Isn’t it interesting how stoked up the enviro-cultists get when anyone, especially a governing politician, says anything against their god, global warming. Check out GW arch-bishop of Canada - David Suzuki’s reaction to the dire warnings in the report on the economic impacts of meeting Kyoto targets:
If our so-called leaders ignore the warnings, I would think that this is a crime against future generations and I'm wondering if there's a legal basis for taking action against people who run corporations or who run government, for their inaction on global warming,
[...I’m wondering if there’s any legal basis for taking action against Suzuki and his ilk for spreading lies about man made global warming, with the intention of swindling everyday people out of gobs and gobs of money. Probably not likely either. As you were.]
I happen to think it's a crime, or perhaps we can call it a sin.
[…the bishop has spoken, let it be written that anyone that is not a lemming and likes to think for themselves is a sinner against the global warming religion and must burn in…umm…Ontario desert for all their natural lives. Even Suzuki is referring to GW hysteria as a religion, complete with sin.]
And what did his worship have to say about the report?
First of all, let's stop listening to the goddamn economists
[…classy! “If you don’t worship my god I will cuss in your God’s name.” Is that what they teach in fruit-fly skool nowadays? Not to mention the disrespect he has shown for some of the most honoured people in their field.]
And finally,
Twenty per cent of the economy will disappear. It will cost more than World War I and World War II put together. We'll go into a kind of depression we've never, ever had in all of history.
[…after which, Suzuki stood up and yelled “BOOO!”]
Why do people like Suzuki and the rest of the global warming cult not get it? These dire predictions are based on very flawed models that are set up to give the answer their creators (global warming proponents) are looking for. On a more basic level, climatologists are lousy at predicting the weather a week or a month into the future. How can we trust them predicting temperatures and weather 20 to 50 years from now?
|