EXPLODING SCHOOL CHILDREN : Global Warming Propaganda Campaign Backfires

page: 12
100
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by Gorman91
 
anything that promotes looking after the planet is a good thing, anything that does that by coming across as a direct threat to anyone, is wrong regardless of if the threat was intended.


Now I agree with that point, but I think the bigger picture is that it clearly was not supposed to be a direct threat to anybody. Of course threatening people isn't right. No one would argue it is - probably including the makers of the ad. Because it wasn't supposed to be threatening!

The strange thing is that lots of people 'have' found it threatening. The less strange thing is that most of them seem to be in the States and can't seem to assign this to just a difference in sense of humour. The makers should have been able to predict that, given the almost universal failure of UK comedy in the states. Amercans just don't 'get' British-style ironic/vage/open to interpretation comedy. That's what this was supposed to be - black comedy.

It also doesn't help that the US population has been 'primed' to view this type of thing as a threat whereas that just isn't the case elsewhere.




posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


OK. if it was propagated that killing Muslims made Global Warming go away, would you say the message is still good? After all, no Muslims, no more majority of Earth's oil. It's a good thing, is it not? No middle east, no Muslims, no arabs, no body there, no more global warming.


You seem to fail to get the point. The only way you are going to stop global warming is if you change the world. The only way to change the world in time to stop global warming is with threats and violence. Now, do you which to go down that path? Because guess what. The path that allowed it peacefully? We passed that one a looong time ago. You can now either chose to force it with violence, or adapt humanity to the changing planet. i chose adaptation, not forcing a way.

That is the facts of life. To say anything else is foul-hearty



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr. N
 


They blew up dissenters. Do explain. How am I suppose to not take that as a threat?



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Because they weren't dissenters. That's my point. They didn't disagree. Generally speaking over hear people don't disagree with climate change, that's not the issue - believe it or not.... That's pretty much a US phenomenon.

The aim was to make people guilty for being apathetic. For knowing there's a problem but doing nothing. That's a totally different argument. Of course people shouldn't be punished for having a different opinion, but laziness and indifference is what got us into this mess in the first place (with a good measure of greed thrown in :lol
.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr. N
 


Well sorry, but you have failed to use the proper definition of dissenters. It seems you are viewing action and inaction as two different things, and indeed it is. but when action becomes a belief, and inaction, or apathy, the dissenters of the action-supporters, then there is truly no difference. You are prosecuting people for being inactive by their own free will, which stands in contrast to your movement, which is an active one. By definition, you are killing dissenters for their laziness. I tis indifferent to the Soviet "I'd rather stay in bed", or the US "Demopublican" split. The fact remains that through your action of destroying inactive, or apathetic, people, you are killing dissenters. And you can't whitewash it. That's exactly what it is.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by lifeform11
 


OK. if it was propagated that killing Muslims made Global Warming go away, would you say the message is still good? After all, no Muslims, no more majority of Earth's oil. It's a good thing, is it not? No middle east, no Muslims, no arabs, no body there, no more global warming.


You seem to fail to get the point. The only way you are going to stop global warming is if you change the world. The only way to change the world in time to stop global warming is with threats and violence. Now, do you which to go down that path? Because guess what. The path that allowed it peacefully? We passed that one a looong time ago. You can now either chose to force it with violence, or adapt humanity to the changing planet. i chose adaptation, not forcing a way.

That is the facts of life. To say anything else is foul-hearty


i'm unsure where i said any of that in my post, sorry for not understanding your post.

i said: what don't you understand? you seem to be avoiding the issue and bringing down to believers vs non believers, that is not the case. the message and the way it is used is the problem, the problem is NOT because it is a global warming video, anything that promotes looking after the planet is a good thing, anything that does that by coming across as a direct threat to anyone, is wrong regardless of if the threat was intended.

what makes you think people do not have a problem with the contents of certain video games? i certainly do, but the OP is not about video games.

(end of what i said)

so i suppose the question is, why do you think promoting looking after the planet in a nice way rather than what we see in the OP is a bad thing ?(going by the response to my post i assume that is what it boils down to), is it not wise to look after the planet we inhabit? surely it is a golden rule, i just don't justify it being done in a threating manner and i do not believe anybody should be killed, i am really struggling to see where you got that impression.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr. N
 


I do not care if it is supposed to be saying if you do nothing you will die. We are all going to die regardless. Mankind will destroy themselves through war long before GW has a chance to remove us from the planet.

The way it is written shows more of a either my way or die than it does if you do nothing you will die.

It is you through your bias that seems to be missing the extremist view this shows. As I stated if this were a religious video people would be up in arms as well. This is nothing but eco-fascist propaganda.

The message presented can be taken in different views. It was done this way on purpose. It is much the same as a double entendre, only this has nothing to do with sex.

People can and do use humor as a threat or warning.

Raist



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
The teacher in the beginning of the video is beautiful and well educated. People Global Warming is not a hoax; it is very real and we need to stop it now!


ok. We will go with the premise that GW is legit. Is it natural or man made? I refuse anyone to tell me that it isnt completely possible that it couldnt be natural, but ok.

This "green" movement garbage is hypocritical in the biggest extreme.

Points.

>>CFL bulbs

These cute little curly light bulbs? Mercury. It will require "special" disposal (I see that hapnin'). The old style bulbs were 100% recycleable with only glass and brass.

God knows what production waste is on these things. Ever notice they are all made in China? This brings my next point.

>>Solar cells.

I'm cool with solar and wind power in theory. No problem. Check this out.

news.cnet.com...

www.voiceofsandiego.org...

These both mention the WASTE from making these things. It also mentions the cost on the people in the area's where they are being made.

"We want it to be all nice and "green" for us but SCREW the SOB's where they're being manufactured!"

>>Smart Cars (for stupid people)

Batteries. Once again, the old cars could be 100% recycled. Smart Cars? How much does it cost to produce a battery of that size? When your battery craps out, can you afford to buy another?

"Oh, the govt. will have a program for that."

Thats not what govt. is for.



This green movement is more about people control, bigger government regulation and an economic rip off.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


Never said that was a bad thing. The fact is that taking care of the planet in a good way is no longer feasible. Now, you can either force your own way to improve things, or adapt humanity to the changed planet. Select one, there is not another way. The later of those allows you to slowly fix problems, but we have already passed the threshold of preventing problems.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr. N
 


Man is not totally responsible. Your action or inaction is not going to stop temperature increases.
Mars gets climate change.
www.timesonline.co.uk...

Some education on the solar system and changing temperature.
www.cicero.uio.no...

Even an ATS thread about the solar system undergoing climate change.
www.abovetopsecret.com...&flagit=221608

Really no need to explain further.
www.skepticalscience.com...


However, the video is more than about GW. It is about either obey and follow or be cast out and removed.

So you are saying that it is no one should be allowed to not act? Even if they feel that man is doing little to influence the temperature over nature?

You do realize nature has kept the earth going and life on earth going long before man ever came into existence right? You really think man has the power to destroy nature? Talk about thinking highly of your kind and placing them on a pedestal.

So yes I chose inaction in something I believe is being overly exaggerated when looking at complete data and not just what we are seeing on earth.

We might be doing some but we are not fully responsible. If you or anyone else wants to “punish” me for not acting on the GW command then I say bring it. If nothing else TPTB are pushing the GW thing as a form of population control in the form of eliminating the dissenters.

Raist



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by Dr. N
 


I do not care if it is supposed to be saying if you do nothing you will die. We are all going to die regardless. Mankind will destroy themselves through war long before GW has a chance to remove us from the planet.

The way it is written shows more of a either my way or die than it does if you do nothing you will die.

It is you through your bias that seems to be missing the extremist view this shows. As I stated if this were a religious video people would be up in arms as well. This is nothing but eco-fascist propaganda.

The message presented can be taken in different views. It was done this way on purpose. It is much the same as a double entendre, only this has nothing to do with sex.

People can and do use humor as a threat or warning.

Raist


I had not considered that what they destroyed with extreme prejudice was the "bystanders". It’s true, the blown up people seemed more indifferent towards taking action then against or for the theory of global warming. It is these people who the movement is trying to reach. That’s deep, good observation Dr. N. The point is we all have a carbon footprint so not making a choice is still contributing.

I hate to make a cliché Nazi analogy however I was taught in American history it was our bystanderism and appeasement that allowed Hitler to rise to such great power. I’ll feed my friends to the shark so it eats me last ect.

As per your earlier point about mortality, Raist… I know of course all living things will die, life is a temporary condition. Have optimism for the future. I would just prefer to use our technology to leave a better quality world to my descendants then what I inherited. There is a totally different fundamental school of thought that says you only live once (its actually driven by greed). If people differ on this level you will not see eye-to-eye on many issues. I’m all for industrialization, I just want responsible industrialization. I want to see true market competition to not only meet the financial bottom line, but also now the humanitarian and ecological bottom line.


edit on 2-10-2010 by Nickodemus because: Additional



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I can tell the same crowd who got rowdy about Kate Perry's appearance with Elmo are in here whining about a video with some entertainment.

No one forced you to watch it.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by felonius
 





These cute little curly light bulbs? Mercury. It will require "special" disposal (I see that hapnin'). The old style bulbs were 100% recycleable with only glass and brass. God knows what production waste is on these things. Ever notice they are all made in China? This brings my next point.


The environmental impact of properly disposed of CFL bulbs is negligible compared to impact of inneficiency of classic bulbs.




These both mention the WASTE from making these things. It also mentions the cost on the people in the area's where they are being made. "We want it to be all nice and "green" for us but SCREW the SOB's where they're being manufactured!"


Absence of emvironmental protection laws in China is largely a political problem. That doesnt mean solar panels cannot be made environmentally friendly. I for one would be all for internationally outlawing importing of goods from countries which do not respect the environment and human rights during manufacturing process (that includes China). But I agree that there are better ways to generate electricity, like nuclear energy.



>>Smart Cars (for stupid people) Batteries. Once again, the old cars could be 100% recycled. Smart Cars? How much does it cost to produce a battery of that size? When your battery craps out, can you afford to buy another?


With modern batteries? Not so much. Environmental impact from manufacturing and running modern electric vehicle is far lower than from using gas powered cars (assuming the electricity is produced from green sources).

edit on 2-10-2010 by Maslo because: add



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SeventhSeal
 


But they did force us to pay for it, at least those whose tax dollars went into paying for it. Is there really a difference here? Seems that a lot of things are forced in this video and related to its making. Seems like forcing is a little to popular. Rape, be it mental, physiological, economical, or physical, makes no difference. It's wrong.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


If man-made global warming is real then why did climate scientists have to fudge data? There is plenty of evidence that our climate goes hot and cold in long cycles. Harvard and Princeton researchers published a study in "Nature" that demonstrates that about 120,000 years ago the climate was much warmer and the sea level about twenty feet higher than it is now. Guess what? There were no coal-fired power plants then, no SUV's, but it was hotter. The marxists are using a naturally occuring phenomenon as the pretense for a power grab, a pretense to take our money and our freedom.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Nickodemus
 


Nevertheless, you are forcing an agenda that has shown to be affecting the solar system not just the earth. You are choosing to make people follow your view. By that ideology, it would be okay to force ones religion on another (or they are removed from the equation).

I am only after the fact that someone is making another do something or face punishment.

By the way I am going to ask if this is also British humor?
Someone please tell me this one is a HOAX

You Brits are just a regular laugh a minute.

Raist



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by swjslj
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


If man-made global warming is real then why did climate scientists have to fudge data? There is plenty of evidence that our climate goes hot and cold in long cycles. Harvard and Princeton researchers published a study in "Nature" that demonstrates that about 120,000 years ago the climate was much warmer and the sea level about twenty feet higher than it is now. Guess what? There were no coal-fired power plants then, no SUV's, but it was hotter. The marxists are using a naturally occuring phenomenon as the pretense for a power grab, a pretense to take our money and our freedom.


Wow I'm really suprised to see this old argument come up. Your totally right lets just continue destroying the planet as if we have no impact because at one time it was a giant ball of molten rock.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SeventhSeal
 


I do not care what she was wearing. What does that have to do with a video about forcing people to give in to your will/agenda?


Just because someone is against the video does not mean it is because of the violence, as I stated before I watch much worse more often. As for the Perry woman you post about I do not care if she is masturbating with Elmo on video. As long as she is not making it seem that you either bend to her will or die I am fine with her doing what she likes (provided it is legal and not torturing a living creature).

Raist



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Raist
 


If I have any agenda it’s to get people to stop ignoring the facts and the science because of the political BS. There is proof that we have swung the pendulum further then it naturally would have gone as stated earlier in my posts. Our lifestyle habits are so closely cherished that I understand everyone’s outrage. It doesn’t change the fact that we have a problem here to solve, a proven problem. If the results were critical in our lifetime, everyone would be more motivated, just like the ozone hole issue.



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Raist
 


Is this information false?



These are the famous "hockey-stick plots" released by the IPCC. As you can see, they paint an alarming picture of the last 140 years.

On a several thousand-year scale...



...we can begin to see that abrupt climate change is nothing new. Also that in the past we have been both MUCH warmer and colder than now.

On a 500 thousand year scale...




Cycles of warm and cold periods become very clear. They are also MUCH warmer and colder than we are now.

I suppose the climate movement back then was very successful.

The next time I hear that ALL THE DATA points to.... I will explode. They mean all the data collected since records began. Since records began! That must have been a long long time ago. Well for the UK it was 1914 (for the MET office). The England and Wales Precipitation series, which measures rainfall and snow, goes back to 1766, and the Central England Temperature series, which covers the temperature from the south Midlands to Lancashire, is the longest-running record in the world, dating from 1659. This is still a VERY short timespan for making claims on climate.

Also notice how co2 levels rise and fall AFTER the temperature rises and falls.


If you look at what eco's call "All the data" by which they mean the last 200 years or so then it looks terrible. Look at the wider picture and you see that we have been MUCH MUCH warmer and colder than we are now.


edit on 2-10-2010 by Pentothal because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
100
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join