First - Let's win the War of Words.

[Derek]

Hi All,
I have just finished reading Green Hell by Steve Malloy, founder of junk science dot com.
The book has been on the shelf for several months since I bought it.
I have no excuse for not reading it sooner. I now regret not doing so.
In the book Steve Malloy has covered the "green" issues, the people who are "greens", and by what means they operate,
to a depth and width of understanding I have not seen elsewhere so far.

Yes, there are many large well known "greens" like Al Gore, and Richard Branson,
but the vast majority of greens are "individuals" or activists of groups of varying sizes,
from as large as Greenpeace, to as small as local cycles advocating groups, and far smaller, individuals, like school teachers for example...
What surprised me was the ease with which the later "groups" above have, and how,
they have, are, and will continue to increase their influence over both politicians and businesses, and hoodwink the general public in the process.
An influence, if not power beyond any reasonable measure compared to their electoral representation.
And YES, the word "over" both politicians and businesses, is absolutely correct.
It truely is an unholy alliance of extreme minorities welding power way beyond any degree they should be able to.
We have been lulled into a false sense of security, whilst behind the scenes the "greens"
have all but taken over both politics and business. AND all the while managing to retain a "nice, well intensioned, but harmless" public appearance.
Mainly by the oh so appealing phrases that are either meaningless, or the opposite of what the "greens" really mean, have as their "green" goal, or actually stand for.
Phrases like "save the planet", "sustainability", "smart growth", "optimum population", etc, etc.

In all honesty, it has been shown already beyond doubt, by their very own actions / pronouncements that
the "greens" are anti-human, anti-technology, and anti-development.

What do we do. ? "Greens" are at best a threat to our ways of life, and at worst will deliberatly cause, or allow by deliberate inaction,
the deaths of many, many countless perfectly innocent human beings.
On forums and blogs Steve Malloy suggests we first win the war of words.
Steve Malloy writes in his book Green Hell ,
" While green opponents have yet to even name their cause,
the greens for a long time have shaped the debate through the use of loaded buzzwords and hard-to-argue modifiers.
These virtually guarantee that the greens begin every discussion with a distinct advantage.
Their terminology invariably aims to capture the moral high ground so that
anyone who opposes them automatically assumes a morally inferior position.
Take the terms "smart growth" and "optimum population," for example.
It's hard to argue against anything "smart" or "optimum," isn't it?
Most people are totally stymied by such terms. Don't be.
Remember what these euphemisms really mean. As discussed earlier,
smart growth means a return to the days of yore when villagers lived in isolated, self-contained communities and rarely left them.
Optimum population is government-enforced population control - like China's one-child policy. "

and,
" "sustainability"? What does it mean?
Does it mean we can't use a natural resource unless there is an endless supply of it?
Does it mean we can't use a resource if getting at it or using it alters the environment, however transiently, in some way, shape, or form?
For the greens, the answer to both questions is yes.
But of course being for "sustainable development" is much more positive sounding and
socially acceptable than the greens' real position,
which is being against all economic activity and development."

and,
" To the greens oil, coal, and natural gas are not sustainable forms of energy because
they involve Earth-harming drilling and mining, and supposedly contribute to global warming.
Nuclear power is not sustainable because it involves mining and disposal of radioactive waste.
Yet they also find ways to oppose wind farms, solar power, and biofuels, citing various "adverse environmental impacts."
It seems that all energy use is unsustainable to the greens."

I think he has made a very good point, in that "we" need to win the war of words, and why.
With this in mind "we" should "arm" ourselves with short, snappy, easily remembered "answers" to the greens buzzwords and cute, fuzzy phrases.

Green buzzwords and phrases like,

I have made a word document of the above linked to buzzwords / phrases and attached it to this post.
Please feel free to suggest your own definitions of what the buzzwords should or actually do mean in practice.
The funnier the better.

Apparently there are no green buzzwords / phrases for J and K according to the above linked to glossary,
so maybe we could suggest some, T-I-C, of course,
Kill joys springs to my mind..
Obviously the greens have quite a few words beginning with W,
but that's no surprise really is it, they are a load of Ws

Obviously the last two listed buzzwords are ALL greens favourite buzzwords really,
as they would like to be applied to all of "us" that is........

[Sunsettommy]

This is why I have stated before that climate/green fanatics have LOST the war on science grounds.But still have a lock on the political front,where they can get those elected ignoramuses to pass stupid laws,that actually hurt the masses.

It would appear that to wrest that control away from the so called greens,is to show the voters what they will expect if they continue to sit on their asses and do nothing to protect and defend their liberty and property.

[Richard111]

I'm sure this has been posted before:

THE GREEN AGENDA

Have a look at some of the links on the left hand side of the page.

Until you get a government that is NOT socialist oriented you will not win this war with words. What is currently happening in Greece will spread to other EU states. The fact that the people are killing bankers indicates all reason has been lost in the desire for revenge.

[Derek]

Great link, well worth repeating Richard111.

I am off to work for four days now, but any suggestions regarding word definitions gratefully accepted.
If people want they can pm me their suggestions rather than post on the thread, the choice is yours.
Don't use to many hydrocarbons doing it though, or paper, or fossil fuels, obviously.
We don't want to use up dwindling resources unnecessarily, and to our surprise make plants too fat do we..

[Mike Davis]

Derek:
It is good to see that you have read that!
Richard111:
That is one of many versions of the same thing! It is good to know it is still getting around and there are sites dedicated to awareness of the agenda.
The answer to what is driving the so called believers is as complex as the climate!

[Richard111]

I am now a firm believer in the socialist agenda for world domination.

AGW is just a cover to distract attention from all the draconian laws being put in place to remove the availability of technology from the masses. This will prevent them fighting back when they do eventually wake up, but it will be too late.

Notice how the so called discussion in MSM focuses on temperature. Completely meaningless and impossible for the masses to counter.

Check as hard as you like, you will not find a single tutorial on how CO2 absorbs radiation from the surface and then radiates back some 1.7W/m^2 or whatever. This has been the centre of the claim for over twenty years!!

They also claim CO2 can absorb surface radiation all the way up the air column!!!! To do this CO2 would need "black body" spectral capability. CO2 does not have this. CO2 absorbs all it can in the first 100 meters and it does indeed put a miniscule portion of heat in to that first 100 meters which was massively warmed by conduction first and starts the cooling process. Look up adiabatic cooling. Note how GHGs have had no influence on this well documented effect in atmospheric physics.

The physics of the "catastrophic abilities" of CO2 are NEVER discussed.
Why? Read my first statement above.

[Mike Davis]

Richard111:
After reading this I decided to use their words against them. I found this site:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/settled
When some one claims the science is settled I provide the definition of the word then show why that is not so.
When weasel claims are made that are contradictory I attempt to show the contradiction.
The "MOMMY STATE" concept has been promoted and taught and has become ingrained in peoples lifestyles. Until an Extinction level event results in starting over and a return to the survival of the fittest the MOMMY STATE will remain.
The end result of the Socialist agenda/ Mommy state ( same thing different names) ( actually Mommy State is the modern version of socialism refined to fit desires) will be eventual human induced self extinction. Probably about 1 or 2 hundred years if not sooner. It could actually begin to deteriorate in as little as 1 generation from now!

[Richard111]

Thanks for the dictionary link Mike. I have a copy of Chambers on my desk. Will do a test sometime to see which is quicker.

"MOMMY STATE" Hah! It fits! They've been bought. Thick as two short planks but produce eight kids and you have £20,000 a year and don't even have to find a job! This is why all those Eastern Europeans come here. Get any old job for peanuts but collect a fortune in benefits for the kids back in Estonia or where ever.

You can imagine the riots when they are told "no more benefits". The EU does not pay these benefits, that's why they come here. This stupid government assumes they will all be labour voters in the election. They are probably right but this does nothing to pay off the UK financial debts, just makes is worse. All this by a chap who used to chant "Prudence".

I'm not expecting anything good out of this election. If Brown retains the premiership I expect riots, ala Greece, by mid summer and a call for EU troops to patrol the streets of Britain.

[strogoff]

I have just found a Green Hell Blog though nothing about a war of words in it.

I miss "facts" and "evidence" in the buzzword list; maybe they are too ambiguous in english or have a completely different meaning in green minds.

[Mike Davis]

"Consistent With"
"Most Likely"
"Settled"
"Statistically Significant"
"Not Statistically Significant"
"YES, But" means no
"NO, But" means yes
The first four phrases replace "Facts and Evidence"
And the whole thing is based on "SWAG"

---

Richard111:
While the Welfare state has been a growing problem for some time, I was referring to the modified Cradle to Grave where all of your life you are told what to do and how to do it because MOMMY STATE knows best. The Book written By Clinton "It takes a Village" was a look at the MOMMY STATE. All the community resources are used to mold the children into "Proper, Responsible citizens" Starting with Child care and Head Start Pre School. The tribe is the Family and Social Networking provides the latest outlet and thought modeling format. Parents do not want to take responsibility for their children because the state provides them with other outlets and wants to take over the training anyway. It started with Neighborhood and Church after school and Child Care. Now it seems that Child Care has to be state certified and subsidized. First it was Smokey Bear and soon you will be jailed for swatting a fly in front of a child because you are traumatizing the child. People have been reported for speaking to loudly to their children.

[Richard111]

Mike:
You describe the country I live in to a T..
Only last month a grandmother was arrested, fined a £1,000 and placed on three months curfew enforced with a radio bracelet on her leg.

Her crime? Selling a goldfish to a 14 year old boy.

I think Ayn Rand had it dead right in her book Anthem.

I expect the riots sooner rather than latter as there is much bad feeling about voters being turned away from polling boths. Every constituency concerned has a high proportion of "other ethnics".

How people can be allowed to vote wearing a burka I do not understand.

[Mike Davis]

Richard111:
As long as the word ETHNIC is part of our language. As long as descriptors are used to separate/ describe individual. Tribalism will continue to exist. If a person wants to be considered part of an Ethnic culture then that is a form of self segregation. I am a Human being and as such I am a member of the Global Human population. If I were to use the descriptor "American" I would be self imposing tribalism. That can and is further refined by claiming I am a Tennessean, Grangerite (for my county), Thorn Hillite ( for my city).

As long as a group as a whole does not condemn openly those who promote violence any self proclaimed member of that group, through words or actions should be treated with the respect the vocal member of their group promote for us. To remain silent is to condone. If these people want respect then they should be counter demonstrating at the embassies representing the terrorist countries. They should attempt to blend into the culture where they live. If they want to display their differences then it is proper to treat them differently. The term is "Self Imposed Segregation"
That is promoted and accepted in the Divide and conquer policies of a MOMMY STATE.

[Richard111]

Mike:
Tribalism. Yep, that is the problem. It is VERY ingrained and this MOMMY STATE is promoting it big time.

I am caucasian and through my ancestry consider myself an English man. My paternal ancestors are from Scotland and Ireland and maternal ancestors from England. I was born in Egypt and spent my early years in India.

I travelled a fair amount, Europe, Middle East and Far East. I spent over twenty years working in South Africa, met my wife there. She was born in Rhodesia. Her ancestors are from England and Wales. We retired to Wales where my wife's family can be traced back over three hundred years in and around the town we live in. We are considered in-comers by the locals some of whom are not even local born and bred!

I have met, lived and worked with peoples of many different races. The most common theme was social identity. All tended to be dismissive of other races. I found that education was the best meeting ground. Lower classes of all races could be bloody dangerous and had to be treated with caution without giving offense. A very tight line to walk.

Now the UK is breaking up into bantu-stans which are no-go areas to other tribes. Some are insisting on having their own laws and customs which are against British law. We already have forced marriages and "honor" killings. Little is done about them. The different tribes always establish their own homelands. The open door immigration policy is considered a "good thing" and if you oppose it you are a racist.

I won't talk about the schools and current education policies. A teacher "lost it" and tried to kill a student recently. Students killing students.

This MOMMY STATE is on course for a major crack up.

[Mike Davis]

Richard111:
That is here as well. here is an example if separatism at work:
http://www.cal.org/topics/dialects/aae.html
Except:
The term Ebonics (a blend of ebony and phonics) gained recognition in 1996 as a result of the Oakland School Board’s use of the term in its proposal to use African American English in teaching Standard English in the Oakland Schools. The term was coined by Robert Williams in 1973, but it wasn’t until the Ebonics controversy that Ebonics became widely used. Most linguists prefer the term African American English as it aligns the variety with regional, national, and sociocultural varieties of English such as British English, Southern English, Cajun English, and so forth.
I lived in Las Vegas where they have culture by Neighborhood with people living near but beyond physical boundaries claiming to live in the most popular "HOODS". Some of the religious "Tribes" take this beyond the limits of extreme. Here they separate into individual churches with internal cliques.

[Richard111]

Mike:
I find it quite depressing. Much worse than I thought.

In South Africa they had "Aparthied". It was working quite well. Each tribe had their own homeland where they could do their own thing without interference. When they ventured into another area they had to follow the local rules. Main problem was due to lack of infrastructure, not enough transport as most workers lived quite far from the work place. What finally destroyed the "experiment" was the insistance that "Afrikaans" be taught and spoken in all schools. The burnings started then.

When "Aparthied" ended there was a mass migration, "afirmative action" which drove away the business people and closed down employment.
Everybody suffered. Shanty towns sprung up all over with consequent increase in crime and health problems. But still the different tribes set up their own areas.

The same thing is happening here in the UK. The "Union" is in tatters, Scotland, Wales and Ireland want independance yet cannot operate without huge subsidies. Mass immigration to the UK results in 25% of all students who do not talk English at home. There is a hospital where 74 different languages are spoken, many other hospitals with similar problems. Doctors have to be contracted from Europe and they often cannot speak English. My dentist is Polish and still speaks very fractured English. Good dentist mind.

But there is still no common meeting ground at grass roots level for all these different tribes. Already we have problems imported from their home countries, Muslims, Sikh, Bengalies, Nigerians, Bangladeshies and now a hugh influx from Eastern Europe. They DO NOT MIX. They snap up all the low paying jobs and claim vast benefits for tribes of children "back home" which our socialist government pays without question. People have been arrested trying to walk to England through the channel tunnel.

They know once they put a foot on English soil their "human rights" become valid and they cannot be deported.

This can only end in tears.

[Mike Davis]

Richard111:
I hear the word Equality and think it means All equal or a melting pot of humanity. Each person is an individual and we all live in peace.
I found out that Equality is freedom to discriminate and hate anyone who is not of your tribe. I define Tribe as a tight social group. The list of social groups is so long and some/ many people belong to more than one tight social group which leads to internal conflicts because it is now possible to belong to a group that discriminates against a different group that you also belong to.

[Richard111]

Green Mind Control

[Sunsettommy]

(05-08-2010 05:53 AM)Richard111 Wrote:  Green Mind Control

The least experienced and easily gullible are the kids:

Quote:Small wonder, then, that a 2010 Gallup poll on climate change attitudes showed that while most demographics had experienced a rise in skepticism about news coverage regarding climate change, Millennials, ages 18 to 29, showed no change. “Notably, all of the past year’s uptick in cynicism about the seriousness of global warming coverage occurred among Americans 30 and older,” wrote Lydia Saad for Gallup on March 11. “The views of 18- to 29-year-olds, the age group generally most concerned about global warming and most likely to say the problem is underestimated, didn’t change.”

The kids never seem to learn that THEY are the ones who needs skepticism the most in order to protect themselves from brainwashing attacks.

I am now 50 years old yet even I realize that I was a dumb ass when I was 25,because I now know NOW what I did not know THEN.There is a good reason why managers and directors are older men and women who have been through the grinder of life for a while.They have life experiences to draw from to make the important decisions with their jobs.

When will the kids wake up and realize they are still dumb asses at age 21?

Quote:At Harvard College peer pressure pushes sustainability outcomes. “As an example, a peer-to-peer engagement program (picture students running around the dorm telling each other to turn off the lights) has helped Harvard College students reduce their energy consumption by more than 12 percent over the last four years,” states the guide. The TPR publication doesn’t indicate whether or not Harvard College has an environmental literacy requirement.

See how dumb the kids are?

[Derek]

I saw this definition of a green buzzword on a T shirt yesterday.
I'll paraphase it here.

"Vegetarian" - An ancient English term, possibly also used in the USA,
and requires research or confirmation of a similar spanish definition.
The term refers to a village idiot, that does not have
the physical ability, and / or mental capacity to hunt.

[strogoff]

Derek,

that T-shirt must have come from Urban Dictionary. It has 119 entries for vegetarian and I like the 3rd definition: "A secret underground society that takes pleasure in torturing fruits and vegetables. They also are trying to monopolize the bottled water market."

The Real Academia Española says it is a french word. (Other thing is "vegan", english term). I don´t find anything strange in Larousse.

Latin:

Vegetare = to grow (all of us grow; we are also vegetables)
Vegetus = healthy, strong
....

Interesting I. Cervantes forum where I find "vegetalismo"......... got lost in "dendrofilia".

Most close thing I found to what you´re saying is "herbivore".


BTW - Have you heard of "cradle to cradle"?. I have not read enough, but it looks like a new trend in design which tries to replace the 3R concept: reduce, recycle and reuse will bring us to the same place (hell) but at a slower pace.