president. Instead all his denials make him look shifty. There are times when honesty and admitting one's mistakes is the winning political move.

Übergeek 바둑이:
He is running to sell books and speeches.
He is no politician and has no expectation of getting the nomination much less becoming president.
The point about the lie detector is not about whether Herman is guilty of sexual indiscretions. I couldn't care less about that. The point is about the dishonesty in the campaign ad itself. Herman did NOT take a legitimate lie detector test. It was software used on the videos of Herman and his accuser. I think the reliability of the software and its application on video material is questionable at best.

@AynRandBot
Ayn Rand Bot
Instead of prosperity, socialism has brought economic paralysis and/or collapse to every country that tried it.

There are different definitions for socialism.
some are Marxist, but many are not.
The failure or success of a system in a particular country may have little to do with economic factors.
Other factors may include internal corruption, overpopulation, external pressure such as foreign support of coup attempts and sanctions.
Consider that a poor country may have been poor before adopting its current economic strategy.

The following countries adopted a socialist economic model. I don't see imminent collapse or increased paralysis compared to their previous economic state.
Bangladesh since 1971
Guyana transitioning from capitalism to socialism 1980-96
India since 1947
Portugal since 1974
Sri Lanka since 1978
Tanzania since 1964

That could be said of the many attempts at a pure capitalist society. That is why Britain adopted some form of socialism when it came to the welfare of it's people.

It was found that even with Conservative Christian policies on giving to those in need (about a 10% donation) ... was not enough. It was the Quaker Bankers who contributed much and founded good society, and in some instances their rejection of capitalism still 100 years on has an impact and contribution to those seeking to better themselves.

If Bankers today went by the Quaker Banker code there would be honesty and none or little fraud, the Likes of Madoff would be unheard of.

btw.. it could be said going by recent events, that a pure capitalist society is just a destructive as a pure socialist state.

But seeing as both sides of the coin have been interfering with each other. Has there been any pure socialist/capitalist society in the last 100 years?

(V): And Europe is going broke. You can only give away so much money before you saturate the system. You know that. One look to Greece is all you need to see how badly a system can fail. You Brits aren't doing so well either. And the USA is heading that way fast.

Artful Dodger: thank god for Australia :)

Artful Dodger: Greece is a strange case, due to much of the country being owned by the Greek Church. As a general example it's pretty crap. Yes in the UK we have problems.. as do all modern economies.

The failure of economies is due to the banks... a capitalist system with no or little regulation at the time, as we were told that they were trustworthy.

The USA is already bust. If it were not for the Chinese and others buying your debt it would be more evident. Something that was started back in the 80's under Raygun and no Pres or US government since has had the balls to stand upto those who choose to manipulate the US economic system just so 1% of Americans can get loads of extra cash.

In real terms the other 99% of Americans have had their income drop allowing for inflation, etc... just so 1% can see their income rise.

Bernice:

(V): Banks are not the problem. Government is. Regulations are in effect, but not followed. In some cases, the government forced bank policy to act against sound financial sense. Many banks saw only dollar signs and went along. Some got greedy. Many didn't. Credit Unions are still strong. I have all my money in a local credit union. Investing in my community. Bank greed is a symptom of a deeper problem. So your only 1/2 right on that point.

Artful Dodger:
It is true that some policies have been counterproductive and some regulations made ineffective. That doesn't imply that there should be no regulations. Policies and regulations should make sense and regulations need to have "teeth" for enforcing them.
It's also true that credit unions have typically avoided the problems banks have had. The key there was how they were controlled and by whom.

Artful Dodger:

> And Europe is going broke. You can only give away so much money before you saturate the system. ... And the USA is heading that way fast.

I think the difference is that in some countries the government gives away the money to bankers, troubled giant corporations and the military industrial complex. The question is, what causes more problems? Giving money away through social programs? Or giving money away to the rich and powerful? As of last week, bankers have received bailouts twice! The only reason why the financial markets recovered last week is because in essence central bankers gave banks a second round of bailouts. The third is the charm I suppose. Next time they will be begging communist China to bailout the capitalist system!

Übergeek 바둑이: I don't think we should bail out the banks. But the government created this mess and allowed the banks to take advantage stupid regulations. And clearly, there are some banks that deserve criminal prosecution.

Here's a story: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57336042/prosecuting-wall-street/?tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel

another is here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-57336046-10391709/behind-the-financial-crisis-a-fraud-investigator-talks/?tag=contentBody;listingLeadStories

Some politicians need to see some jail time as well. But it will never happen.

Artful Dodger: Right.... That's why The UK has had to stop the bank system collapsing and millions of peoples savings lost of banks like the RBS. This would have had WORLD WIDE repercussions.

... the government didn't tell the bank to engage in a consortium to buy another bank. Nor did the government tell them to ignore warnings from their own people regarding the lack of full accounts, as it did not matter... The buying of the bank was already decided to go ahead regardless...

The billions of pounds that have gone on shoring up the financial system re RBS, Northern Rock and other banks... The loss that councils in the UK are reeling from due to banks in Europe that have collapsed taking investments with them..

.. it's all the governments fault. Banks and businesses do not in anyway have any influence on governments what so ever, or do they have the ability to run themselves.

..... Our governments do that... well in the UK at least.. 'own' many of them, or in principle the people do.

"Bank greed" ... ... That's the greed that cost the UK over £850,000,000,000

N' why is it that such firms as Southern Cross have to be regulated? Isn't it inherent as part of the service of running a care home organisation you'll not run up so much debt that the whole company collapses leaving 750 care homes and 30,000 residents exposed to closure..... Which is now the situation... leaving the public purse to have to do the right thing and keep them open till buyers can be found.

But.. now other care home providers are found to be in the same situation. If they fail.. The government of the UK will have to step in to safeguard the elderly and vulnerable.

Does the government need to babysit these firms and change the bedsheets of the directors who will just lose their job... Nothing to stop them moving onto another firm.

.... As it is.. You have more rights buying a kettle from Argos than being a resident in these care homes or indeed if your brand new home collapses from bad workmanship.

Our pensioners are told that the big power firms need to increase prices while already making record profits, leading to more "fuel poverty".

... Interesting history bit. One of the factors involved in the winning of WWI was the betting on the stock exchange in Wall Street on who would win. I imagine how pleased the Allied troops must have felt crossing no man's land, knowing that some some rich stockbroker just made a few thousand on how many of them will die that day.

Such is Capitalism.

(V): the entire problem in a nutshell.

Bwild: If that's the case, a hammer can bring it to light.

Bwild: It'll be interesting to see if prices do come down once the UK's new wealth of shale gas comes on the market. Personally I'd like to see more geothermal power systems built.

Yellowstone holds a lot of potential ;)

Ahhhhh the Liberals are everywhere according to Fox..... Even according to Eric Bolling using the New Muppet movie to promote communism.

Tim Dowling a blogger for the Guardian (it's a blogger, so he must be right) reports on how, with this new enlightenment he can look back and see all the old Muppet movies including this one are part of a long plot to overthrow the American dream and to brainwash young kiddies (just as the Cars movies did) into being left of left leftie liberals.

".....
The Muppet Movie (1979). The Muppets head for liberal Hollywood, portrayed here as some kind of collectivist paradise, while a businessman, a Colonel Sanders-type fast food magnate, is once again the antagonist. The notion of slaughtering a pig (in this case, Miss Piggy) is treated as if it were equivalent to murder. Thank you, veggie-nazis.

The Great Muppet Caper (1981). The Muppets travel to London, home of socialised medicine. Features some squatting.

The Muppets Take Manhattan (1984). I didn't see this one, but it's clearly about the Muppets joining some sort of terrorist network, which may sound funny to certain leftwing intellectual freedom-haters, but I think it's just sick.

The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992). Based on a story by Charles Dickens, whose other work was known to demonise workhouses, prisons and the wealthy. On the plus-side, the film itself promotes private charity over state intervention, but the overall message is that poor people got that way through no fault of their own, and need rich people to bail them out.

Muppet Treasure Island (1996). Treats the entrepreneurial wherewithal of freelance treasure hunters as "piracy". Why, for once, can't the bad guy turn out to be an overzealous environmental regulator?

Muppets From Space (1999). This film posits an essentially godless universe where certain Muppets turn out to be space aliens and is, in its own way, as anti-Christian as any Harry Potter film...."

Remember people... Liberals are everywhere!!

(V):
We mustn't forget about the green agenda of Dr. Seuss and the insidious eco-friendly plots of his books.
Oh, the horror of spreading the message of maintaining sustainable resources. We humans are supposed to dominate. If creatures have not evolved to withstand human encroachment and exploitations, they don't deserve to survive.

Dark Prince: ... There are never ever any movies glorifying making money!!... ... ... Maybe that role has been moved to the Churches, seeing as many a TV preacher seems to be saying Jesus can make you rich!!

(V): Liberals are everywhere in Hollywood and the Media. Not exclusively, but predominantly

Artful Dodger: I suppose then.. we have to blame them for the death of Kenny then!!

But is Kennys' death a fact??

(V): Liberals are everywhere in Hollywood and the Media. Not exclusively, but predominantly

Artful Dodger: Is Murdoch a Liberal then?

(V):Liberals are everywhere in Hollywood and the Media. Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly
Not exclusively, but predominantly

get it now? or do you need more?