Jump to content

Do You Believe in Man-Made Climate Change?


Guest ProudConservative

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

You're backing up the point I'm making better than I ever could.  You make sitting in the lap of a dictator and government look more like a lap dance.

I have no idea what you're talking about.  Probably more of your alternate history.  Perhaps you could cite the million man war you're talking about, who's sole objective was to keep oil out of the hands of communists. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shady said:

I have no idea what you're talking about.  Probably more of your alternate history.  Perhaps you could cite the million man war you're talking about, who's sole objective was to keep oil out of the hands of communists. :lol:

Anyone else want to take a shot at what this idiot is avoiding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The US is not committed to the Paris Accord, given they have given notice to withdraw.  You are being stubborn, which I get but ... no ...

Yes, you are correct, they're not participating in the Paris Accord, their successful reductions in emissions has been done on their own.  So what?  Are you interested in real results, or to just demagogue the issue?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.  It's defining territory by law and negotiation.  I'm surrounded by and live and work in treaty lands every day.  Treaty settlements are the biggest economic driver in my region.

Uh...no.  Treaty lands are not the same thing.  You cannot buy or own land on a reservation.  You cannot benefit from any of the land/income tax exemptions as a non-Indigenous person.  You cannot hold a status card that gives you such exemptions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Uh...no.  Treaty lands are not the same thing.

The point is they're lands that were negotiated with their original governments not just the one's Ottawa put in place.  That's apparently what's missing in Wet'sewet'en. Ottawa and Victoria seem to be attempting to just deal with elected chiefs and hoping public mis-perception about the false pre-eminence of elected councils will carry the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The point is they're lands that were negotiated with their original governments not just the one's Ottawa put in place.  That's apparently what's missing in Wet'sewet'en. Ottawa and Victoria seem to be attempting to just deal with elected chiefs and hoping public mis-perception about the false pre-eminence of elected councils will carry the day.

What makes it their territory?  Title hasn't been established.  Unelected chiefs making non-binding calls against elected chiefs.  Seems very dubious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

What makes it their territory? 

The fact they were here before us.

Quote

Title hasn't been established.

Title was simply ignored and unaddressed, especially in BC where the government did not follow explicit orders to do so from their own hereditary 'chief' as I recall.  

Quote

  Unelected chiefs making non-binding calls against elected chiefs.  Seems very dubious.

What's dubious is assuming this colonial opinion on how 1st Nations governs themselves means anything to them.

It's like we can't even conceive of systems of governance based on a hereditary line that stretches back in time. I'm sure I've seen this before but...can you recall anything that sounds similar to this at all?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The fact they were here before us.

Title was simply ignored and unaddressed, especially in BC where the government did not follow explicit orders to do so from their own hereditary 'chief' as I recall.  

What's dubious is assuming this colonial opinion on how 1st Nations governs themselves means anything to them.

It's like we can't even conceive of systems of governance based on a hereditary line that stretches back in time. I'm sure I've seen this before but...can you recall anything that sounds similar to this at all?

 

Aryans?  That's the problem.  Race-based territories.  Lands occupied by various groups over thousands of years that one ethnic group claims is exclusively theirs for eternity.  Um...no.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

As I pointed out above much of the world is pulling together by acting locally which sometimes includes blockades.

It won't help enough, the means of producing natural gas is anything but natural and besides which the bigger goal at the moment as I see it is establishing indigenous political sovereignty.  Erecting that hurdle will be very important when push comes to shove against the development of future fossil fuel sources/infrastructure.    

Locally won't do it.  Sorry, it just won't. Carry on though.  It might not do any harm either.

As for indigenous political sovereignty, the majority of indigenous people whose land the pipeline crosses want it in place.  Hereditary chiefs do not.  If you believe that the rights to decide on political and economic issues are bestowed based on a birthright, then you do.  I prefer a more democratic means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yeah...it's more like states united in common cause though, big fossil fuel interests and big governments are deadbeats content to leave action up to everyone else while riding on their coat-tails.

Under the Trump administration the United States has re-started its nuclear energy program, which had been halted after green-peaceniks and their supporters lobbied government and swung public opinion to bring this technology to a halt. The truth of the matter is nuclear is the only viable option to produce steady, high levels of power while keeping carbon production down.

Stupid progressives think their little wind mills are going to be enough to power a modern country. Power consumption is going up, up. Every character you type on the keyboard consumes a small amount of power, and also produces a certain amount of global warming.

So unless you know what you’re talking about, perhaps it’s a good idea to shut up a little. Save the planet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Shady said:

Yes, you are correct, they're not participating in the Paris Accord, their successful reductions in emissions has been done on their own.  So what? 

So what... This:

I posted 'They are more committed to Paris than the US is now' and you asked what I was talking about.  Well I guess now you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

It is true and it was done sans the federal government at the state and city level.

But but but... 

Of course you refuse to get it. The fact that the Paris accord is a failure, and the country that was not signatory did better than all of them, probably all of them combined. Hell yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Aryans?  That's the problem.  Race-based territories.  Lands occupied by various groups over thousands of years that one ethnic group claims is exclusively theirs for eternity.  Um...no.

I was thinking the House of Windsor actually descended from Germans interestingly enough I suppose but irrelevant to the point you're dodging which is that family-based territories are facts on the ground, especially where it's been unceded or conquered. Interestingly enough again, some one like the Windsor family once tried to wipe my family name out in the pursuit of our territory but again that's irrelevant to the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Locally won't do it.  Sorry, it just won't. Carry on though.  It might not do any harm either.

As for indigenous political sovereignty, the majority of indigenous people whose land the pipeline crosses want it in place.  Hereditary chiefs do not.  If you believe that the rights to decide on political and economic issues are bestowed based on a birthright, then you do.  I prefer a more democratic means.

So do I but we have to negotiate our way there.  If it takes generations so be it that's often how humanity rolls deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Under the Trump administration the United States has re-started its nuclear energy program, which had been halted after green-peaceniks and their supporters lobbied government and swung public opinion to bring this technology to a halt. The truth of the matter is nuclear is the only viable option to produce steady, high levels of power while keeping carbon production down.

I agree but I just need to see the industry surrounded by institutions of accountability and safety that would make Orwell blush.

Quote

Stupid progressives think their little wind mills are going to be enough to power a modern country.

Conservative lickspittles won't stand for any oversight that their betters deem to be an economic burden so I guess it'll have to be windmills.

Quote

Power consumption is going up, up. Every character you type on the keyboard consumes a small amount of power, and also produces a certain amount of global warming.

Well don't look now but power consumption is down due to blockades.  There's more than one way to slow down an economy. 

Quote

So unless you know what you’re talking about, perhaps it’s a good idea to shut up a little. Save the planet

Ok but I'd rather you go piss up a rope. I know precisely what I'm talking about and it means nothing to me that you think otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

But but but... 

Of course you refuse to get it. The fact that the Paris accord is a failure, and the country that was not signatory did better than all of them, probably all of them combined. Hell yeah.

What is there to get? Canada is still a deadbeat and you're happy to leave it up others to pull more weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Popular Now

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    robretpeter42
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...