Saturday
21Feb2009
Clinton Focuses on Global Warming in China
Saturday, February 21, 2009 at 06:58AM That’s right, global warming. Not human rights. Not freedom of religion. Not freedom of speech.Secretary of State Hillary Clinton focused on global warming on her first visit to China and urged China not to make the same mistakes the United States has made:
HILLARY CLINTON: “We hope you won’t make the same mistakes we made.”
“When we were industrializing and growing, we didn’t know any better; neither did Europe. Now we’re smart enough to figure out how to have the right kind of growth.”
Trackback URL: http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/3066252
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (13)
I don't know if you're aware of it but you might want to check this out. The ice caps that are melting on Earth are melting at the exact same rate as the ice caps that are melting on every other planet that has ice in our solar system. To make a long story short any global warming that may be occurring is not the result of human beings, it is a solar system wide event caused by increased solar flare radiation that will progressively increase and peak in 2012.
This is hard science. This is the reason that cities have a higher rate of warming than other areas, hard surfaces such as concrete, asphalt, and brick absorb solar radiation, which produces heat, greater than areas that do not have these hard surfaces, and consequently larger cities have greater warming than smaller ones.
Once again, this is not caused by humans, animals, or any other Earth based living thing.
Thanks Zara for mentioning this! There is so much more concrete evidence that refutes man made global warming. I honestly thought at first that it was all us and then I started to dig deeper and really look at the evidence and the evidence against it. I know now , after actually doing my own research, that man made global warming is a farce. Too bad most Americans refuse to branch out and get info from someplace other than the major news outlets on this matter!
As for Hillary - not surprised. You had to know she would not do anything worthwhile in this position.
This isn't even 90s rhetoric. It's so 70s that I feel like I'm in some weird time warp. And they say the Republicans have no original ideas. The only reason the Democrats' seem original is because they appeal to young people who have never heard them before. Says a lot about our education system, doesn't it?
Can I have back the thirty+ years in real life as well as in the time warp. If I could be that young again, knowing what I know now...
HILLARY CLINTON: “We hope you won’t make the same mistakes we made.”
What's up with this Democratic Administration traveling the world apologizing for America!! Their voice is not MY voice!! Send them to Gitmo! Strike that! Too humane!
Hillary is clueless on North Korea, too.
As for China, I recall a huge uproar when she visited China in her husband's administration because she completely ignored human rights violations on her visit (it was some sort of summit). She as a pro-choicer turned a blind eye to forced abortions and the one-child policy. Hillary is as irrelevent today as she 15 years ago.
I was confronted yesterday by a group of environmentalists in Seoul, they were young college kids, who urged me to support their group and put a global warming bumper sticker on my car because global warming is a very, very serious issue.
I explained why it wasn't and said thanks but no thanks.
Isn't it interesting how liberals place mother earth and fake ideals over human beings?
Yeah right, the ChiComs are going to listen to us lecture them about faux 'global warming'?
Steph is right - this is SOOOOOO 70s. We lectured the Chinese back then about the dangers of overpopulation - remember that one, Steph? Oh yes, the Chinese wisely heeded our chicken littling and implemented their disatrous one-child-per-couple-or-else-receive-government-mandated-abortion policy. Confucian culture demanded that Chinese couples try to have sons and now there aren't even enough Chinese women for Chinese men to marry.
Add to that the communist regime's burgeoning elderly population and diminishing youth population and the Chinese could be facing a self-made crisis of just having the wrong demographics to support the entire man-made artificial generational makeup.
When puny little humans start thinking they are in control of the environment, nature, populations, or other wild and spurrious speculations about things that belong to God's domain, look out.
Environmentalism, global warming, population control, abortion and evolution are all components of the new paganism.
How sad that a US Secretary of State would admonish the communist Chinese to protect mother earth while its eating its citizens alive in slave labor and forced abortions.
I remember, Johnny. Too bad not enough others remember. Otherwise we wouldn't be in the position we're in today.
Off topic? I posted this Amy because it frightens me.
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict said on Saturday there were worrying signs of a new type of eugenics based on perfection and physical beauty.
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE51K1KE20090221
Pope warns on new eugenics based on beauty
Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:08pm EST
There is this underground scholastic movement on "population control" (Johnny)
I think the Pope is pointing out one movement's angle.
Not to be on Pelosi's side, but her record on China's human rights violations is steadfast.
read the Pope's quotes at link, some of the best work he has done in my opinion. His view are really timely.
Gold,
Thanks for the link. This all goes with the "every child a wanted child" theory that justifies abortion. That's one reason the godless libs hate Sarah Palin so much - her Downe Syndrome afflicted baby Trig was brought to birth which is a fiery rebuke to the designer baby movement.
In all honesty, as long as the Holy Father or anyone else allows evolutionary theory to exist side by side with Christianity, eugenics will never go away. It is a doctrine of devils, a scourge on the human race, and the font of abortion, the Holocaust, the communist genocides and and every manner of pagan belief and action.
May God crush every vestige of eugenic belief and practice.
Zara: "The ice caps that are melting on Earth are melting at the exact same rate as the ice caps that are melting on every other planet that has ice in our solar system."
I wonder which planets you are talking about. Which planets even have ice caps?
1) Earth, obviously.
2) The ice giants Uranus and Neptune are not melting, it is much too cold for liquid water out there.
3) Mercury and Venus are much too hot for ice. (Venus has a night side which might get cold, but doesn't have any water, so no ice.)
4) Saturn and Jupiter are gas giants, so don't have polar caps; but some of their moons are the same sort of size as mercury, and some of them feature ice: Europa, for example, is permanently covered in ice all over its surface, and Ganymede actually has ice caps. However, detailed measurements of these planets are, as far as I am aware, restricted to relatively few probes / flybys such as Galileo and Voyager. I don't know where I'd get hold of any data more recent than the mid-90s.
This leaves just Mars. Are there any others?
The relative scarcity of data available on Mars must be appreciated. First direct climate measurements on Mars are from the 1970s flybys. Only very recently have we started taking surface temperature readings, we only have about 5 Martian years (about twice as long as an earth year) of records. During most of that period (up to 2007), solar activity has been decreasing, and solar activity now is still well below it's 1999/2000 levels. (Given Mars' low thermal inertia due to thin atmosphere and lack of oceans, it doesn't suggest that the sun is causing the changes at the Martian south pole).
Whatever the cause, we simply don't have a vast body of historical data with which to compare Mars' current behaviour. If you are thinking only of Mars, then referring to it as "every other planet" (implying several planets are involved) and describing our scarce recordings there as showing melting at "the exact same rate" (whatever that would mean for an almost airless planet twice as far from the sun as us) is, I feel, rather overstating your case.
"This is hard science."
Well, I think a very small percentage of what is written about this subject is either hard or science. Because of the perceived need for action, a lot of what we read is politics: either written by politicians, or written by scientific advisers for politicians. If it isn't political, it's journalism. The tradition of journalism is to identify two opposing sides to state there case and call that "fair"* , and the tradition for politics is to deliver a stirring polemic and win public affection and trust. None of this has anything to do with science.
There is some science involved, but it's not anywhere near the mainstream. (in "the mainstream" I include the major news outlets, but it also include these blogs and web pages which deliver polemics). The temptation is to be seduced by the politics and the journalism, pick a side and cheer it on. Realistically, that's inevitably what we all end up doing because the actual analysis and science is a full time job, in fact it's a pretty hard full time job. So don't make the mistake of thinking that this is the "real" science. You can recognise real science by it's being boring and difficult. If it's easy, unambiguous and snappily written, it's not science: it's politics or journalism.
* this habit leads to many science-based stories being very poorly reported, eg. the MMR vaccine scare story which caused unnecessary panic in Britain.
pretty graphs showing solar activity -- select "solar cycle 23" for the recent changes.
"May God crush every vestige of eugenic belief and practice."
Johnny ,
Amen.