Step One: Fully concede (admit) to our innermost selves that we were addicted to climate fear mongering.
Step Two: Come to believe that a Power greater than ourselves causes weather and climate, restoring us to sanity.
Step Three: Make a decision to study and understand how the natural world works.
Step Four: Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves, our need to frighten others and how we have personally benefited by expressing alarms about the climate.
Step Five: Admit to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our exaggerations and false claims.
Step Six: Become ready to set aside these notions and actions we now recognize as objectionable and groundless.
Step Seven: Seek help to remove every single defect of character that produced fear in us and led us to make others afraid.
Step Eight: Make a list of all persons we have harmed and called “deniers”, and become willing to make amends to them all.
Step Nine: Apologize to people we have frightened or denigrated and explain the errors of our ways.
Step Ten: Continue to take personal inventory and when new illusions creep into our thinking, promptly renounce them.
Step Eleven: Dedicate ourselves to gain knowledge of natural climate factors and to deepen our understanding of nature’s powers and ways of working.
Step Twelve: Having awakened to our delusion of climate alarm, we try to carry this message to other addicts, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
With a New Year close at hand, let us hope that many climate alarmists take the opportunity to turn the page by resolving a return to sanity. It is not too late to get right with reality before the cooling comes in earnest.
Full piece here rclutz.wordpress.com/2017/12/2…
I would say not only return to sanity, but back away (FAST!) from the smugly, arrogant, ignorant, demonizing, denigrating, self-serving, 'I-know-jack-shit-about-you-but-I-will-tell-YOU-why-you-don't-believe-and-you-are-morally-and-intellectually-WRONG-because-*I*-say-so' SJW / Brownshirt attitude.
Or is it open only to the elite?
One cannot be allowed to leave The True Faith.
"Morally, I'm not in a position to judge."
Well, thank the Cosmic Muffin, I am.
You advocate a return to an economic and technological level that
would result in the deaths of millions, primarily helpless children.
You have a cesspool where most people carry their hearts.
Your statements are vapid, childish, and your opinions come from a
desire to never admit that you are wrong, which leads you to
accept everything that you are told that agrees with your current
beliefs, rather than honestly inform yourself of facts which might
negate your world view. In other words, you would rather remain
ignorant than admit ignorance, even in the privacy of your own
mind (what little of it still functions).
That is the evil of the ego, and you are it's slave.
Just having "Athena" as part of your name is evidence of not only
your ego, but your pride... And your lack of honesty.
I can't begin to understand such a closed, miniscule mind. The inability to work out a simple piece of logic is appalling. The above line is just another reason I refuse to engage with this idiot.
You have already seen the example in this piece
51% of the membership have concluded that the current shift in climate is at least partially natural to mostly natural. And this is one of the groups which cheerfully touts as supporting the 'consensus.'
And this is just one of several of those groups in which a large minority to a small majority fall into the same category. And I will also note right here that when I presented her a link to a piece I had put together detailing those other groups and the numbers of scientists within them who disagree with the 'consensus' - SHE NEVER LOOKED AT IT. She made her 'rebuttal' without so much as clicking on the link, after earlier claiming that I do not provide backup / links. When I looked at the page, there had been NO visitors. She's not interested in any information which might crack her wall of ignorance.
Just taking those groups alone, that means there are thousands, possibly tens of thousands of scientists WHO DISAGREE WITH THE 'CONSENSUS' WORLD-WIDE.
And as that is just a very small sampling of the groups, that by any common-sense thinking ought to mean that TENS OF THOUSANDS is a MINIMUM. Which could easily be settled by each organization on the list holding and making public a poll of every single member.
Which means there is NO '97%' consensus.
She is desperately trying to avoid understanding that.
I have told her that I will SPAM anything she has to say. But since she's attempting to deflect the course of the conversation with you, I figure I'll leave those comments up for you to work with *g*
For your information I readily admit it when I'm wrong - in fact I just did so... was it in this thread or another one? I forget. Kjam hid it in a huff anyway. Kjam had brought up some exotic fission technology and I had sarcastically said that I'm sure that climate denier websites talk about nuclear power all the time since it's so in line with their agenda. Kjam told me that actually they do talk about nuclear quite a lot. So I was wrong, and said so. So what? I'm not afraid of being wrong and when I find out I am I correct myself.
And I advocate the fall of civilization? Seriously? Where do you get this stuff? That's completely delusional. You seriously think that a carbon tax or cap and trade or emission limits on powerplants is going to kill millions? That's beyond ridiculous. Do you think that fossil fuel technology is the pinnacle of the possible advancement of civilization? Or do you think that America has fallen so far from the promise of our ancestors that we're not capable of solving technological challenges anymore?
And not very observant, except of what you want to see.
Oh, and she would never look at any of the links, anyway. 'lies made up by deniers' dontcha know.
It works both ways, Sugar Plum.
A coward, a liar, and a braggart all in one. Is there a more pathetic example of humanity?
about this kind of topic than I do.
But I have yet to see you even attempt to engage in honest debate.
Unless that's the new, hip term for childish name calling.
I'm just here to throw peanuts.
She's full of shit. And nothing else.
Tell me something, if you don't know anything about what we're talking about, how would you know honest debate if it jumped up and bit you on the ass? If you don't have a clue about climate change, how could you tell if anything that Kajm or I say has any basis in reality whatsoever? Guess? Throw a dart at the wall? Or just insult the person who says things that might disturb your tidy little world view and make you think? I realize that you'd likely burn out some neurons if you tried to actually evaluate the predigested bullshit that Fox News et al feed you, but you could try to act like a civilized adult even if you are that scared.
Like most libtard/leftist/sjw/gender confused, the 'global warming' crowd has Invested their entire lives into a Pack of Lies, and to admit it's Lies would be to Negate their very Existence.... (which wouldn't be a Bad Thing, it would save the Diesel Fuel needed to run the Woodchipper..)
All this time, they have been trying to reprogram the masses of unbelievers,
how dare the Deniers try to tell them their DOGMA is wrong?
Also, note how they have used the word "Denier" with the deliberate linkage to another one of their favorite Memes, "Holocaust (tm) Denial" to Connect their representation of "Hitler" to their Meme of 'global warming'. They have gone so far as to advocate that "Deniers" should be Silenced, Imprisoned and even Killed. Kinda like "nazis" huh?
Unless she's too much of a coward to leave it there.
*edit* to kkkessy: screw your note. Until you *ASK* me what I believe instead of telling me what *YOU* think I believe based upon your biased assumptions of what is behind what I say, we have nothing to discuss. You 'perfectly understand' what YOU think the basis for my stance is, not what it actually is. Again, your 'perfect understanding' comes to a big, fat ZERO.
Until you take what *I* tell you my thinking is at face value and valid, we have nothing to discuss.
As you have determined that politics or some 'big oil' conspiracy are the only reasons for my stance, we have nothing to discuss.
As you have determined / been taught that many skeptic scientists across the globe are paid off / intellectually dishonest, we have nothing to discuss.
As you have determined that I am intellectually dishonest, we have nothing to discuss.
And as you will instantly misinterpret and misrepresent everything I have said here to mean something I did not say and do not believe, we have nothing to discuss.
Happy New Years.
She did judge me morally- for in her mind the likes of EXXON are evil corporations bent upon profit at the expense of the planet. And the only reason she would even have for bringing up EXXON is that I am somehow motivated by them / money / the 'politics' they could buy comments.deviantart.com/1/7215…
So if the energy companies who make her life Livable are bad, then by rights I must be bad. Therefore, she has judged me morally.
Or does she imagine "Exxon" sitting in an easy chair,
smoking an expensive cigar and drinking a nice Rose'?
And Exxon's profit margins are a heck of a lot
lower than companies which don't produce such vital
products. Say, cosmetic companies.
She really shouldn't have "Athena" in her name...