Page 56 of 150 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866106 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 1491

Thread: Climate Change Report

  1. #551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    That's the red Herring Again. You're trying to "win" by diverting what we were talking about which was Moore as a shill.
    Dude. No. Stop.

    cwolff: "The guy is a shill!"
    Me: "For whom?"
    cwolff: "For energy companies!"
    Me: "Like nuclear energy? What's wrong with nuclear energy?"
    cwolff: "Red herring!"

    This is how conversation works. You say something, I say something then you say something then I'll say something again.

    If I wanted to disprove Moore was a shill (which I'm not necessarily doing) how would I go about that without you saying I'm just resorting to a logical fallacy? Or are you saying we basically just have to take your word as gospel on this matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by waywardgs View Post
    So your contention is that all the corporations and interests and front groups on that list are somehow "good"?
    I didn't say that, I just said a corporation isn't inherently bad. When someone lists a bunch of corporations then says "This Moore guy has been paid by them at one point or another" why is that automatically supposed to make Moore sound like is an asshole? I think Moore's point was that you have to be a realistic environmentalist. You can't just say all corporations are evil and need to go away. For example his red herring take on nuclear energy. The world needs energy (unless we want to go backwards as a society) and nuclear energy is one of the safest and cleanest forms of energy around. Likewise his point about the logging industry. Do we not want homes and shelters and paper and shit? Are all logging companies necessarily evil because they cut down trees? Are there possibly some responsible logging companies?

    Quote Originally Posted by waywardgs View Post
    1. Penn and Teller: Question the background of all these fools screaming about ACC and their motivations! (valid)

    2. Use a guy who's built a dubious career out of lending his bullshit "former greenpeace" credentials to prove your point.

    3. That guy is guilty of the VERY SAME THING penn and teller are criticizing the environmental movement for.

    4. Fuck.
    I think the point of using Moore was in direct response that there was supposedly no debate over whether the world was going to end in the next 50 years and that mass extinctions were going to happen unless we did something about it.

  2. #552
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    8,035

    Default

    From Greenpeace wiki...

    "Environmental historian Frank Zelko dates the formation of the "Don't Make a Wave Committee" to 1969 and according to Jim Bohlen the group adopted the name "Don't Make a Wave Committee" on 29 November 1969.[31] According to the Greenpeace web site, The Don't Make a Wave Committee was established in 1970.[32] Certificate of incorporation of The Don't Make a Wave Committee dates the incorporation to the fifth of October, 1970.[33] Researcher Vanessa Timmer dates the official incorporation to 1971.[34] Greenpeace itself calls the protest voyage of 1971 as "the beginning".[35] According to Patrick Moore, who was an early member but has since distanced himself from Greenpeace, and Rex Weyler, the name of "The Don’t Make a Wave Committee" was officially changed to Greenpeace Foundation in 1972.[33][36] Because of the early phases spanning several years, there are differing views on who can be called the founders of Greenpeace."

    "Because Patrick Moore was among the crew of the first protest voyage and the beginning of the journey is often referred as the birthday of Greenpeace, Moore also considers himself one of the founders.[33] Greenpeace used to list Moore among "founders and first members" of but has later stated that while Moore was a significant early member, he was not among the founders of Greenpeace in 1970"

    'Early Greenpeace director Rex Weyler says on his homepage that the insiders of Greenpeace have debated about the founders since mid-1970's"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace

    So was he a founder? Who knows. He was there at what Greenpeace calls "The Beginning". Of course NOW Greenpeace wouldn't call him a founder if it all started in his basement and he paid for it with his pocket change.

    Quote Originally Posted by waywardgs View Post
    So your contention is that all the corporations and interests and front groups on that list are somehow "good"?

    It's a long shot, but maybe that's true. But think about what it says about the messenger- he's going to lend his name to ANY DAMN THING. He's not an "expert" in ALL of those fields. Don't be daft.
    From hat i saw, he was advising those companies on improving their Eco image, and maybe Eco practices.

    You don't need to know Nuclear Physics to advise a company to NOT dispose of nuclear waste in a "bad" way.

    Actually.. reading those things you posted... I don't see a single one that says he takes money to promote how awesome an energy company is.

    Westcoast Energy and BC Gas 1993-1994 "to design a public consultation process to address greenhouse gas emissions for the natural gas sector in B.C.";

    BHP Minerals to facilitate a round table on proposals to use the abandoned Island Copper mine as a landfill site (1993-94);

    consultant to the Canadian Mining Association and the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada "on the role of biodiversity in environmental policy in the mining industry," (1996);

    consultant to BHP Minerals (Canada) Ltd. to author a paper on the environmental impact of submarine tailings disposal over the 23-year life of the Island Copper Mine on Vancouver Island

    The only thing that comes close.. is the fact that he speaks on behalf of Logging companies. Doesn't say exactly why he does.. but could be that he is saying something along the lines of replanting while logging doesn't harm the environment in the long term. -shrugs-

    Unless the Logging industry has suddenly become the oil industry, or hell, the energy industry.. Cwolff's and your claims are invalid.

    Also... the dude has a PH.D. in Ecology... I think that makes him an expect on the impact of companies on the ecology... Then again, what do I know.
    Last edited by Jarvan; 04-26-2014 at 10:54 PM.
    This space for sale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Back View Post
    We have to count our blessings that we enjoy freedom of speech without fear of oppression in this county.
    (When you can't answer a question for fear of making you or your savior look bad)

  3. #553

    Default

    Don't you know what a shill is? Maybe that's the problem.

    A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.

  4. #554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarvan View Post
    From Greenpeace wiki...



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace

    So was he a founder? Who knows. He was there at what Greenpeace calls "The Beginning". Of course NOW Greenpeace wouldn't call him a founder if it all started in his basement and he paid for it with his pocket change.
    I'll buy that. He can call himself a founder and I won't object.

  5. #555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    Don't you know what a shill is? Maybe that's the problem.
    Actually the real problem here is that I've let you throw me off track here. Bad cwolff.

    I don't think I've ever said this guy wasn't a shill. I was simply asking why is it necessarily bad that he shills for certain companies...say like...nuclear energy! Then your only response is "Red herring!"

    Okay fine, let's just go ahead and say the guy is a shill for nuclear energy. You win this one cwolff.

    Now tell me why is supporting nuclear energy bad?
    Last edited by Tgo01; 04-26-2014 at 11:32 PM.

  6. #556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgo01 View Post
    Actually the real problem here is that I've let you throw me off track here. Bad cwolff.

    I don't think I've ever said this guy wasn't a shill. I was simply asking why is it necessarily bad that he shills for certain companies...say like...nuclear energy! Then your only response is "Red herring!"

    Okay fine, let's just go ahead and say the guy is a shill for nuclear energy. You win this one cwolff.

    Now tell me why is supporting nuclear energy bad?
    I won't tell you that.

  7. #557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    I won't tell you that.
    Mmm hmm.

    Tgo01: 1,000,000
    cwolff: 1

  8. #558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waywardgs View Post
    1. Penn and Teller: Question the background of all these fools screaming about ACC and their motivations! (valid)

    2. Use a guy who's built a dubious career out of lending his bullshit "former greenpeace" credentials to prove your point.

    3. That guy is guilty of the VERY SAME THING penn and teller are criticizing the environmental movement for.

    4. Fuck.
    From the video, exactly what did Patrick Moore say that was false, misinformed or wrong? Factually.. not because you disagree with it.

    I read through his bio.. he seems to be taking a common sense approach to climate change without the bullshit "OMG COMPANIES ARE EVIL AND WE MUST DESTROY THEM ALL!!!!11111111"
    PC RETARD HALL OF FAME
    Quote Originally Posted by Back The Reigning Retard Champion most consider the GOAT View Post
    3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran-the 2 time Retard Champion View Post
    Regulating firearms to keep them out of the hands of criminals, the unhinged, etc. meets the first test of the 2nd amendment, 'well-regulated'.

    Quote Originally Posted by SHAFT-Internet Toughguy RL Loser View Post
    You show me a video of me typing that and Ill admit it. (This was the excuse he came up with when he was called out for a really stupid post)

  9. #559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    Don't you know what a shill is? Maybe that's the problem.
    It seems like you don't understand what a shill is. Moore runs a company that works with other companies to help them do things in an ecologically responsible manner.

    Using your very basic misunderstanding of the term, I would also be a shill because I am a contractor for an electric company and you disagree with me.

    That's not what a shill is.
    Last edited by Parkbandit; 04-27-2014 at 07:00 AM.
    PC RETARD HALL OF FAME
    Quote Originally Posted by Back The Reigning Retard Champion most consider the GOAT View Post
    3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seran-the 2 time Retard Champion View Post
    Regulating firearms to keep them out of the hands of criminals, the unhinged, etc. meets the first test of the 2nd amendment, 'well-regulated'.

    Quote Originally Posted by SHAFT-Internet Toughguy RL Loser View Post
    You show me a video of me typing that and Ill admit it. (This was the excuse he came up with when he was called out for a really stupid post)

  10. #560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parkbandit View Post
    Using your definition, it seems like you don't understand what a shill is. Moore runs a company that works with other companies to help them do things in an ecologically responsible manner.

    It's not someone who you just disagree with.
    Just because you run a company to work with other companies to help them do things in an ecologically responsible manner doesn't mean you necessarily have to believe in it (you're a great example) or not be in the pocket of industry.

Similar Threads

  1. It's cold, therefore climate change!
    By Tgo01 in forum Politics
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-08-2015, 08:19 AM
  2. Don't Try to Stop Climate Change
    By ClydeR in forum Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-11-2013, 05:19 PM
  3. Clinton says Climate change...
    By Daragon in forum Politics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-24-2010, 04:16 PM
  4. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 04:02 PM
  5. The Cheney Doctrine and Climate Change
    By ClydeR in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-14-2009, 11:06 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •