The reviews are in for Saturday’s international effort to save the planet from global warming, and the news isn’t good for folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry sycophants.
From boring acts, to poor attendance, and folks actually leaving early out of sheer frustration, the concerts appear to have failed miserably.
Is this a sign that Al Gore is as poor an event planner as he is a presidential campaigner? Or, is the public’s interest in this issue dropping faster than temperatures in the southern hemisphere?
Before we get there, it is clear that folks in America and Great Britain were less than thrilled with this event as reported by Reuters Sunday (emphasis added throughout):
U.S. and British media were generally underwhelmed on Sunday by Live Earth, the mega-concert organized by former U.S. vice president and green campaigner Al Gore, which, though built on the model of Live Aid and Live 8, created a less positive buzz.
[…]
Several articles examined the green credentials of artists on the day, including Madonna, whose annual "carbon footprint" was estimated at around 100 times the average Briton's.
Hmmm. You mean there's an obvious hypocricy in extraordinarily wealthy stars telling citizens to cut back on their energy usage as they jet around the planet living lives that normal humans could only dream of? Who'd have thought it?
In reality, isn’t that what all of this issue is about? Shouldn’t similar fingers of disdain be pointed at Gore, Crow, David, DiCaprio, and all of these hypocrites who are conceivably richer than ever telling millions nay billions to do as they say but not as they do?
British media seemed to think so:
The News of the World tabloid, Britain's biggest-selling newspaper, detailed estimates of Madonna's carbon emissions from nine houses, a fleet of cars, a private jet and the Confessions tour, calling her a "climate-change catastrophe."
The Sunday Telegraph quoted U.S. reports of her alleged financial links to companies accused of being major polluters.
How delicious. Speaking of the Telegraph:
As global satellite multi-media musical entertainment, Live Earth was just about adequate. As a platform for stadium politics, it was a dismal affair. "Can you help save the earth?" bellowed Radio 1 DJ Chris Moyles. Cue muted murmur of support.
"We might be screwed if that's the response," he half-joked.
[…]
The whole tone felt misjudged: Al Gore appeared by satellite, to no great reaction in the stadium, and seemed to be addressing a small audience of native Americans, not seizing the world by the reins.
Hmmm. Al Gore failing to motivate large percentages of people. Shouldn’t be a surprise outside of blue American states, correct?
Yet, what is surprising was Monday’s New York Times article on the subject where one would expect to find a much more glowing response:
Al Gore declared Live Earth “the largest global entertainment event in all of history,” but this seven-continent, multimedia eco-extravaganza was colored by the very complacency it vowed to combat.
[…]
Unlike benefits for world hunger or genocide, celebrity efforts to curb the greenhouse effect backlash into the glass-house effect: People who own Escalades, private jets and McMansions shouldn’t recycle bromides at people who fail to carpool to work. Carbon-offsetting, the newly fashionable practice of compensating for one’s own carbon emissions by paying into a fund to reduce them elsewhere, may be better than nothing, but to some it sounds too much like rich men paying others to take their place in the draft during the Civil War.
Checking that link to make sure this was the Times? I understand.
In the end, what does the reaction to this event tell us? Is a public with a traditionally short attention span growing tired of this issue?
After all, for many here in America, global warming – unfortunately for all the wrong reasons – became a front page story when an agenda driven media blamed Hurricane Katrina on the White House, and tied 2005’s active tropical storm season directly to the climate change bogeyman.
With enough fear being stoked 24/7, the timing of Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” – along with the media’s free advertising for the film – couldn’t have been better. Suddenly, global warming became a cause celebre.
However, as 2006’s hurricane season fizzled, and a much cooler and snowier than normal April gripped much of the states in 2007, the calamity seemed to be postponed, and the country’s angst might have diminished.
On the other hand, the hypocrisy of the front-men might also be overshadowing the message. It’s one thing for folks to feel charitable when big stars donate their time to get the common man off their couches to raise funds for the poverty-ridden. However, it’s altogether a different issue when the mega-rich are asking regular folk to cut back on their energy use.
This becomes even more absurd when the ringleader and Global Warmingist-in-Chief is identified to have made up to $100 million in the past seven years, and stands to make significantly more if this issue stays in the limelight.
Just how much are regular folks who are scraping to make ends meet, save for their kids’ college costs and their own retirement willing to sacrifice so that Al Gore can become a billionaire?
As the Telegraph pointed out:
Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, woke a lot of people up to the very real and imminent dangers of climate change. But the inconvenient truth of Live Earth is that it was a soulless telethon, with no clarity or drive.
In reality, this is the stony heart of the entire global warming movement: it is soulless with no clarity or drive.
The only thing clear is that those at the helm are making a huge amount of money off of this issue. And, it appears that this was made infinitely clear to millions nay billions across the planet on Saturday.
Now THAT’S an inconvenient truth.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The only events that Gore can
July 9, 2007 - 10:11 ET by BruzillaThe only events that Gore can put on that "score big" are the ones where nuns give thousands of dollars, supplied by the Chinese, to the causes Gore supports... like the DNC.
"On the other hand, th
July 9, 2007 - 10:16 ET by AtillaKahunaThis has been my major problem with the event since I first heard about it. I just think it is ridiculous for these people to try to tell us what do do with our lives when they are completely unwilling to do anything in their lives.
I noticed a complete lack of celebrities who truly try to limit their energy use (read that as "Have the moral ground to stand on") - Ed Begley Jr. comes to mind. Not that he's a huge celebrity anymore, but neither were most of the acts that played!
Kahuna
Pay or no pay?
July 9, 2007 - 10:22 ET by PawpawNWere any of these so-called performers and celebrities paid anything for such? Were they given free travel? Just why did they do this? Moral reasoning? Hey, I know why! They got carbon offsets from Al's company for either 1/2 price or maybe free!!!
Considering Al Gore and his r
July 9, 2007 - 12:20 ET by dscottConsidering Al Gore and his rich celeb buddies are responsible for half of all residential CO2 emissions, he would do better to invest in alternative energy companies and hock the products to his buddies and followers. Come on Al, you and your buddies (5% who own 70% of the US personal wealth) use as much electricity as all of India combined the least you can do is use the products you tell us to use. Anyone who can spend $1000/month on electricity and a similar sum on natural gas certainly has the money to buy solar and wind power equipment for their property.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Agenda Driven News
July 9, 2007 - 10:16 ET by allanfThe reporting of global warming advocate Bill Blakemore at ABC, and the donation of massive amounts of air time by NBC make it plain that global warming is an agenda issue for the "news" organizations.
They won't stop their coverage. They are advocates. Low ratings seem to have little effect on these folks.
Live Earth
July 9, 2007 - 10:39 ET by Gordon SchumwayGordo
Melmac
No you didn'tNo Soup For You
July 9, 2007 - 10:45 ET by SemperrightNo you didn't
No Soup For You
No you didn'tNo Soup For You
July 9, 2007 - 10:46 ET by SemperrightNo you didn't
No Soup For You
new slogan
July 9, 2007 - 10:43 ET by Jack BauerWhich word?
July 9, 2007 - 10:48 ET by PawpawNJack, is, oh excuse me, was it LIVE EARTH or LIVE EARTH? Which pronounciation? Seems we have more of a problem with Global Pronounciation than with Global Warming----oops my bad again, meant Global Climate Change!!
Live Earth -- putting the L
July 9, 2007 - 10:52 ET by Jack BauerLive Earth -- putting the LIE into lie-ve.
That would the correct pronunciation methinks. And the correct sentiment as well.
How serendipitous.
CORRECT
July 9, 2007 - 11:01 ET by PawpawNMe thinks you are totally CORRECT. LIE-VE Aid. More like Kool Aid, but that would be GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE!!
So what you're saying is, it
July 9, 2007 - 12:25 ET by Hero SquadSo what you're saying is, it was actually "Lie Vearth."
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
We can only hope...
July 9, 2007 - 10:56 ET by c5thenWe can only hope.
My guess, however is that "they" will use the poor response and the lack of turnout as proof of the apathy and how much more hype is needed.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
If that's the case, and if mo
July 9, 2007 - 12:27 ET by Hero SquadIf that's the case, and if more concerts are planned in the future... perhaps Al is actually using these Live Earth mega-carbon burning events as means to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Anyone else notice that the h
July 9, 2007 - 11:36 ET by jpatchAnyone else notice that the heading above "Live Earth" on the sign is Morse Code for SOS?
Gee Al, how clever. Would that be like, the earth is trying to send a message in Morse Code to outerspace? Or is the SOS for your withering aspirations of global domination?
jpatch,That SOS a distress c
July 9, 2007 - 11:53 ET by Dave Rjpatch,
That SOS a distress call for the good ship Al Gore, as it appears to be taking on more and more water with each passing day. After all, just how many torpedos can the thing take on?
Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.
Once again, the man who inven
July 9, 2007 - 14:27 ET by Del DolemonteOnce again, the man who invented the internet is a dollar short and a day late.
In late 2006, our Federal Commuincations Commission (FCC) decided to DROP the Morse Code requirement for Amateur ("ham") radio licensing. Many other countries, like Canada, the UK and several European countries, have also dropped Morse.
Why is that? Because it's become obsolete! Sorta like Al, eh?
Here's the ARRL news story about the end of Morse Code in the US
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2006/12/15/104/?nc=1
Morse Code - not dead yet
July 9, 2007 - 14:55 ET by w0tmSorry, this has nothing to do with the subject at hand but, as a ham radio hobbyist of many years, I had to commit on the FCC's action of no longer requiring the learning of Morse code to obtain an amateur radio license. Even though I prefer Morse code, I took a wait and see attitude. The FCC changed as most of the world had already changed to no longer require the learning of Morse code.
Surprise! The number of new "hams" has sky rocketed. All the people who claimed Morse Code was impossible to learn became hams. And the BIG surprise came next. Many thousands of those same people tried a bit of Morse code and found it fascinating. Yes, they could learn it after all! Morse code operating in ham radio is at its highest level ever. Not to defend Morse code but it's been proven time and time again that, in an emergency, in weak signal conditions, Morse code gets through when voice is just a few scratches here and there. As Mark Twain said "reports of my death are greatly exaggerated".
See www.arrl.org for info on joining this very enjoyable hobby whether you ever try Morse code or not
I actually got my intro to ha
July 9, 2007 - 20:57 ET by Del DolemonteI actually got my intro to ham radio when I was living in Hawaii in 1963. Our Cub Scout den (is that what they called them?) took a field trip to a local amateur radio operator. He told us what he did, and then showed off by working a guy in Anaheim (gasp!)
My problem was that I was never a person who would ever spend a large amount of time talking to people on the phone to begin with, so why should I go thru all the time and expense to bore them by calling them up to talk over the radio waves? There's only so much stuff you can talk about, after all.
Oops! There is the country-bagging aspect of course.
My alternative solution was to become an SWL. Tuned in, logged, reported, recorded, and verified a batch of stations (almost 105 countries so far) between 1967 and the present. I listened to Radio Prague's 1968 transmissions, and a few other earth-shaking moments.
One of the memorable recordings I have is an off-air recording from about 10 years ago. I was trying to record Radio Botswana, which is in the southern part of Africa. They have a world-famous "interval signal" with barnyard animals. Slight problem, the Radio Botswana frequency (72-or 70 something on shortwave) is right in a ham band, and some of Georgia's finest ARRL members decided it was worth mooing along with.
That Botswana IS was done by the way by station members making animal noises!
"...An Inconvenient Trut
July 9, 2007 - 11:37 ET by mattm"...An Inconvenient Truth, woke a lot of people up to the very real and imminent dangers of climate change."
The Times still doesn't get it. Their entire article points to the utter hypocrisy of the Climate Change leader and his entourage of elitists, which should put doubt to the alarmist claims of said hypocrites, yet they miss it completely.
Even their good (relatively) articles are off....
Kill The Messenger! (not the message)
July 9, 2007 - 12:07 ET by Ten7sThe Liberal-stream-media (aka the MSM) don't want to kill the AGW Hoax (aka the Myth of Man-made Global Warming). They just want to keep Ozone Al (aka the Goracle) from challenging the Hilldabeast (aka the Devil's Handmaiden) for the DemPrezNom. They don't want to kill the message just the messenger (unless he doesn't delclare for the Dem Primary, in which case in the eyes of the MSM, he'll no longer be the hypocrite.)
The amount of scrambling by t
July 9, 2007 - 11:57 ET by MassConservativeThe amount of scrambling by the organizers to justify this trainwreck of an event is amazing. Check out the following article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml;jsessionid=Y3YEVIHZLPY2ZQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0?xml=/earth/2007/07/09/eacarbon109.xml
The best line is:
"She said it "wouldn't have been appropriate" to broadcast details to viewers of how to fight climate change.
The Live Earth concert at Wembley Stadium and other cities around the world was held to raise public awareness about the dangers of climate change and global warming."
Excuse me?....Unless you have been under a rock since Al Bore's "Inconvenient Fiction" was released there is public awareness of the issue. Unfortunately for the shlockmeister the awareness is that most of the hot air is coming from him.
Earth to Al - you should have
July 9, 2007 - 12:03 ET by Ruths husband BenEarth to Al - you should have called it "Leave Earth."
Did anyone consider that ma
July 9, 2007 - 12:17 ET by motherbeltDid anyone consider that maybe people have figured out that staging a concert, no matter who the stars, does NOTHING to alleviate global warming????
But that's liberals for you...they don't really care about results...it's "good intentions" that matter. "Awareness" is everything...wear the ribbon, show you're "aware" of the crisis du jour, and that makes you better than everyone else.
In the same vein, the Politico has a story today about John Edwards' intention to stage (and I do mean "stage") a "poverty tour." He plans to announce today that
he’ll take a break from fund-raising and campaigning in early-voting states next week for a three-day, eight-state, 12-city “Road to One America” tour aimed at calling attention to poverty in the deep South, the Mississippi Delta, Appalachia and the Rust Belt.
The Edwards "Poverty Tour"
Thanks, John, for making everyone "aware" of poverty. Who knew???????
The condescension and self-aggrandizement of these people never cease to amaze.
...but to some it sounds too
July 9, 2007 - 12:20 ET by Dave R...but to some it sounds too much like rich men paying others to take their place in the draft during the Civil War.
Or, as happened in many cases, forcing their slaves to stand in their place, which cost them nothing.
Noel, I agree. I think the Climate Change train is running out of steam. Despite the best efforts of the MSM and the lefties in this country, dissenting opinions are being heard. There have also been some fairly high-level defections recently, as many former advocates of man-made climate change have switched sides in the debate.
I also think people are looking at the numbers, which do not support the idea that the planet is getting warmer, as whatever warming was going on, seems to have ceased since the 1990's. I also think that, as you mentioned, the blatant hypocrisy of these people has not gone unnoticed among many. Al Gore's and John Edwards' home energy requirements, and people like John Travolta, who parks a 707 in the front yard of one of his homes, for crying out loud, has to have raised a great many eyebrows.
Perhaps this is one time that "wealth envy" is actually having a positive influence on things.
In addition, there just may be those among the dumbMasses that are beginning to wake up from their liberalism-induced slumbers (nightmares?) and remember that there were such things as natural disasters prior to January of 2001. That is down-right miraculous, if you ask me.
Help Fred defeat the RINOs, along with the Hitllary-Obama Axis, & win the White House in '08.
Personally I don't think I ha
July 9, 2007 - 12:49 ET by nnptcgradPersonally I don't think I have "wealth envy", I mean if they can get people to pay them money then fine. What I hate is how they tell us they know better and feel so strongly about things and that makes up for them not actually doing a damn thing about those items they feel so strongly about.
Or, as people say, the "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" part of it. If they actually had their houses running off solar power or wind power, did all the things they say we should, then I'd say good for them, and not be quite so snide and sarcastic about their performances in this waste of energy (mental and physical) also known as Live Earth.
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
What I would really like to k
July 9, 2007 - 16:29 ET by Cape ConservativeWhat I would really like to know is if that university is still planning on awarding this "bag of wind" an honorary doctorate.
With scientists coming out of the shadows all over the world saying GW is a bunch of hooey, one would imagine a university might be having second thoughts. An honorary doctorate of WHAT?? Pomposity????
Please look carefully at the
July 9, 2007 - 12:21 ET by dabalPlease look carefully at the picture at the top of this thread.
All he's missing is the little white collar and *presto*, he's a Catholic Priest.
The pendulum is beginning t
July 9, 2007 - 12:26 ET by daveinbocaThe pendulum is beginning to swing in the other direction. Like Global Cooling in the '70s, AGW will settle down as another fad---the melting icecaps on Mars sealed it for me.
"In reality, this is t
July 9, 2007 - 12:26 ET by sanskritg"In reality, this is the stony heart of the entire global warming movement: it is soulless with no clarity or drive. The only thing clear is that those at the helm are making a huge amount of money off of this issue."
What exactly is wrong with making money??
Nothing is wrong with making
July 9, 2007 - 12:54 ET by nnptcgradNothing is wrong with making money, the thing is what is that money supposed to do? If I have a concert saying "Come buy tickets to pay my rent!" it's completely legit. If you have a concert saying "Save the Planet!" and use it to pay rent, what are you? What exactly was this supposed to do that we haven't heard three billion times (more if you go to public schools)? Where is the money going?
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
Sans
July 9, 2007 - 13:11 ET by Noel SheppardSans,
Not at all. I love money. However, in my real career -- and my past ones -- the industries I worked in had rules and regulations concerning honest and ethical presentations to customers.
In fact, any industry you could name has such requirements, from medicine to real estate to banking to insurance to advertising to automotive sales. You name it. Every industry that has contact with the public has rules and regulations concerning this contact which require the truth.
Yet, what is being sold right now by Al Gore and the IPCC are lies. Are you for folks profiting from lies? Would you feel okay with the selling agent of a house you were buying not disclosing problems with the property before you purchased it? Or, how about when you borrowed money? Would it be okay with you if the lender lied about the interest rate you were being charged, and was allowed to charge you more than what he told you?
Don't be confused here. I am a capitalist. However, I want others within this capitalist structure to have to abide by the same rules and regulations I do to make a living. The fact that a normally anti-capitalist media are giving Gore and his sycophant devotees a pass on the moneys they're making selling lies should be just as despicable to you as it is to me -- unless of course you believe much as NASA's James Hansen that lies are acceptable when advancing an agenda. ns
What exactly is wrong with ma
July 9, 2007 - 13:43 ET by shannon20What exactly is wrong with making money??
I have no problem with people making money, but when they want to dictate carbon taxes and stuff like that, it's not just about them making money.
How was the ticket/vendor rev
July 9, 2007 - 13:21 ET by TruthMattersHow was the ticket/vendor revenue dipsersed?
Anyone know how much carbon was spewed by Budweiser to make all that beer those hippies slurped?
“From boring acts, to poor
July 9, 2007 - 13:23 ET by Dave High“From boring acts, to poor attendance, and folks actually leaving early out of sheer frustration, the concerts appear to have failed miserably.”
I was reading through some of the Live Earth concert news coverage. Hundreds of thousands of people turned out in Brazil, Wembly stadium was sold out, The New York and Washington DC events were huge successes, and millions of people around the world logged on to www.LiveEarth.MSN.co.... “As of 3:00 pm EDT on Saturday, MSN had a total of more than 10 million video streams and had the most simultaneous viewers of any online concert ever, the company said,” read one news article. Another said this about the overall event: “Organizers estimated the shows, held on all seven continents, involved more than 150 musical acts and an audience of 2 billion.” http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/233742
Thank goodness I bothered to check this out! If I trusted NewsBusters, I would have come away with the opinion that the whole thing was a huge flop. NewsBusters, indeed. I think NewsSpinners is a more appropriate name, although you really did bust up the news on this story. I invite your readership to take a quick tour around the web, look at the pictures of the throngs of people in massive, sold out stadiums and then see if they can come to the same conclusions as presented on this site. It is truly incredible to me how the writers at this site (and other conservative sites) will stop at nothing to tell the story in their own way, spinning and dissembling to their readership to “prove” their conservative viewpoint.
Regards, Dave High
Now you are catching on Dav
July 9, 2007 - 13:31 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsNow you are catching on Dave, NewBusters controls the news!
Just look.
Here and here for starters.
It's all lies dave.
D
I don't support our liberals or their mission.
DFTT:Wow! You found a coupl
July 9, 2007 - 13:41 ET by Dave HighDFTT:
Wow! You found a couple of articles that show TV viewer ship was lower than expected and that proves your point? What about the 10 million people watching on the World Wide Web? Times are changing, you know. It may come as a shock to you, but people are reading fewer newspapers and spending more time on the Web. Similarly, perhaps the fact that 10 million people were watching on the Web contributed to lower TV viewer ship. Naww, couldn’t be. It doesn’t support the conservative spin that the concerts were a flop!
Yeee-hawwww! Dave High
phony quotes don't make it real
July 9, 2007 - 13:48 ET by DontFeedTheTrolls10 million on the web (for a few seconds or minutes or hours) plus a TV audience of 2.2 million (for a few seconds or minutes or hours) plus a couple million attendees (for a few seconds or minutes or hours) does not even come close to your phony 2 billion number.
You are now and forever proven a dimwit (and possibly a liar).
It's official cause I say so.
D
I don't support our liberals or their mission.
For an audience of 2 billion,
July 9, 2007 - 14:15 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveFor an audience of 2 billion, that would mean that 1 out of every 3 people on earth would have watched. I've been doing an informal poll at work today asking people if they watched it...so far all of the responses have been either, "Live what?" "What's that?" and "Hell no!" out of the 40 or so people I've talked to that doesn't look too good for helping reach an audience of 2 billion. How many of the 6 billion people on earth are under the age of 10, over the age of 50, have access to a TV or the internet, and out of the entire population how many people really gave a crap about Live Earth? My guess is that nowhere near 1 billion people even cared enough to notice.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson
I believe the gushing, near-o
July 9, 2007 - 14:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberI believe the gushing, near-orgasmic piece in today's Boston Globe referred to 2 billion. Actually, the number is complete BS, since that 2 billion number was thrown out there EVEN BEFORE THE CONCERT STARTED.
Teletubbies reruns get more
July 9, 2007 - 13:49 ET by Jack BauerTeletubbies reruns get more viwers than Live Earth. Dead Wrong.
Actual PROFESSIONAL broadcasters admit. TV event, total flop.
Live Earth. Dead Wrong.
July 9, 2007 - 13:41 ET by Jack BauerSure, with the greatest respect (ie: no respect at all) that's bollocks. That's the "potential" audience when they add up all the people who "could" watch it.
From the UK Broadcast magazine website, that would be the "bible" for those in the TV production biz.
To put that into perspective. reruns of the Teletubbies get more viewers.
By the way, before the 5.30pm switch to BBC1, the concert opened on BBC2, with a massive 900,000 viewers.
Admittedly way way more viewers than Olbermanniac, but still... how pathetic is that?
Regards, someone in touch with reality and actual facts.
Jack
July 9, 2007 - 13:53 ET by Noel SheppardJack,
It's a fracking waste of time with this guy. The BBC is now blaming Wimbledon for the poor viewership of this event. Yet, Dave cites a Canadian article, and that trumps everything.
What a crock! ns
"The BBC is now blaming
July 9, 2007 - 14:00 ET by NCConservative"The BBC is now blaming Wimbledon for the poor viewership of this event."
That is incredibly funny for two reasons. One, is Wimbledon really all that popular all across the planet? And two, is there really that much overlap between the "Wimbledon" crowd and the "global warming hippie wannabe" crowd?
I see two very different target audiences there...
Before long they'll blame the Tour de France for taking away viewers. Sheesh.
More tennis, less harangues
July 9, 2007 - 17:10 ET by nkviking75I bet Wimbledon required far less waste of energy. On the other hand, they're probably evil polluters if they use chemicals to treat their grass courts.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised if a circus breaks out.
ns ..Yeah I guessed that, b
July 9, 2007 - 14:11 ET by Jack Bauerns ..
Yeah I guessed that, but really the info is for curious NBers who like to be armed with actual facts... the funny thing is in the blame game...
South Africa: lousy viewing figures blamed on COLD weather.
UK: lousy viewing figures blamed on WARM weather.
Which in a paradigm fo the MMGWing logic deniers. Whenever there's cold, wet, windy wether that the fautlt of MMGWing.
And whenever there's hot, dry weather that also blamed on MMGWing.
But have you noticed how we've managed to intimidate the MMGWing cult into now referring to "climate change?" Hedging their bets it seems.
Also -- forgot to mention, LIVE AID was on BBC1/2 in the UK in1985, and it averaged something like 20 MILLION viewers. That would be almost 10 times Live Earth.
I believe the low viewership
July 9, 2007 - 14:41 ET by Hero SquadI believe the low viewership could be partially attributed to the nice summer weather many of us had that day. Rather than sit inside and watch TV all day, perhaps we chose to go outside and do something instead.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
We don't need Power Point pre
July 9, 2007 - 13:43 ET by jpatchWe don't need Power Point presentations, documentaries, or world-wide concerts to give us the message - we've got it already: Al Gore is a blood-sucking vampire that seeks to gain the power and prestige that he so dearly covets in the wake of his 2000 electoral college LOSS.
There is no conservative viewpoint that needs spinning here, the facts speak for themselves. Whooppee whoo, people around the world went to some rock concerts, totally mindblowing and revolutionary, right? It's so hillarious to hear people use the word "spin" when it comes to news - it's only "spin" to them if the message is not in accordance with their own view of reality. Just like Democrats HAD to boycott the scheduled debate hosted by FoxNews, there's just no way possible that the Democrats could get a fair shake on Fox, right? Too much spin!!!
But, you did have one thing right in yet another of your worthless posts on here...we will stop at nothing to tell the story, but it won't be in our own way, it's in the right way. Ya know, just like everyone around a murder scene will have his/her own "version" of what happened, but in real life, there was only 1 version. We seek to find the true version of the story. And the truth here is that Live Earth can bl*w me!! They should have called it "Live Girth", and kept a perpetual count on Al's waistline. Is it true that it's increased an inch for every 10 million that he's made off of AGW?? Must be all of those "carbon crunchers" snacks he's been eating. Oh, you haven't heard of those? Don't worry, they're coming to a grocer near you! ; )
We don't need Power Point pre
July 9, 2007 - 13:43 ET by jpatchduplicate.
Dave
July 9, 2007 - 13:51 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
You've just perfectly demonstrated your thorough lack of credibility. In my piece, I cited from Reuters, the British Telegraph, and the New York Times to demonstrate how this event was disappointing. Yet, you cite the Star in Canada, and claim that I'm being dishonest.
Well, frankly, I've had my fill of you, and won't respond to any more of your nonsense in the future. Adieu. ns
stupid is as stupid does
July 9, 2007 - 13:59 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsNoel I often wonder about people like Dave High. Can he really be that stupid? He isn't in the crazy/stupid category of rhayes, but his pronouncements are bizzare. I can't believe someone really can be that stupid and thus I conclude they must be getting paid to post nonsense here. That is all I can come up with.
Sheesh!
D
I don't support our liberals or their mission.
Noel:Sorry for my persistence
July 9, 2007 - 14:33 ET by Dave HighNoel:
Sorry for my persistence, but there are more than a thousand articles on the web that from what I can tell are almost all mostly positive in tone to what was a massive international event. Sure you can pick of few nits out of them (plastic cups strewn on the floor at Wembley stadium, Madonna not being “green”enough, etc.), but for the most part, it was clearly a smashing success.
I would argue that conservatives in general had a preconceived notion to spin and bash this story, no matter how it had turned out. No real surprise in that, but somebody needs to point it out lest your negative spin rules the day entirely.
Below are just a few of the over 1,200 links covering the story. It seems on the surface that a tremendous number of people had a damn good time; not the other way around as you presented.
Sorry for the truth, Dave High
Two billion watch Live Earth concerts
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0708/breaking18.htm
Live Earth concert rocks crowds around the globe
http://origin.mercurynews.com/music/ci_6328221
Live Earth events rock and awe a global audience
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/4950751.html
Music's the Messenger at Live Earth
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/08/AR2007070800139.html?nav=rss_artsandliving/entertainmentnews
Going green is global at Live Earth concerts
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003779575_live08.html
Stars rock the world for climate change
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4120774a4500.html
I just found over 1,000 links
July 9, 2007 - 14:41 ET by jpatchI just found over 1,000 links to websites and stories telling me that the Holocaust was a myth...and that Elvis, Biggie and 'Pac are alive and well, kickin' it on a caribbean island.
Dave, just because some people actually went to these concerts, doesn't mean that 2 billion people watched them, and it certainly doesn't mean that any 1 of those people who paid to see a rock concert are going to do a darn thing about "fixing" our planet. But hey, Al pockets just got a bit deeper. "Way to go guys!! The earth is saved!!!"
"I just found over 1,000
July 9, 2007 - 14:47 ET by Dave High"I just found over 1,000 links to websites and stories telling me that the Holocaust was a myth...and that Elvis, Biggie and 'Pac are alive and well, kickin' it on a caribbean island."
Somehow I doubt the veracity of this statement. But hey, if that's what it takes to prove your point, I say go for it!
DH
Doubt all you want Dave, I'l
July 9, 2007 - 15:05 ET by jpatchDoubt all you want Dave, I'll just go ahead and put you in the "denier" category.
But, are you serious? Go do a search for 'holocaust myth', and tell me that you don't have literally hundreds upon hundreds of links to books, sites, published papers, statements from governments, statements from political groups, statements from political leaders, activists, etc. etc. etc.
I'm glad that you found links that said that people had a great time, and that people actually went to these concerts. What we're saying is that people didn't fall all over themselves to tune in, or to buy a ticket...the sad thing is, it doesn't even matter, because Al is still getting richer, and the planet just got a whole lot sicker. Also, like I already said, I wonder how many of these concert attendees is actually going to do something about "fixing" our global illness, which is, basically, totalitarianism, right? Oh, wait, it's...CO2. Wait a second...plant food?!?!? Plant food is our planet's newest cancer? I must be missing something...
jpatch:Your point about there
July 9, 2007 - 15:26 ET by Dave Highjpatch:
Your point about there being hundreds of articles on the Holocaust Myth is true. I looked it up as you suggested and certainly there are hundreds of articles about it, most of which are attacking the purveyors of said myth. It is certainly a well-discussed topic of conversation with most right-minded people smashing the myth to smithereens. I don’t know how bringing the holocaust myth to the table though does anything to advance your argument that the Live Earth concerts were a meaningless flop. Can you say non sequitur? Sorry, it’s just too out there in left field for me.
On your point that Al Gore financially enriched himself through these concerts, I am going to ask you to “show me the money.” I saw where Noel floated this one earlier without any apparent evidence to back it up. This is how conservatives operate. Float a false statement, hope that Drudge picks it up, and fiction takes on the appearance of fact. Before we let this happen with this potential “conservative myth,” I say to you once again, show me your evidence.
Tick, tick, tick, tick... Dave High
...and the evidence of 2 BILL
July 9, 2007 - 15:41 ET by vrwc13...and the evidence of 2 BILLION? Or anything even halfway close?
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
The source of the "two billion" estimate is.....wait for it....
July 9, 2007 - 15:45 ET by RJThe source of the "two billion" figure is right there in one of Dave High's links. It comes from.......wait for it.......Algore! hahahahaha!
That's right. During the concert Algore took the microphone and said "two billion of us have come together...."
Where the rest of the links give figures, they admit to being "estimates"......
Regards, RJ
Try Web searching “Live Ear
July 9, 2007 - 15:52 ET by Dave HighTry Web searching “Live Earth two billion.” I am not saying it is fact, just what is being reported. I would guess two-billion is the promoter's optimistic exaggeration. But if you read Noel’s stuff only, you would conclude that the whole thing was a total flop that could have been held on a basketball court in a snowstorm somewhere in ..., well you get my point.
DH
The estimate of the world pop
July 9, 2007 - 16:10 ET by danboThe estimate of the world population I just found was about 6.5 billion. This includes people in third world countries who have no TV.
So about 1 out of 3 people in the world watched. Now that must be a record.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
web search this...Results 1 -
July 9, 2007 - 16:19 ET by vrwc13web search this...
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,920,000 for gore idiot. (0.12 seconds)
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
Wrong again, Dave High
July 9, 2007 - 18:29 ET by RJWrong again, Dave High. Since you once more run away from rebuttals that slap you in the face with facts, I don't mind presenting them again.
According to the links you provided, it wasn't some anonymous promoter who first floated the "2 billion" figure, but the Gorster himself...and he did it DURING the concert before any numbers could have come in.
Your backtracking from your original high dudgeon is noted. Considering the expectations, the event WAS a flop and you know it....but I don't expect you to ever admit it. ;^>
Regards,
RJ
Ohh Daayaaveee! "Ther
July 9, 2007 - 15:43 ET by MightyMouthOhh Daayaaveee!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Dave,I used the holocause myt
July 9, 2007 - 15:48 ET by jpatchDave,
I used the holocaust myth to show you that no matter what the content, I can find websites, published papers, stories, etc. etc. on the internet to defend my stance. You challenged Noel's findings by posting weblinks, just as people who would be arguing against the holocaust could just as easily post a never-ending list of links to websites that vehemently deny the holocaust's occurence. Can you say, analogous situation?
Secondly, you are accusing "conservatives" of "floating a false statement...and fiction takes appearance as fact." Hahahahahaha...you're confused today. I believe what you just laid out there is the mission statement of liberalism.
Oh, and I believe the clock is still "tick, tick ticking" from you not aswering any of my direct questions posed to you the other day concerning the realities of implementing these carbon reduction numbers that are supposedly going to save the earth? Ya, well, you never had an answer as to how we're supposed to "fix" the earth without destroying our own, and other, advanced societies. The burden of proof on this issue, belongs to those that profit from its perpetuance. You know, kinda like how you're trying to intimate that Al isn't reaping any profit's from these concerts? And how, two days after the concerts have ended, are typing "tick tick tick" at the end of your inane comments, as if to exhibit some sort of assurance that you KNOW that Al Gore didn't make several more millions from these concerts?? You're just such a genuis, Dave. Yup, just smart enough to get brainwashed by Al Gore. Nice work!!
jpatch:Where is your evidence
July 9, 2007 - 15:58 ET by Dave Highjpatch:
Where is your evidence that Al Gore profitted "several more millions" from these concerts? As I said earlier, Noel was the first (that I know of) to float this conservative myth without any supporting evidence. You are now backing him up. If he said, follow me blindly over this cliff, would you do so? Noel is not talking to me anymore, so I can't ask him where he got his information, so I have to ask you. SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE THIS STATEMENT.
Regards, Dave High
Hmmm. Big surprise here.
July 9, 2007 - 16:28 ET by Dave HighHmmm. Big surprise here. Just call me Dave High, the resident “Conservative MythBuster” here at NewsBusters. Noel, I can here you grinding your teeth all the way over here. I know that you are chomping at the bit just to present your evidence that Al Gore took personal financial profits from the Live Earth concerts as you asserted. Go ahead, let-r-rip!
DH
Dave High
July 9, 2007 - 16:35 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
That's enough. Show me where I said Al Gore took money from these concerts now, or apologize for making this assertion. If not, I'm going to ban you without any further warning, and there will be no coming back.
I expect a full apology post haste, or you're gone. ns
Noel: Emphasis mine. I incl
July 9, 2007 - 17:18 ET by Dave HighNoel: Emphasis mine. I include the salient portion of the thread for context.
sanskritg Says:July 9, 2007 - 13:26
"In reality, this is the stony heart of the entire global warming movement: it is soulless with no clarity or drive. The only thing clear is that those at the helm are making a huge amount of money off of this issue."
What exactly is wrong with making money??
(Noel: I assume the highlighted comment above is yours as you responded to it as yours, but I couldn't find it in the original thread.)
reply | moderate commentsFunnyIrrelevantInsightfulTrollAbusive/Offensive»
nnptcgrad Says:July 9, 2007 - 13:54
Nothing is wrong with making money, the thing is what is that money supposed to do? If I have a concert saying "Come buy tickets to pay my rent!" it's completely legit. If you have a concert saying "Save the Planet!" and use it to pay rent, what are you? What exactly was this supposed to do that we haven't heard three billion times (more if you go to public schools)? Where is the money going?
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
reply | moderate commentsFunnyIrrelevantInsightfulTrollAbusive/Offensive»
Noel Sheppard Says:July 9, 2007 - 14:11
Sans,
Not at all. I love money. However, in my real career -- and my past ones -- the industries I worked in had rules and regulations concerning honest and ethical presentations to customers.
In fact, any industry you could name has such requirements, from medicine to real estate to banking to insurance to advertising to automotive sales. You name it. Every industry that has contact with the public has rules and regulations concerning this contact which require the truth.
Yet, what is being sold right now by Al Gore and the IPCC are lies. Are you for folks profiting from lies? Would you feel okay with the selling agent of a house you were buying not disclosing problems with the property before you purchased it? Or, how about when you borrowed money? Would it be okay with you if the lender lied about the interest rate you were being charged, and was allowed to charge you more than what he told you?
Don't be confused here. I am a capitalist. However, I want others within this capitalist structure to have to abide by the same rules and regulations I do to make a living. The fact that a normally anti-capitalist media are giving Gore and his sycophant devotees a pass on the moneys they're making selling lies should be just as despicable to you as it is to me -- unless of course you believe much as NASA's James Hansen that lies are acceptable when advancing an agenda. ns
Okay, by my reading, your opinion is Al Gore is intentionally profiting from lies. In the second highlight, Gore is “getting a pass” on making money selling lies. No where do you indicate how Al Gore is profiting from these concerts, or any other of his efforts. Your base assertion is that he is a liar in it for the profit. I assume that if I said Cheney pushed for the war in Iraq so his stock profits in Halliburton would skyrocket (which in fact they have); you would take umbrage at the assertion. Your assertion that Al Gore’s leadership on the global warming issue is all based on profiteering from lies is just as cynical. Have you considered for just one moment that perhaps he truly believes in what he is doing? No, it is obviously all about just make huge profits at the expense of the rest of us. Even taking money from kids at rock concerts. Will they stop at nothing, these damn eco-terrorist-capitalists?
I will apologize to you as I try not to personally offend. I have obviously done so, yet again. It is just that you and I are so polar opposites on everything, you get my dander up. You did in fact though accuse Al Gore of personally profiting from his anti-global warming efforts. I decry that as cynical and short-sighted. Kick me out if you must, but those are the facts.
Regards, Dave High
Dave, the fact is that the co
July 9, 2007 - 17:27 ET by PeskyDaneDave, the fact is that the company which Algore chairs stands to make a pretty penny off GW. Bit of a conflict of interest don't you think?
PD:This may well be my last p
July 9, 2007 - 17:48 ET by Dave HighPD:
This may well be my last post, but help me with this. The link you posted seemed to be a general website for a company that buys businesses. I saw no reference to Al Gore or global warming. What did I miss?
Formerly Yours, Dave High
Apparently, you miss a lot.I
July 9, 2007 - 17:54 ET by Roger the ShrubberApparently, you miss a lot.
I am helping, hoping this makes you go away sooner rather than later. So, don't go away crying. Just go away.
Hey Rog, we're doing it again
July 9, 2007 - 17:58 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveHey Rog, we're doing it again...that great minds thinking alike stuff.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson
Happens a lot these, don't it
July 9, 2007 - 17:59 ET by Roger the ShrubberHappens a lot these, don't it? :p
RtS:From the link you sent me
July 9, 2007 - 18:13 ET by Dave HighRtS:
From the link you sent me:
Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management:
Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he "buys" his "carbon offsets" from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy "carbon offsets" through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks.
I see where he is buying and paying, but not reaping. You can look at this several ways;
1.) He is investing in a future in which he truly believes (capitalist)
2.) He is putting his money where his mouth is (political)
3.) He is a cynical bastard trying to destroy the earth while making huge profits in the process (wrong)
I am guessing 1 & 2. You guys guess 3. Sorry, I am not buying.
Dave High
So, he helps start a corporat
July 9, 2007 - 19:45 ET by Roger the ShrubberSo, he helps start a corporation, and then creates a need for this business based on lies? I think they call that fraud in my neck of the woods.
I am sure your investment skills are impressive. I hope your children enjoy community college.
Do some research Dave.http://
July 9, 2007 - 17:57 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveDo some research Dave.
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/03/al_gores_inconv.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54528
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009730
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/117/features-gore-an-inconvenient-portfolio.html
Just a few of the many articles delving into the money making potential for Al Gore's carbon offsets.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson
PD:This may well be my last p
July 9, 2007 - 17:48 ET by Dave HighPD:
This may well be my last post, but help me with this. The link you posted seemed to be a general website for a company that buys businesses. I saw no reference to Al Gore or global warming. What did I miss?
Formerly Yours, Dave High
Dave under 'team' at that sit
July 9, 2007 - 19:55 ET byDave under 'team' at that site
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
Dave
July 9, 2007 - 21:45 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
As is common to your ilk, you're now changing the story. Earlier, you accused me of stating that Gore was profiting from these concerts. I challenged you to prove that's what I wrote. Now, since you can't prove that, you're claiming that I indicated Gore was profiting from global warming alarmism. That is correct. He is. He has made millions off of "An Inconvenient Truth," and millions off of companies selling global warming solutions. He does not contest this, neither do I. Why do you? Do you think he didn't profit from "An Inconvenient Truth," or all of his investments in companies offering global warming solutions? Are you really that naive, or just can't tell the truth yourself?
Regardless, as you could not prove that I stated he was profiting from these concerts -- and, in fact, didn't even try to prove it -- you owe me an apology, or will be banned. Period.
Last warning or you're gone. If in your next post, you don't prove that I stated Gore was profiting from these concerts, or offer an apology, you're done! Period! ns
dave, I see you are a member
July 9, 2007 - 14:41 ET by bassndudedave, I see you are a member of the, "No matter what I will not see the truth" club. There are a lot of tree huggers writing articles out there. What do you expect them to say?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
The difference between genius
July 9, 2007 - 14:44 ET by danboThe difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. Albert Einstein
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
But you must agree as well th
July 9, 2007 - 15:01 ET by Hero SquadBut you must agree as well that most of these sources had their own preconceived notions about the concert and its impact.
Seriously though, do you believe that people's opinions about this issue were suddenly changed because a few rock stars got together for a concert?
It wouldn't surprise me that as many, if not more, opinions were swayed the other way because of the blatant hypocrisy of an environmentally irresponsible event touting the virtues of environmental responsibility.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Dave
July 9, 2007 - 16:26 ET by Noel SheppardDave,
Though I bid you adieu earlier, your disingenuity and total disregard for participating in an honest discussion here are forcing me to respond.
I suggested to you last week that your actions here are giving a bad name to liberals everywhere, and that you are actually confirming the negative views most conservatives have of your ilk. With your posts in this thread, you have continued to make yourself and your fellow leftists look even worse.
Let me show you how. Did you notice that the first article you linked to was actually a somewhat abridged version of the Reuters piece I cited in my article? That got past your supposedly superior intellect, didn't it? However, take a look at the following paragraphs from your Reuters piece, and see if you can find some similarities to the one I cited from:
I guess you missed that. You also missed the fact that three of the articles you cited here were virtually the same AP piece by Rebecca Santana published at different websites. Did your superior intellect miss that, too, Davey? Or that nowhere in these pieces was total attendance or viewership addressed? As such, how did this ONE article in any way refute mine? Oh, that's right. It didn't. You just expected nobody would look at them and identify how irrelevant they were. How honest of you.
Furthermore, the last link quoted Al Gore as saying 2 billion came together, but offered no actual real statistics. You think this in any way refuted my claims?
Adding it all up, and what you linked to refuted absolutely nothing. Of course, we're used to that here, and that's why you have become a tedious bore who should be ignored.
As I said a few days ago, you truly sadden me. Adieu. ns
P.S. BTW: Did you happen to notice how terrible the American TV ratings were for this event, Davey? Think we're making that up, too?
Noel...very nice
July 9, 2007 - 16:30 ET by LionKingNoel, thanks for responding so well. I think you captured the spirit of the frustration level of many.
Noel: A great rebuttal, fil
July 9, 2007 - 20:22 ET by Dave HighNoel: A great rebuttal, filled with conservative points and truths. Unfortunately, you delve into personal backwash more than I do. Stripping away “the points,” here’s what was interjected in-between:
Noel: In all respect, did you get enough personal peace out of your vacation on the lake? Consider taking another week off. I really think you worked too hard on vacation. If a sniveling liberal such as myself can get you so pissed off so easily, well, consider taking another week off. I mean this. Over the summer, my business slows down and I slow down. I think it is a natural thing.
I will stop nagging you. Obviously it is not healthy for either of us. I still enjoy intense political discourse, though. Perhaps some time in the future when we have both enjoyed a deep breath...
Sincerely, Dave High
Dave High, Acting as a memb
July 9, 2007 - 20:42 ET by hydrodynDMDave High,
Acting as a member of the Newsbusters Chorus ...
Mr. Sheppard takes the time to point out weaknesses in one of your posts and instead of responding to his specific criticisms, you decide to:
1) cry about the personal jabs he takes at you (something which is ironic given even a cursory review of any of your posts)
2) suggest that he needs a vacation because he's obviously letting you get to him (an obvious attempt to stroke your own ego)
Wow. I think it might have been easier to just say "Noel, you're right. I didn't put enough thought into that post".
That way, you wouldn't come across as such a child.
Your "boldness" mad
July 9, 2007 - 16:35 ET by Cape ConservativeYour "boldness" made me pass right over you :-) Hollering doesn't make it right!
Petra Nemcova, the model who
July 9, 2007 - 13:38 ET by shannon20Petra Nemcova, the model who nearly drowned in the Asian tsunami, said: “While I was there I didn’t feel hate towards nature. I felt nature was screaming for help.”
I wasn't aware that earthquakes were caused by Global warming. That's a new one!
Sure, Earthquakes. Total ec
July 9, 2007 - 13:54 ET by Jack BauerSure, Earthquakes. Total eclipses of the sun. Autism. All caused by manmade global warming. The debate is over.
And King Ghidorah.
July 9, 2007 - 14:14 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd King Ghidorah.
Delayed LOL shrubbster.
July 9, 2007 - 14:32 ET by Jack BauerDelayed LOL shrubbster. I had to look it up first.
I wanted to use Gammara or Ro
July 9, 2007 - 14:41 ET by Roger the ShrubberI wanted to use Gammara or Rodan, but I couldn't remember if they were another result of nuke testing. I knew Ghidorah came from space... haha
LOL
July 9, 2007 - 14:23 ET by shannon20LOL
Global Warming is a religion but no longer a vote getter
July 9, 2007 - 14:41 ET by w0tmAssuming a complete takeover of our country by the far left next year, the
one agenda demagogues will use Global Warming as an excuse for many, many things
they plan to do anyway. But it will provide them much needed political cover.
Kind of like being black and Jesse Jackson. He has an invisible protection
shield around him as strong as anything seen in Star Wars. Criticize him on
anything no matter how blatant and you're automatically a bigot.
Disagree with anything that will be done by the libs in the name of Global
Warming and it will be committing original sin. New taxes, controls, etc.
They'll own more and more of all of us. We'll be pillared if we speak up.
But notice most (D) candidates rarely bring up Global Warming these days.
They know people are waking up to Al Gore's wild and unsubstantiated
statements. They don't want to get tarred with the same brush
when people notice NYC is not under water yet. Total flaming rhetoric but
zero facts and truth. The new religion of "The Church of the Global
Warmists" will continue and only grow larger and stronger. As a Christian
myself, I accept and am glad that religion is based on faith. Faith in the dictionary
is defined as belief in something that is not provable with evidence that one
can observe with any of the five senses. This new religion has, with this
event, advanced into one where the belief is true faith. A true religion. Just
not a religion where there is a God. A religion where Mother Earth is
worshipped. That's nothing new. Buddism and many American Indian religions are
based on the worship of Earth as being its "God". Few that I know are
cynically used by some to control, and even own, the lives of others. At least
it's not Islamofascism where a small percentage believe only they deserve to
live. Personally, I'm not worried about an Al Gore brain-dead zealot trying to
slit my throat. But the small minority who has always believed we can't think
for ourselves or run our own lives still worries me. To them, we are only
safe in their hands. The common name for these "nanny state"
people is Democrats.
Global Warming will continue to grow as the religion of choice for all those
who were left without a church pew with the fall of communism. Truth and
facts will mean nothing to them. Just as truth and facts meant nothing to
these same people when their heroes were Marx, Stalin, Mao, Castro and
others. Some hope for a permanent return to the 60's. That may just
happen. Most loved the 60's as a "cheap date" and a great way
to blame all their troubles on "the man". "Let the good
times roll (again)!" was in full force yesterday. We ain't seen
nothing yet!
Did anyone hear any science talked about yesterday? No. As I
say, it is now an official religion where faith is the basis of
all. As Al Gore said, "the discussion is over".
This could all just be harmless fun by those in life who are mindless followers
by choice and accomplish nothing of substance during their stay on this earth
but, unfortunately, it is already being used by the minority who has been
trying to control others since time began. Be it Caesar in Rome or
Castro in Cuba. Some people, when they taste power, are only satisfied
with absolute power. Global Warming is now just a means to and
end. Not the end. This will become serious after the next
election. Don't expect (D) politicians to say much more about
Global Warming. They realize the public is beginning to recognize a
gigantic scam. They'll let Al keep the issue alive then, when they
take over, it will just be one more set of handcuffs to control us
all. The glorious 60's will return until the "reap what you
sow" time suddenly arrives with some horrendous event and then all Hell
breaks loose. No one today has any idea what comes after
that. I do know "Global Warming" will be a distant
memory. People will be preoccupied with keeping warm and finding
something to eat. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions".
In this case, it's an eight-lane highway and we're in the car pool lane.
2 Billion my a**
July 9, 2007 - 17:08 ET by jay_19752 billion people equals one third of the total population. Go and survey 99 people and see if 33 of them watched this. I seriously doubt that 1/3 of the entire earths population viewed these concerts, whether live or on television. I know the last thing I want to see is a bunch of has beens telling me that I suck and I need to change my ways while they play songs that I didn't like back in the '80's. Genesis and Madonna, wow, talk about star power. I do not know one person that had watched any of the coverage. If one did watch, that would put the percentage at less than one percent. If less than one percent of the people that I know watched this, how could it possibly be 1/3 of the planet viewed this travesty?
I post this same comment agai
July 9, 2007 - 17:43 ET by Roger the ShrubberI post this same comment again that I posted hours ago. The "2 billion" number was thrown out there DAYS ago, EVEN BEFORE THE CONCERT STARTED. July 4th, actually.
Come on Roger...Didn't you li
July 10, 2007 - 08:06 ET by jpatchCome on Roger...
Didn't you listen to what Dave High said? It's just like us conservatives to keep floating lies out there so eventually they become accepted as fact. That's how we operate.