Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees.

Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment.

Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment?



$90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms



$90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6

Seems like a clash of religions if you ask me  ;D

innocentbystander. wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 6:38pm:

Seems like a clash of religions if you ask me  ;D

Left and Right Christianity are two religions. Very insightful.

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 6:27pm:

Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6

Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done.

Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit?

Really?
Do you even know any hard right Christians?
You do realize we are largely secular right?
Most people don't mix religion and politics.  It's only when politics tries to insinuate itself into religious areas that most problems occur.  Of course atheists have been shoving their disbelief down people throats for ages.

So why would a Christian or someone of any particular religion have an opinion on Climate Change/Global warming any more than anyone else?

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 6:27pm:

Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6

Rubbish! Our elected spokesperson, Professor Flim Flammery, esteemed hard right Christian and general unrestrained bovver boy, gives us all the guidance we need.

We arranged for Captain Abu Khalid, climate change refugee to be a shopping trolley wrangler in Canberra. His appointment to this lofty position is sure to keep him safe from rising sea levels.

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:02pm:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6 Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done. Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit?

http://www.acl.org.au/

Nothing about AGW

Grendel wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:05pm:

Really? Do you even know any hard right Christians? You do realize we are largely secular right? Most people don't mix religion and politics.  It's only when politics tries to insinuate itself into religious areas that most problems occur.  Of course atheists have been shoving their disbelief down people throats for ages. So why would a Christian or someone of any particular religion have an opinion on Climate Change/Global warming any more than anyone else?

Isn't the environment supposed to be god's creation.
Yet Hard Right Christians are at the forefront of it's destruction.

Do hard right christians support family planning methods,like abortion and contraception?

Hard-Right Christians would do well to remain silent about just about everything.

Like far-Right pollies and voters, they do not inhabit the real world.

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:31pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:05pm: Really? Do you even know any hard right Christians? You do realize we are largely secular right? Most people don't mix religion and politics.  It's only when politics tries to insinuate itself into religious areas that most problems occur.  Of course atheists have been shoving their disbelief down people throats for ages. So why would a Christian or someone of any particular religion have an opinion on Climate Change/Global warming any more than anyone else? Isn't the environment supposed to be god's creation. Yet Hard Right Christians are at the forefront of it's destruction. Do hard right christians support family planning methods,like abortion and contraception?

OMG!
Where's the slaps head emoticon? :D

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:02pm:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6 Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done. Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit?

It's all conjecture.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:38pm:

lee wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:02pm: ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6 Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done. Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit? It's all conjecture.

Blasphemy

---

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:41pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:38pm: lee wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:02pm: ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6 Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done. Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit? It's all conjecture. Blasphemy

Ha!

I'm very concerned for our environment.

Why?

I'm a mother and an avid gardener ; I'm also a rightie and a Christian.

Ok Greens?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:47pm:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:41pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:38pm: lee wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:02pm: ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6 Wow, personal opinion masquerading as informed comment on climate change. Well done. Or do you have a reference for that Hard Right Christianity bit? It's all conjecture. Blasphemy Ha! I'm very concerned for our environment. Why? I'm a mother and an avid gardener ; I'm also a rightie and a Christian. Ok Greens?

'Most' as the first word. in my original post.
Hard right groups next to never comment on climate change or direct their followers to back parties with strong climate change polices.

Correct?

The hard right christian groups are more interested in fighting these political parties, like the Greens, on side issues.


Some have even condemned the Pope for arguing for more action on AGW.

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:28pm:

http://www.acl.org.au/ Nothing about AGW

I am so very sorry. i got confused First it was AGW, Then it was Climate Change and  now leftists are morphing back to AGW.

So where in your link was the reference to Climate Change, seeing as you want to be pedantic as to what you wrote? It doesn't appear on the front page and you have to join to get other items.

Are you a closet member of ACL?

Or is it enough not to preach climate change religion?

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:28pm: http://www.acl.org.au/ Nothing about AGW I am so very sorry. i got confused First it was AGW, Then it was Climate Change and  now leftists are morphing back to AGW. So where in your link was the reference to Climate Change, seeing as you want to be pedantic as to what you wrote? It doesn't appear on the front page and you have to join to get other items. Are you a closet member of ACL?

When you see 'climate change', accept it as being meant : 'human caused climate change'.

Also you wanted an example of hard right christians avoiding the topic of climate change ... the ACL site was that. 


I forget you want to be spoon feed. Sorry.

Now we have the foreplay out of the way, would you like to avoid the topic again.

Making labels and broad generalisations does not really enhance any kind of constructive dialog.

Unless its me doing it.

miketrees wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:19pm:

Making labels and broad generalisations does not really enhance any kind of constructive dialog. Unless its me doing it.

That's gotta be the funniest post of the year  ;D

I hope it was taken in the way I intended.

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 7:28pm:

http://www.acl.org.au/ Nothing about AGW

And then if you look at the thread title -

'Hard Right Christians, Silent About AGW'

I knew I had seen AGW somewhere.


____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:12pm:

Also you wanted an example of hard right christians avoiding the topic of climate change ... the ACL site was that.

So that any site not mentioning AGW/CC is hard right Christian. Got it.

miketrees wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:24pm:

I hope it was taken in the way I intended.

Ummmm this is OzPol. Nothing here is taken seriously. Nor should it ever be. :P

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:25pm:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 7:28pm: http://www.acl.org.au/ Nothing about AGW And then if you look at the thread title - 'Hard Right Christians, Silent About AGW' I knew I had seen AGW somewhere. ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 8:12pm: Also you wanted an example of hard right christians avoiding the topic of climate change ... the ACL site was that.  So that any site not mentioning AGW/CC is hard right Christian. Got it.

Your deduction. not mine.

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:


Of course not. You failed deductive reasoning.

Cardinal George Pell criticises Pope Francis over climate change stance


Cardinal George Pell has publicly criticised Pope Francis' decision to place climate change at the top of the Catholic Church's agenda.

Cardinal Pell, a well-known climate change skeptic, told the Financial Times the church had "no particular expertise in science".

"The church has got no mandate from the Lord to pronounce on scientific matters," he said,

"We believe in the autonomy of science."

His comments come a month after Pope Francis released an historic encyclical calling on humanity to fight global warming.

"We do need to slow down and look at reality in a different way, to appropriate the positive and sustainable progress which has been made, but also to recover the values and the great goals swept away by our unrestrained delusions of grandeur," he wrote.

"The urgent challenge to protect our common home includes a concern to bring the whole human family together to seek a sustainable and integral development, for we know that things can change."

The 192-page document is titled Praise Be to You: On Care for Our Common Home, and calls on humanity to be more motivated and to improve education to save the environment.

"The earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth," Pope Francis wrote.

"The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all.

"At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life.

"A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system."

Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Pell to reform the Vatican's finances nearly 18 months ago.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/cardinal-george-pell-criticises-pope-francis-over-climate-change-stance-20150718-gifhjt.html

Was Tony Abbott wedged by Pope Francis on climate change?

Catholic leaders do not feel bound to agree with Pope Francis and probably gain voters' respect when they act as free agents.

The Catholic Bishop of Rome, the Pope, is a unique figure in world politics. Not only does he have unusual worldwide status but he has an army of several billion of his own church members. His high profile means that he is listened to like no other person in public life outside a very few political leaders, such as the President of the United States. This is so even among many people who are not at all religious.

Self-proclaimed atheists have welcomed his recent environmental encyclical almost despite themselves. They have agreed with his sentiments and assumed that many people around the world will listen to his words. On a recent issue of The Drum on the ABC two of the three panellists, including the political editor of a metropolitan daily, went out of their way to declare their atheism while welcoming the message of the recent encyclical.

His church followers include Catholics among political leaders around the world, including our Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, and many members of his cabinet. This fact preoccupies the media. Such leaders are regarded in public commentary as being the type of followers who will not only listen to but invariably obey their spiritual leader.

The combination of these two qualities is what makes Pope Francis unique. The Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, global corporate leaders like News Corporation's Rupert Murdoch and/or other faith leaders like the head of the Anglican Communion, Archbishop Justin Welby, or the Dalai Lama cannot match him. They lack either the personal status or the apparently dedicated followers.

All this means that when Pope Francis published his encyclical, Laudato Si: on the Care of Our Common Home, many Australian responses played on Abbott's status not only as a Catholic but what's more, a so-called devout Catholic, or a famously Catholic Prime Minister. The implication was that Abbott had been wedged by the Pope, that is by virtue of his faith put in an internally contradictory position, from which it would be extremely difficult to extricate himself.

Many of Abbott's critics have long pointed to an apparent disjunction between his policies and his Catholic/Christian beliefs on matters like asylum seekers and economic policy. He is seen to be inconsistent at best, hypocritical at worst.

In the same way too much is made of Abbott's Catholicism vis-a-vis this encyclical. Some of it plays gently on his religious beliefs, such as the suggestion by the Greens' leader Richard di Natale that he hopes this will be a "Jesus moment" or a "road to Damascus moment " for the Prime Minister. That wordplay is fine as far as it goes.

But those who go further and imply that Catholic political leaders usually follow edicts from the Pope just don't understand the enormous variety of beliefs within Catholicism. You just have to look at the Catholics in the Abbott cabinet to see that. The policy differences between Abbott, Joe Hockey, Malcolm Turnbull and Kevin Andrews, for instance, are enormous and this reflects the diversity within Australian Catholicism. Outside the cabinet there are many other Catholics whose views show even greater diversity than among cabinet ministers, not to mention those Catholics in other parties.

This diversity of views will be shown if there is a free vote on same-sex marriage in the Parliament this year. The Pope and the leadership of the Catholic Church are unequivocally opposed to same-sex marriage, yet many prominent Catholics will vote in favour if given the chance, just as they have in the past on other sexual morality reforms.

So to be consistent, commentators should admit that if the Pope is wedging Abbott on climate change then he is wedging Turnbull on same-sex marriage. In fact, the Pope and the bishops acting for him are more likely to be critical of Catholics who are for same-sex marriage than of Catholics who are against climate-change policy. Some conservative Catholic bishops in the US have been extremely critical of pro-choice American Catholic leaders like former presidential candidate and current Secretary of State John Kerry, by announcing their intention to refuse them Communion.

This is not to deny that the Pope's encyclical is an important political document in Australia among Catholics and hence indirectly for Abbott. The enthusiastic responses to the encyclical from the Australian bishops and from leading Catholic agencies like the international aid and development agency Caritas and religious orders such as the Columbans and the Jesuits demonstrate this. The dynamics within the church on environmental and justice issues will change therefore. In turn, as Father Frank Brennan, of the Jesuits, says, it is likely to encourage Greens' supporters within the church.

But this would be the case if a Liberal non-Catholic Christian like Julie Bishop or Scott Morrison were prime minister. The fact that it is Abbott is more of a curiosity than a really serious issue. The Catholic Church can appear to wedge many Catholic political leaders on all sorts of policies. If that really mattered, it would make life impossible for leading Catholics in politics. But it rarely does. They feel free to disagree with their spiritual leader and probably are applauded by the wider community for being free agents. It can

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/wedged-by-the-pope-20150624-ghw6tv.html

Cardinal Pell. Yep a man to be listened to.  Are Catholics hard right Christians?

Looks like the Pope isn't a hard right Christian....  but then we know this Pope has issues and an agenda.

Doesn't make him any more correct than anyone else on the planet though.

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 8:51pm:

Cardinal Pell. Yep a man to be listened to.  Are Catholics hard right Christians?

They're not even Christians.

They're just...ummm weird.

Opus Dei shapes as a challenge for Tony Abbott


FACTIONAL forces linked to the conservative Catholic group Opus Dei are making an unprecedented push for power in Liberal veteran Philip Ruddock's safe northern Sydney seat of Berowra.

Four state seats in the electorate have already been battlegrounds at preselections.

Religious Right figures, including factional powerbroker and state Attorney-General Greg Smith, have seized three of these.

NSW Liberal sources say the religious Right is moving in several Sydney seats, preparing for preselections that could be held within 12 months.

But one told The Australian: "Most of the action is in Berowra right now."

Some Liberals believe the activities of the religious Right are increasingly becoming a matter for Tony Abbott.

"This is a challenge for Tony Abbott as a lot of people are doing this in Tony Abbott's name," one insisted.

As reported in The Australian yesterday, 88 prospective new members have applied to join the Liberal Party in the past three weeks. Almost half of these appear to have links to the religious Right.

Local Liberal sources say many have direct links with Opus Dei through the Tangara School for Girls and Redfield College and their parent organisation, PARED, or Parents for Education.

The prospective new members include Redfield and Tangara parents and friends and staff members. and PARED office bearers or directors.

Tangara and Redfield College are both in the Berowra electorate.

Both schools have Opus Dei chaplains.

PARED is affiliated with the Institute of Family Studies of the University of Navarre in Pamplona, Spain, a campus created by Opus Dei founder Saint Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer.

"All these guys are close family friends," one Liberal said.

"They all went to the Opus Dei schools, they all joined together and they're all one unit. You can't separate them."

Mr Ruddock would not comment on the matter yesterday.

The NSW Liberal Party constitution prohibits candidates from discussing preselection.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opus-dei-shapes-as-a-challenge-for-abbott/story-fn59niix-1226065960567

That help you lee ?

CONSPIRANUT TIME...

Pope Francis from Argentina is widely reported as a leftist. So not hard right, perhaps hard left.

lee wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 9:15pm:

Pope Francis from Argentina is widely reported as a leftist. So not hard right, perhaps hard left.

Perhaps soft left even  ;D

lee

Quote:

Are Catholics hard right Christians?

Is Opus Dei hard right?

http://honisoit.com/2014/03/the-cult-of-opus-dei/

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 9:21pm:

Is Opus Dei hard right? http://honisoit.com/2014/03/the-cult-of-opus-dei/

You tell me. You appear to be an authority. Whether the accolade is earned is moot.

Honisoit.... :D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)
Is Honisoit extreme LW ratbaggery? :D
Always was always will be. ;D

http://www.news.com.au/national/sydney-university-student-newspaper-honi-soit-pulled-after-placing-vaginas-on-the-cover/story-fncynjr2-1226701525635

Yep quality newspaper there Swinny. :D :D :D

Relativity to the thread Grendel?

More Greenie BULDUST from the Greenies-Lose.


Global Warming: Ten Facts and Ten Myths on Climate Change
By Prof. Robert M. Carter Global Research, March 10, 2016

Copenhagen and Global Warming: Ten Facts and Ten Myths on Climate Change

Ten facts about climate change

1.     Climate has always changed, and it always will. The assumption that prior to the industrial revolution the Earth had a “stable” climate is simply wrong. The only sensible thing to do about climate change is to prepare for it.

2.    Accurate temperature measurements made from weather balloons and satellites since the late 1950s show no atmospheric warming since 1958.  In contrast, averaged ground-based thermometers record a warming of about 0.40 C over the same time period. Many scientists believe that the thermometer record is biased by the Urban Heat Island effect and other artefacts.

3.    Despite the expenditure of more than US$50 billion dollars looking for it since 1990, no unambiguous anthropogenic (human) signal has been identified in the global temperature pattern.

4.    Without the greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature on Earth would be -180 C rather than the equable +150 C that has nurtured the development of life.

     Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas, responsible for ~26% (80 C) of the total greenhouse effect (330C), of which in turn at most 25% (~20C) can be attributed to carbon dioxide contributed by human activity. Water vapour, contributing at least 70% of the effect, is by far the most important atmospheric greenhouse gas.

5.    On both annual (1 year) and geological (up to 100,000 year) time scales, changes in atmospheric temperature PRECEDE changes in CO2. Carbon dioxide therefore cannot be the primary forcing agent for temperature increase (though increasing CO2 does cause a diminishingly mild positive temperature feedback).

6.    The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has acted as the main scaremonger for the global warming lobby that led to the Kyoto Protocol. Fatally, the IPCC is a political, not scientific, body.

Hendrik Tennekes, a retired Director of Research at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, says that “the IPCC review process is fatally flawed” and that “the IPCC wilfully ignores the paradigm shift created by the foremost meteorologist of the twentieth century, Edward Lorenz“.

7.    The Kyoto Protocol will cost many trillions of dollars and exercises a significant impost those countries that signed it, but will deliver no significant cooling (less than .020 C by 2050, assuming that all commitments are met).

The Russian Academy of Sciences says that Kyoto has no scientific basis; Andre Illarianov, senior advisor to Russian president Putin, calls Kyoto-ism “one of the most agressive, intrusive, destructive ideologies since the collapse of communism and fascism“. If Kyoto was a “first step” then it was in the same wrong direction as the later “Bali roadmap”.

8.    Climate change is a non-linear (chaotic) process, some parts of which are only dimly or not at all understood. No deterministic computer model will ever be able to make an accurate prediction of climate 100 years into the future.

9.    Not surprisingly, therefore, experts in computer modelling agree also that no current (or likely near-future) climate model is able to make accurate predictions of regional climate change.

10.   The biggest untruth about human global warming is the assertion that nearly all scientists agree that it is occurring, and at a dangerous rate.

The reality is that almost every aspect of climate science is the subject of vigorous debate. Further, thousands of qualified scientists worldwide have signed declarations which (i) query the evidence for hypothetical human-caused warming and (ii) support a rational scientific (not emotional) approach to its study within the context of known natural climate change.

LAYING TEN GLOBAL WARMING MYTHS

Myth 1     Average global temperature (AGT) has increased over the last few years.

Fact 1       Within error bounds, AGT has not increased since 1995 and has declined since 2002, despite an increase in atmospheric CO2 of 8% since 1995.


Myth 2     During the late 20th Century, AGT increased at a dangerously fast rate and reached an unprecedented magnitude.

Facts 2      The late 20th Century AGT rise was at a rate of 1-20 C/century, which lies well within natural rates of climate change for the last 10,000 yr. AGT has been several degrees warmer than today many times in the recent geological past.


Myth 3     AGT was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times, has sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years (the Mann, Bradley & Hughes “hockey stick” curve and its computer extrapolation).

Facts 3      The Mann et al. curve has been exposed as a statistical contrivance. There is no convincing evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in AGT were unusual, nor that dangerous human warming is underway.


Myth 4     Computer models predict that AGT will increase by up to 60 C over the next 100 years.

Facts 4      Deterministic computer models do. Other equally valid (empirical) computer models predict cooling.


Myth 5     Warming of more than 20 C will have catastrophic effects on ecosystems and mankind alike.

Facts 5      A 20 C change would be well within previous natural bounds. Ecosystems have been adapting to such changes since time immemorial. The result is the process that we call evolution. Mankind can and does adapt to all climate extremes.


Myth 6     Further human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere will cause dangerous warming, and is generally harmful.

Facts 6      No human-caused warming can yet be detected that is distinct from natural system variation and noise. Any additional human-caused warming which occurs will probably amount to less than 10 C. Atmospheric CO2 is a beneficial fertilizer for plants, including especially cereal crops, and also aids efficient evapo-transpiration.


Myth 7     Changes in solar activity cannot explain recent changes in AGT.

Facts 7      The sun’s output varies in several ways on many time scales (including the 11-, 22 and 80-year solar cycles), with concomitant effects on Earth’s climate. While changes in visible radiation are small, changes in particle flux and magnetic field are known to exercise a strong climatic effect. More than 50% of the 0.80 C rise in AGT observed during the 20th century can be attributed to solar change.


Myth 8     Unprecedented melting of ice is taking place in both the north and south polar regions.

Facts 8      Both the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are growing in thickness and cooling at their summit. Sea ice around Antarctica attained a record area in 2007. Temperatures in the Arctic region are just now achieving the levels of natural warmth experienced during the early 1940s, and the region was warmer still (sea-ice free) during earlier times.


Myth 9     Human-caused global warming is causing dangerous global sea-level (SL) rise.

Facts 9      SL change differs from time to time and place to place; between 1955 and 1996, for example, SL at Tuvalu fell by 105 mm (2.5 mm/yr). Global average SL is a statistical measure of no value for environmental planning purposes. A global average SL rise of 1-2 mm/yr occurred naturally over the last 150 years, and shows no sign of human-influenced increase.


Myth 10   The late 20th Century increase in AGT caused an increase in the number of severe storms (cyclones), or in storm intensity.

Facts 10    Meteorological experts are agreed that no increase in storms has occurred beyond that associated with natural variation of the climate system.



Robert M. Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University (Queensland) and the University of Adelaide (South Australia). He is a palaeontologist, stratigrapher, marine geologist and environmental scientist with more than thirty years professional experience.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/copenhagen-and-global-warming-ten-facts-and-ten-myths-on-climate-change/16467

Deflection attempt Juliar.

What are you scared of. People realising the hard right religionists are climate terrorists?

double post

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 6:27pm:

Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change.

WTF has religion got to do with so-called AGW?

You silly little girl.

Pour old Greenies-Lose is running for cover now her Greenie Bulldust is exposed as just more of the same tired old Greenie Bulldust.


Top 10 Global Warming Lies That May Shock You
Written by James Taylor, Forbes Blogs on 11 February 2015.

turbinesGlobal warming alarmists frequently make false and deplorable assertions (see, for example, my recent column debunking false claims that global warming is causing a decline in wheat production), but the Environmental Defense Fund’s recent fund-raising mailer, “10 Global Warming Effects That May Shock You,” may well set a new low. However, climate realists can make lemonade from EDF’s preposterous mailer by using it to show open-minded people the difference between global warming alarmists and global warming truth-tellers.

EDF has assembled what it believes to be the 10 most powerful global warming assertions in the alarmists’ playbook, yet each assertion either backfires on alarmists or has been proven false. While reading how flawed EDF’s assertions are, remember these are the very best arguments global warming alarmists can make. Open-minded readers should have very little difficulty dismissing the mythical global warming crisis after examining the top 10 assertions in the alarmist playbook.

Alarmist Assertion #1

“Bats Drop from the Sky – In 2014, a scorching summer heat wave caused more than 100,000 bats to literally drop dead and fall from the sky in Queensland, Australia.”

The Facts

Global warming alarmists’ preferred electricity source – wind power – kills nearly 1 million bats every year (to say nothing of the more than 500,000 birds killed every year) in the United States alone. This appalling death toll occurs every year even while wind power produces just 3% of U.S. electricity. Ramping up wind power to 10, 20, or 30% of U.S. electricity production would likely increase annual bat kills to 10-to-30 million every year. Killing 30 million bats every year in response to dubious claims that global warming might once in a great while kill 100,000 bats makes no sense.

Just as importantly, alarmists present no evidence that global warming caused the summer heat wave in a notoriously hot desert near the equator.  To the contrary, climate change theory and objective data show our recent global warming is occurring primarily in the winter, toward the poles, and at night.

Australia’s highest recorded temperature occurred more than half a century ago, and only two of Australia’s seven states have set their all-time temperature record during the past 40 years. Indeed, Queensland’s 2014 heat wave paled in comparison to the 1972 heat wave that occurred 42 years of global warming ago. If global warming caused the 2014 Queensland heat wave, why wasn’t it as severe as the 1972 Queensland heat wave? Blaming every single summer heat wave or extreme weather event on global warming is a stale and discredited tactic in the alarmist playbook. Objective science proves extreme weather events such as hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, and droughts have become less frequent and less severe as a result of the Earth’s recent modest warming.

Now go to the LINK to see what utter garbage theis Greenie Bulldust really is

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/top-10-global-warming-lies-that-may-shock-you.html

The pore old Greenies-Lose is so upset she is shaking and posting her dribble TWICE!!!!

Fuzzball wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:06am:

____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. WTF has religion got to do with so-called AGW? You silly little girl.

Another who can't differentiate between profile male and female signs.

Religion indoctrination influences how people vote. That's why religious groups spend so much time telling their cultists how to vote.

Or worse, plant religionists in political parties so to systematically take those parties over.

i.e

Opus Dei shapes as a challenge for Tony Abbott


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opus-dei-shapes-as-a-challenge-for-abbott/story-fn59niix-1226065960567

Hard right religious cults want climate collapse, so to create a climate collapsing world war.

Gee it is all enuff to make a Greenie curl up and die!!



Providing Insight Into Climate Change Myths / Facts

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

MYTH 1:  Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.

FACT:  The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling through 2011. The warming rate from 1964 to 1998 was the same as the previous warming from 1911 to 1941. Satellites, weather balloons and ground stations all show cooling since 2001. The mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8 C over the 20th century is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects"). Two science teams have shown that correcting the surface temperature record for the effects of urban development would reduce the reported warming trend over land from 1980 by half. See here.

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


MYTH 2:  The "hockey stick" graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature decrease for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.

FACT:  Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.

The "hockey stick", a poster boy of both the UN's IPCC and Canada's Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that. See here for more information.


MYTH 3:  Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus causing most of the earth's warming of the last 100 years.

FACT:  Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by about 120 part per million (ppm), most of which is likely due to human-caused CO2 emissions. The RATE of growth during this century has been about 0.55%/year. However, there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.


MYTH 4:  CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.

FACT:  Greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone and N2O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO2 constitutes about 0.04% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as "greenhouse agents" than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and – in the end – are thought to be responsible for 75% of the "Greenhouse effect". (See here) At current concentrations, a 3% change of water vapour in the atmosphere would have the same effect as a 100% change in CO2.

Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention these important facts.


MYTH 5:  Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.

Now go to the LINK to read the rest of the debunking of the Greenie Bulldust

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3

Oh Gosh, now Greenies-Lose's Greenie BULLDUST gets debunked 16 times!!




16 Signs That “Global Warming” Was A Lie And That We Have Now Entered A Period Of Global Cooling
December 16, 2013 Michael Snyder

Record Events

Back in 2009, Al Gore boldly declared that “the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”  Well, it turns out that was a lie along with almost everything else that Al Gore has been peddling.  The truth is that the polar ice cap is actually growing.  It is about 50 percent larger than it was at this time last year.  And as you will read about below, a shocking UN report that was recently leaked shows that the planet has actually not been warming for the past 15 years.  So if you are breathlessly anticipating that “global warming” will soon bring on the apocalypse, you can stop waiting.  On the other hand, there is rising concern about what “global cooling” will soon do to the planet as we suffer through the beginning of the coldest winter in decades.  Thanks to an unusually quiet solar cycle and an unusually high number of volcano eruptions, global temperatures have been falling.  And if this cold weather persists, that could lead to massive global problems.  Periods of very low temperatures throughout history have resulted in mass crop failures and widespread famines.  Could that soon happen to us?

The following are 16 signs that “global warming” was a lie and that we have now entered a period of global cooling…

1. According to a leaked UN report that absolutely rocked the “global warming” believers, the earth has not gotten any warmer for the past 15 years.

2. The amount of ice covering the Arctic is up by 50 percent compared to this time in 2012.

3. In just one week in late November, a combined total of more than 1000 new cold temperature and snowfall records were set in the United States.

4. In just one week in December, a combined total of more than 2000 new cold temperature and snowfall records were set in the United States.

5. On December 15th, 53 percent of the United States was covered in snow.  That was the highest level on this date in 11 years.

6. A snowstorm that spanned more than 1,000 miles slammed into New England on Sunday.

7. Some areas of upstate New York were hit with about six feet of snow a few days ago.

8. Chicago just experienced that coldest temperatures that it has seen in December in nearly 20 years.

9. On December 7th, Eugene, Oregon recorded the lowest temperature that it has seen since December 11th, 1972.

10. A few days ago, three feet of snow closed roads in Jerusalem.  It was the worst snow storm in Israel since 1953.

11. Heavy snow also fell on parts of Saudi Arabia.  That was considered to be extremely unusual.

12. The recent snowfall in Turkey was so bad that it closed 900 roads.

13. Temperatures have dropped so low that some Syrian war refugees are actually dying from the cold.

14. Cairo, Egypt just had the first snowfall that it has experienced in 100 years.

15. It was so cold in Canada recently that the Arctic Winter Games biathlon trials were forced indoors.

16. According to NASA satellite data, a temperature of minus 135 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded in Antarctica back in July.

So why is all of this happening?

Well, the number one factor affecting our climate is the giant ball of fire called the Sun that our planet revolves around.  As I detailed in a previous article, solar activity has dropped to a 100 year low.  The following is how a Space.com article recently described what we are currently experiencing…

    The sun’s current space-weather cycle is the most anemic in 100 years, scientists say.

    Our star is now at “solar maximum,” the peak phase of its 11-year activity cycle. But this solar max is weak, and the overall current cycle, known as Solar Cycle 24, conjures up comparisons to the famously feeble Solar Cycle 14 in the early 1900s, researchers said.

    “None of us alive have ever seen such a weak cycle. So we will learn something,” Leif Svalgaard of Stanford University told reporters here today (Dec. 11) at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union.

Another factor that is causing all of this cold weather is a dramatic rise in volcanic activity.  Throughout human history, volcanic eruptions have produced some of the coldest winters ever recorded, and in 2013 we have witnessed a record number of volcanic eruptions.  Something appears to be happening to the crust of the earth, and that is one of the reasons why I included the future eruption of Mt. Rainier in my new novel.  The mainstream media does not talk about this much, but right now we are seeing a stunning rise in volcanic activity all over the planet.


Got to LINK to read a bit more

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/16-signs-that-global-warming-was-a-lie-and-that-we-have-now-entered-a-period-of-global-cooling

Sweetie.
This isn't a debate over the financing of denialism.

Human Caused Climate Change is Real.

Your denialist position lost years ago.

____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:15am:

Fuzzball wrote on Jun 7th, 2016 at 9:06am: ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. WTF has religion got to do with so-called AGW? You silly little girl. Another who can't differentiate between profile male and female signs. Religion indoctrination influences how people vote. That's why religious groups spend so much time telling their cultists how to vote. Or worse, plant religionists in political parties so to systematically take those parties over. i.e Opus Dei shapes as a challenge for Tony Abbott http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opus-dei-shapes-as-a-challenge-for-abbott/story-fn59niix-1226065960567 Hard right religious cults want climate collapse, so to create a climate collapsing world war.

No confusion here, I know what you are.

Fuzzball wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 11:56am:

____ wrote on Jun 7th, 2016 at 9:15am: Fuzzball wrote on Jun 7th, 2016 at 9:06am: ____ wrote on Jun 6th, 2016 at 6:27pm: Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. WTF has religion got to do with so-called AGW? You silly little girl. Another who can't differentiate between profile male and female signs. Religion indoctrination influences how people vote. That's why religious groups spend so much time telling their cultists how to vote. Or worse, plant religionists in political parties so to systematically take those parties over. i.e Opus Dei shapes as a challenge for Tony Abbott http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opus-dei-shapes-as-a-challenge-for-abbott/story-fn59niix-1226065960567 Hard right religious cults want climate collapse, so to create a climate collapsing world war. No confusion here, I know what you are.

Then you purposely lie.
Shame hard righter, Shame

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 9:05pm:

Some Liberals believe the activities of the religious Right are increasingly becoming a matter for Tony Abbott.

So Opus Dei support of the Liberals and TA means that the Liberals and Opus Dei are hard right? That then means, by your logic, that Opus Dei support of Labor makes them hard left.

'There are about 20 or two dozen of them, some Labor, some Nationals, and some independents, but most are Liberals. They are about as varied a lot as you could get, both in political and religious allegiance, within the bounds of Christian practice in Australia. '

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621834807.html


____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:35am:

Human Caused Climate Change is Real.

'US Senator Timothy Wirth (Later at the UN).

    “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing …”


'Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment

    “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” '

CO₂, all other things being equal will change the climate. The question remains "Are all other thing equal"?

You really should look at science rather than MSM for your views. Look at it totally, not piecemeal.

Just this:

It is better to act now, and discover later that action was not necessary, than it
is to FAIL to act, and discover later that it is too LATE to act.

God forbid if we made the world a better place un-necessarily, eh?

Worried about supplying fossil fuel funded denialism website links to the comments.

That's ok.

Human caused climate collapse is still real and as dangerous.

Kat wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 12:16pm:

Just this: It is better to act now, and discover later that action was not necessary, than it is to FAIL to act, and discover later that it is too LATE to act. God forbid if we made the world a better place un-necessarily, eh?

Just think. The trillions of dollars spent on climate change/AGW could have already made the world a better place.

____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 12:17pm:

Worried about supplying fossil fuel funded denialism website links to the comments. That's ok. Human caused climate collapse is still real and as dangerous.

So quote some science instead of hyperbole. You know, the stuff without could, perhaps, may.

97 percent of climate scientist back ..

You can't handle the facts.


The debate is over and the hard right are pro climate destruction.

Shame Hard Right, Shame

____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 12:32pm:

97 percent of climate scientist back ..

You still believe the 97% claptrap? The one the has been dropped by the Garudian, because it has failed to deliver? Except to numpties it seems. Perhaps the "science is settled"?

'By various measures (drought area1 and intensity2, climatic aridity index3, and climatic water deficits4), some observational analyses have suggested that much of the Earth’s land has been drying during recent decades, but such drying seems inconsistent with observations of dryland greening and decreasing pan evaporation5. ‘Offline’ analyses of climate-model outputs from anthropogenic climate change (ACC) experiments portend continuation of putative drying through the twenty-first century3'

'Our findings imply that historical and future tendencies towards continental drying, as characterized by offline-computed runoff, as well as other PET-dependent metrics, may be considerably weaker and less extensive than previously thought.'

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3046.html

Oh, No. More uncertainty. ;)

The silly old very deep in denial Greenies-Lose is bunging on the Greenie Bulldust non-stop even tho every time she is totally debunked as just a dumb drongo.

http://snip.ly/4t4gd#https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/09/map-these-are-the-cities-that-climate-change-will-hit-first/

____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 1:53pm:

http://snip.ly/4t4gd#https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/09/map-these-are-the-cities-that-climate-change-will-hit-first/

Wow, Projections made by climate model. What could possibly go wrong?

You know,climate models being wrong? BTW climate models are not science. You do understand that don't you?

From the underlying paper -

'Using 1860 to 2005 as the historical period, this index has a global mean of 2069 (±18 years s.d.) for near-surface air temperature under an emissions stabilization scenario and 2047 (±14 years s.d.) under a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario.'

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v502/n7470/full/nature12540.html

As mentioned in other threads, business-as -usual uses RCP8.5. What the fail to realise is hat all of the "forcings" used in the models must hold true for the output to be true. That is most unlikely.

According to the alarmist favoured site SKS RCP8.5 has a projected CO2 level of 1370ppm by 2100. Which is an approximate twice times doubling CO₂ since 1985.

In contrast, the RCP8.5 was based on a revised version of the SRES A2 scenario; here, the storyline emphasizes high population growth and lower incomes in developing countries”.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/rcp.php?t=3#emissionsconcentrations

But you said it with such certainty. Bravo.

An interesting update from the link you provided -

'Los Angeles will hit the mark the next year ' remember the article was published in 2013.

According to Wiki the record high for Los Angeles was in 2010. So I guess the modelled climate was wrong.

Gosh, by now everyone must know that the Greenies' Global Warming is just a GIGANTIC HOAX perpetrated by the United Nations to fraudulently get money for the United Nations.

And, of course, the Greenies are just puppets of the United Nations.

juliar wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 2:41pm:

Gosh, by now everyone must know that the Greenies' Global Warming is just a GIGANTIC HOAX perpetrated by the United Nations to fraudulently get money for the United Nations. And, of course, the Greenies are just puppets of the United Nations.

Give that man some aluminium foil.

Its true that the IPCC has admitted in its goals that the AGW hoax is being used to redistribute global wealth.

____ wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 9:35am:

Sweetie. This isn't a debate over the financing of denialism. Human Caused Climate Change is Real. Your denialist position lost years ago.

prove it....  it will be a world first. :D

____ wrote on Jun 6^th, 2016 at 6:27pm:

Most hard right christians are silent on the destruction caused by human caused climate change. Silent about the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Silent on the treatment of climate change refugees. Why are most hard right christians more angry about employing gay workers than they are about the destruction of god's created natural environment. Will Hard Right Christians come out of hiding, and join with the Greens and defend the Human Race via protecting our environment? $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms $90 billion worth of housing in Australia could be at risk from extreme events like Sydney's storms http://www.businessinsider.com.au/property-market-risk-climate-change-storms-2016-6

Did your patron saint Al Gore inform you about this topic....??

Anthropogenic Global Warming Religion is the biggest lie ever told to mankind.

When all the people of the Earth realise its snake oil, people like you will be hung from the nearest tree.

I'ld like to see that................. 8-)

http://i67.tinypic.com/72yt0j.png

Patron Saint of Anthropogenic Global Warming Religion

Grendel wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 3:05pm:

____ wrote on Jun 7th, 2016 at 9:35am: Sweetie. This isn't a debate over the financing of denialism. Human Caused Climate Change is Real. Your denialist position lost years ago. prove it....  it will be a world first. :D

First step in proving.

If humans exploded every nuclear bomb on the planet, would this effect the global climate?

Answer Yes

Proving humans are capable of effecting the global climate.

Once you agree to this, then we can walk you through the next step.

lee wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 12:27pm:

Kat wrote on Jun 7th, 2016 at 12:16pm: Just this: It is better to act now, and discover later that action was not necessary, than it is to FAIL to act, and discover later that it is too LATE to act. God forbid if we made the world a better place un-necessarily, eh? Just think. The trillions of dollars spent on climate change/AGW could have already made the world a better place.

It has.

And it will continue to do so.

Whether climate change is crap or not, any move towards renewable
and/or cleaner sources of energy cannot be a bad thing.

No, I don't expect coal mines to be closed overnight or coal-fired power
stations demolished, but the less reliance we have to place on them, the
better.

Kat wrote on Jun 7^th, 2016 at 4:23pm:

Whether climate change is crap or not, any move towards renewable and/or cleaner sources of energy cannot be a bad thing.

'Ottar Edenhofer Co-chair U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

    “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy,” “We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” '

'Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment

    “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” '

It is not about the environment it is about wealth distribution.

'Dharnai, a community of about 3,200 people in eastern India’s Bihar state, had been without electricity for three decades. So when activists with Greenpeace set up a solar-powered microgrid in July of 2014, the excitement was palpable. But, residents said, the problems started almost immediately.

When the former chief minister of Bihar state visited to inaugurate the grid, villagers lined up to protest, chanting, “We want real electricity, not fake electricity!”

By “real,” they meant power from the central grid, generated mostly using coal. By “fake,” they meant solar.'

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-trumps-solar-in-india/

Except for those poor countries which have been denied funding by the IMF and World Bank, because they would only fund renewables. The Chinese have now backed them for fossil fuel.

How has it made the world a better place kat?
just askin...  I need a list.