Birds of a feather....

Thousands marched in New York for climate salvation. Celebrities like Leonardo were on hand to show their support for stupidity and the climate. Also on hand were anarchists, socialists, and communists. Other craziers were reported but no one wants to pile on.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...-nothing-less/

"Climate Change" is a scam brought to you by the Zero Population Growth Social Elitists.

It's been said that if you peel away the "green", the whole environmental movement is "red" underneath.

Don't you just love it when ultra rich celebrities tout their socialist tripe.

Hey, it's easy to dictate the values of the socialist agenda, and communism, as you look out the widow of your "Dacha on the Volga".

Brought to you by the usual nitwits who favor ideology over science. After all, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage know far far more about climatology than say....oh....climatologists.:h ypo_h4h:

Brought to you by the usual nitwits who favor ideology over science. After all, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage know far far more about climatology than say....oh....climatologists.:h ypo_h4h: Originally Posted by timpage

You realize that picture probably shows steam, not smoke coming from those stacks, right?

DiCaprio loses his hearing when confronted about his jet setting ways... LOL

I fully support alternative fuels and "green" technology, but global warming is bullshit. However, we do need modern, clean energy sources. Oil is so 19th century.

You realize that picture probably shows steam, not smoke coming from those stacks, right? Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

prove that.

I fully support alternative fuels and "green" technology, but global warming is bullshit. However, we do need modern, clean energy sources. Oil is so 19th century. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I agree with the idea of clean energy, because I don't wish to see people polluting the air and water. Unfortunately, China and India insist on using dirty coal and oil, and some third world country somewhere will always use the developing nation argument against us and ascribe an untenable economic pressure in favor of using the cheapest and most abundant source, and will not spend the money on pollution controls. Then, they will shake down the first world to pay for the alternatives.
It is a dismal trap.

Care to show us where this SCIENCE supports the idea of global warming. Even the SCIENTISTS who said this 20 years ago are backtracking. Hell, they don't even call it global warming anymore because they sound stupid.

Here is science: I drop an apple from my hand. I KNOW that it will fall to the ground at an acceleration of 32 feet per sec/per sec. This will happen every time and I can write a mathmatical formula.

Here is global warming science: Next year will be full of hurricanes (which are caused by global warming....but only in the last 40 years before that they were caused by something else) unless there are no hurricanes (which is also caused by global warming). But if there are then it is definitely global warming. Now, if you don't want any hurricanes to destroy your home on the beach (like Al Gore's multimillion dollar mansion) then you just have to pay me some money and I will try to make it stop. I may fail (meaning that there may be a hurricane despite my best efforts) but you still pay me for trying.

You realize that picture probably shows steam, not smoke coming from those stacks, right? Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

That reminds me of years ago, when the Tree Mile Island Nuclear Disaster struck.

Jonny Carson, in his nightly monologue, spoke up on it. He showed pictures of the huge cooling towers, with the large plumes billowing out. His line was, "authorities say that there is no danger. I guess they want us to believe that is steam coming out of those towers".

In fact, that is exactly what it was. But to the parents of future Obama Voters, it made no difference. Don't let facts get in the way of a good punch line, or in the case of Global Warming-Climate Change, in the way of a good taxing scheme.

By the way, how many people were killed in the Three Mile Island Nuclear Disaster, considered our Nations worst?................none.

Maybe the GW'ers could cut off a few reporters heads to get you war mongers to open your purse strings on the war on climate change!



.

By the way, how many people were killed in the Three Mile Island Nuclear Disaster, considered our Nations worst?................none. Originally Posted by Jackie S

Two known deaths and 25 million paid to keep peoples mouths shut.

Two known deaths and 25 million paid to keep peoples mouths shut. Originally Posted by slingblade

http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/sptopics/tmi/faq.php

http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/sptopics/tmi/faq.php Originally Posted by Jackie S

They are stilling having legal issues and have even admitted to lying about stuff. they have paid out an additional 100 million since the original 25 million so far.
Example " But in fact the infant-mortality statistics around TMI only became public in the winter of 1980, when Dr. MacLeod--who had since returned to the University of Pittsburgh--began receiving calls from his former colleagues. Anonymous members of the department told MacLeod that the state was suppressing statistics that indicated a rise in infant-mortality rates near TMI. Alarmed by what MacLeod termed a "restrictive policy" on health data, he released the numbers in a pulpit address at Pittsburgh's First Unitarian Church. That, in turn, forced the Department of Health to make the figures officially public.[25]

And the numbers apparently confirmed the public's worst fears. In the six-month period following the accident, in a ten-mile radius around TMI, thirty-one infants had died. In 1978 the number was only fourteen; in 1977 it had been twenty."

So I guess I was wrong. It was more than two. If you read up on it there has been so many cover up's it is not funny.