The orgy of hypocrisy at the Copenhagen climate conference has begun.

 

There will be at least 1,200 additional limousines--all petrol or diesel--on the streets, and at least 140 extra private jets at Copenhagen's main airport not including Air Force One.

 

The estimates by climate skeptics, using the Church's own calculations, is that they will burn an additional 41,000 metric tons of CO2 over the course of the conference, the equivalent of an entire middle-sized city in that timeframe. (they quote Middlesborough as an example; West Palm Beach would make a local equivalent)

 

All this to try to hammer out a deal that again would not be signed by China or India, or most developing countries, to attempt to change a problem that may or may not exist, and is under open suspicion now that the cooking of the books has been exposed.

 

The hilarious part: the local escort union is offering free sex with anybody with a badge for the conference.

The hilarious part: the local escort union is offering free sex with anybody with a badge for the conference.

 

 

I believe this is actually the "Completely pointless part". Or perhaps "The part that sounds like you are making up."

The hilarious part: the local escort union is offering free sex with anybody with a badge for the conference.

 

 

I believe this is actually the "Completely pointless part". Or perhaps "The part that sounds like you are making up."

Guess again.

 

They did it in response to some Churchgoers saying "Be sustainable, don't buy sex."

So we're still going with the "Completely pointless part".

So we're still going with the "Completely pointless part".

 

 

I only said it was funny.

I'm at work at this moment and can't see YouTube stuff, so I will look at that later.

 

As for the latest on Climategate, Al Gore went on the record trying to refute the e-mails. The problem is, he falsely states that the e-mails are all older than 10 years old, when in reality the e-mails in question are as recent as a few weeks ago and the vast majority of those actually publicized are no more than a year old. The range of e-mails in question date from 1996 to 2009.

The G77, a group of developing nations representing 130 countries in Africa, South America, southern Asia and the South Pacific, have pulled out of Copenhagen negotiations. They cited the lack of open negotiations and the developed world's utter unwillingness to continue to live up to their Kyoto obligations.

 

Some analysts believe they will be back soon.

In the case of Obama and Pelosi, early so they could avoid the blizzard presently hitting D.C. with nearly 2 feet of snow.

oh golly no...people used transportation to get a conference not in their own country...

 

they definitely should have rode their bike and flown in on gliders

 

anything else? or does that about cover the nonsense that is this thread

No, the non sense is that there were buses waiting for these so called leaders but they all chose to ride in their fancy limos and SUV's. These are the same idiots that want us to be more conservative by riding buses, rails, hybrids, or other modes of transportation such as riding a bicycle when they themselves are the biggest hypocrites and not even participate in conservation themselves.

The nonsense is that a vast majority of the leaders in Copenhagen used private jets. I think the only warmer that flew commercially was Harry Reid. And even he used a limo once he got there.

In the case of Obama and Pelosi, early so they could avoid the blizzard presently hitting D.C. with nearly 2 feet of snow.

 

 

You like pointing out things that don't matter.

 

Like, it doesn't apply to everything you say, but you have a tendency of taking little things that have no bearing on anything whatsoever and then pointing them out as if they mean something.

You like pointing out when things "don't matter". If you're not going to contribute constructively, don't contribute. Or is it your nature as a Nats fan to troll NL East message boards?

 

The point was the whole irony of a conference on global warming greeted by below-average temperatures and punctuated by a snowstorm that would serve as a prelude to a continent-wide blizzard that would kill north of 100 people and shut down Eurostar. That doesn't even touch the forests they killed to print out all their pamphlets and the thousands of copies of each hundreds-pages proposed agreement draft, and the thousands of tons of carbon they pumped into the air with the conference itself and all the private jets (plus Air Force One) and individual limos they used to get there and back.

he's not a Nats fan. And you're right, world leaders should've just merrily hopped on the buses along with the thousands of protesters who probably would've pelted them with god-knows what.

 

That other stuff isn't even a drop in the bucket. Why didn't they all walk to the conference and sleep outside to conserve electricity and not do any printing and and and...

 

Not that I'm a big global warming defender, but "OMG YOU GUYS HOW CAN THERE BE GLOBAL WARMING BECUZ ITS SNOWING OUTSIDE AMIRITE??!!!" doesn't really cut it.

It's not really ironic that it was snowing. Global warming or climate change or whatever doesn't preclude the possibilities of extreme weather at either side. If anything, I think most climate change people have come to the position that the worst effects of global climate change are the extremes on both ends and the loss of moderate temperatures that are more conducive to living our style of life, as well as the massive negative potential effects these temperature extremes will have on natural ecosystems on our planet.

 

It doesn't matter that it's snowing anywhere, that doesn't serve as a condemnation of anything, except maybe your ability to think critically.

 

If I start a thread saying "It's 80+ degress outside and it's Christmas Eve, GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL WHERE YOU AT ORLANDO RAYS????" you would think I'm an idiot. Because it's idiotic to take isolated, anectdotal evidence as refutations of a "global climate" debate.

 

For example, I may not necessarily agree with what I consider El Penguino's slightly militant stance on this issue, but at least he brings something to the table that has some substance. You, on the other hand, sound like a cheap, bargain rack version of Rush Limbaugh, complete with Talking Point Action and the patented "Tries to hard to point out things that he thinks are funny because he doesn't have a good sense of humor" system©.

 

For what it's worth, I don't necessarily consider myself a climate change person, though I do advocate changes in our day to day lives as well as changes in our national character in order to ween us off our increasing dependence on a nonrenewable resource, but it's not necessarily climate change driven, as much as it is like, f***ing practical to develop new ways to acquire energy (yes, including Nuclear).