If you haven’t blogged, made a poster, built a sand castle or ran naked through the streets screaming “the climate changers are coming”, then you’re quite a tough cookie aren’t you? If you haven’t switched off the lights and sat in the dark or considered organic eggs or experimented with recycled bath water in your kettle, or done something environmentally friendly in the past year, chances are you’re really just a selfish urbanised bastard who ought to be exterminated.
Climate change has been the most visible subject since Peter de Villiers’ winky made international headlines.
So if you still think that climate change is a hoax, designed and marketed by the scorn of a betrayed woman sitting on an island called Al-Gore, I doubt this is the time to publicly express your reservation.
You will be lynched.
Of course even if you are remotely correct that current concerns are exaggerated, it would be disingenuous, if not retarded of you to defend our current industrialisation and rampant processing of the earth’s resources as anything but harmful to the mother-ship.
The consequences are more than quivering numbers on a chart.
You really needn’t look further than parts of Southern Africa and East Africa where shifts in the climate has left in its wake disastrous consequences for farmers and their communities in those regions. With a dearth of man-made irrigation, drought effectively means you die, or at least you watch your cows die. Mozambique, Malawi, even parts of northern KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape are currently experiencing severe droughts. In Ethiopia, Oxfam issued a warning that if food aid of about $115 million didn’t fall from the sky, some six million Ethiopians are going to starve.
Of course, if we had known in advance, we could have transferred the $350 million used for the Moses Mabhida Stadium in Durban to feed them a three-course meal.
We didn’t know but we could still have a moment’s silence during 2010.
Ethiopians, like other Africans are used to starving much like Bangladeshis are used to drowning, and well, they will have to get over it.
But what about the rest of the world who aren’t used to starving? What will they do?
The UN says that about 20 million people were displaced in 2008 as a result of climate change; more than war-induced displacement.
If anything, climate change can be rather inconvenient.
In fact, things are so bad, it is reported that some of the world’s greatest river basins in South Asia are intensely threatened by over-exploitation and climatic change. If the rivers decide to stop flowing or morph into a shopping mall, some 750 million livelihoods will dry up. Indian farmers have already been resorting to suicide or selling their daughters for between $40 to $100 (depending on her accent) in a bid to survive. I personally think renting out the kid would be more lucrative, but hey, I am no pimp.
South Asians have been procreating like bunnies, burdening the eco-system like selfish ravens for years and they might deserve to drink their own sewerage as fresh water dries up, but, let’s not be callous, even Robert Mugabe deserves a trial before we hang him.
At this juncture, we are so inundated with climate-change talk you could swear we were actually shedding our ego, altering our behaviour and looking nature’s appointed bush-whacking locusts in the eye as they prepare to teach us earthlings a good lesson for banging up earth.
You’d think we would realise our method of industrialisation needed to be curbed immediately if we want our great grandchildren to visit Kruger National Park and not be visited on an island by a shoal of great whites taking the family to see “the last of the morons”.
But our action continues to be just paint on a glazed brick wall.
Twelve years ago, over 160 countries signed an agreement to reduce carbon emissions, which became known as the Kyoto Protocol. It was called the Kyoto Protocol because it was held in Kyoto, Japan and not because the UN wanted to brand climate change as a sci-fi flick starring Bruce Willis.
The fact that China did not attend the meeting (apparently a few thousand foetuses striking at the Nike factory distracted the Chinese government), and the United States did not sign the agreement, took the piss out of all the well-intentioned governments and their commitment to slow climate change, contain the earth’s temperature and save the world.
So here we are, all the way in 2009, with polar bears almost already roaming our gardens, and seals almost already claiming our neighbours’ swimming pools (note to neighbour: dude, please clean your pool) but the developed, industrialised governments (ie the biggest violators) still want to negotiate our future on their own terms.
No one knows what precisely will come out of the final sets of talks in Copenhagen in December 2009, but if you’re cynical that anything but a farcical sequel to the sci-fi flick Kyoto Protocol is on the way, you probably not far off the mark.
The Kyoto Protocol did not place binding restrictions on developing countries and despite the per-capita emissions being extraordinarily lower to the developed world, it is clear that the developed world are quite erroneous in their tacit opposition to the formation of an international binding treaty.
This is not cool.
China might have replaced the United States as the biggest violator producing 23% of the world’s greenhouse gases but the G8 together produces half the world’s output of greenhouse gases.
Africa produces just 5% and India is said to be producing also 5%, but its share is said to be rapidly increasing.
The fact is that the United States is unlikely to pass the necessary legislation in Congress by the time Copenhagen happens. This means it’s unlikely the US will be in a position “to pledge” sizeable reductions. China and India — at the crest of their industrialisation, have indicated participation and “notable” reductions to greenhouse emissions — are still unlikely to shed their inbuilt stubbornness without full participation from the developed world, especially the United States.
Developing and industrialising countries should be reducing any greenhouse emissions spurting out their cracked behinds. Moreover, there is absolutely no reason why poorer nations cannot advance a serious strategy of eco-friendly energy generation, consumption and practice.
Though every step counts, it is simply ludicrous for the developing world to take steps while the developed world and the United States in particular remain both reluctant and even willing to shirk their part of the responsibility.
The situation is so bizarre that even though England has the first legally binding goals towards reducing emissions, the goals are so low; experts contend that even if every country adopted the law, it wouldn’t change anything.
Once again, the common man must bear the brunt of yet another buzzkill.
We want the common farmer to stop tilling the fields to reduce carbon emissions, we want consumers to buy exorbitantly priced eco-friendly foods and we want porn addicts to save trees and indulge in digital porn instead.
But effective response to climate change has yet to become super politicised, so much so that it loses its political zeal and becomes a shared, universal concept; a political notion that is not up for debate.
As it stands, climate change is no different to the politics of the Middle East or our country’s policy of appeasement with Robert Mugabe, or the lack of effective action in Tibet, Burma, Kashmir, Sudan or Somalia.
As it stands, 1.2 million child prostitutes continue to service paedophiles in India despite there being enough legislation to suggest it was more than just an ice-cream outing.
Where there is no political will, causes remain feeble, whimsical blog posts.
Twitter is ablaze with debate, anecdotal evidence, comment, links to other green-web-machines urging the online world to shift and act towards extending the life of this earth.
But this farce is becoming rather jaded now.
The earth, like death, taxes and strip clubs are the only things real.
Unfortunately, climate change is just another piece in the puzzle of international relations, and not a separate dilemma.
And as such, without a binding international treaty which includes the participation of the United States and China and without consequences for non-participation, the millions of dollars spent on publicity, travel, rigorous debate and dancing girls sent all over the world to push people into action, amounts to nothing more than well, jerking off your hose.
I find it quite amusing (my penchant for black humor) how Global Warming morphed itself into Climate change when it became blatantly obvious what a lot of codswallop Global Warming was.
Weather patterns change. The only thing that does not change is our unwillingness to accept change.
It’s not rocket science. Really.
Through the eons of time mankind has adapted. Those that did not, perished. Its quite simple.
Our vague and fantastical notion that we will actually be able to preserve weather patterns is fueled by the soothsayers out to make a quick buck, and boy, are they coining it at the moment.
‘Even the return of the selling of indulgences, a practice abandoned by the medieval church and now resurrected in the form of carbon offset payments, is not stopping us from changing cellphones every six months.’
Deyan Sudjic, The Language of Things
Maybe climate change will create the equality we so desire. We would all be displaced, starve, suffer and grow great empathy…
This was probably the most incoherent piece about global warming I’ve ever read.
Right Robin, you have it sussed and figured out do you and the thousands of scientists around the world have no idea what they are talking about??? Your life must be bliss with all the ignorance in it..
Your disdain of new the emerging movement, looking to reduce their dependency on oil, that is taking root all around the world, is all too apparent. Calling these visionaries “jerk-offs” shows a myopic, shortsighted mindset. China and India’s ascent has made the world realize that these oil-based economies are not sustainable. Countries have finally realized that whoever figures out how to harness alternative energy sources that are less detrimental to our fragile environment, will lead the worlds economy in the next century. Never underestimate the creativity of the human mind – that race is on!
Change starts at the local level and initially with the individual – this Gandhian philosophy has been successfully adopted throughout the world in progressive societies to create long-lasting positive change. Even if you don’t want to accept this simple yet empowering philosophy, since I’ve come to realize that there are certain fundamental truths that truly cannot be grasped by some, at least try not to trample on others in their quest of greener planet.
Ha ha ha…. i have always wondered that they mostly blame industrialisation as one of the reason for global warming, what made the ice melt during the ice age coz i dont think there where any industries then.
@Robin Grant
You say “I find it quite amusing (my penchant for black humor) how Global Warming morphed itself into Climate change when it became blatantly obvious what a lot of codswallop Global Warming was.”
Climate change IS a result of global warming.
Ha, ha,… amusing isn’t it?
No good arguing the precautionay principle that guides science with a climate change denialist though, they would probably find that extremely amusing as well.
Mainstream climate science has sufficient evidence to argue that millions of people will starve, be displaced, die from new diseases, freak weather etc. as a result of climate change that is caused by global warming.
Ha, ha,..Amusing isn’t it? As long as it does’nt happen to you, then, well its not so funny.
Ripe for Revolution: The Organic Solution
“Organic farming, in and of itself can effectively reduce global warming. Very few of us know that.” – Dr. Timothy La Salle, Rodale Institute
From the video:
“Climate change is one of the most challenging issues of our time. What if right beneath our feet there existed an affordable way to significantly resolve global warming?”
“Organic farming practices could sequester 39% of the world’s annual carbon dioxide load if applied to all cropland in the world.”
“If organic farming methods were practiced on all the planet’s food growing land, it would be like taking more than 1.4 billion cars off the road.”
Watch the video and take action:
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=14110646
Climate change, global warming, increasing desert land, rising sea levels, holes in the ozone layer……you name it, we have indeed heard it all before and over many years if not decades.
Can we do something about it?? If it requires the cooperation in changing lifestyles of some seven billion people on this planet, the answer is clearly a resounding NO.
Simple proof: the various gatherings and proposed protocols have shown that there is no global consensus on the issue or on any solutions to the “problem”.
“global warming” or “climate change” has just become another hot topic which has given conference organisers and related travel industries another source of income.
Just work out how much “CO gas” is produced by the participants on their travels to the venues to discuss the reduction of “CO gas emission”.
Do I think it is a joke? Yes I do.
The solution to rising sea levels? Learn to swim or build a boat or both.
The current carbon based economy is shedding jobs like its going out of fashion. Green jobs will be Germany’s largest employer by 2020, the number of green emplyment opportunities are growing there by day. Thank goodness for peak oil.
I watch TV in the dark – so yeay, im not gonna get lynched!!!!
Carbon Dioxide has very little to do with climate change. Over the last several hundred years the temperature has ALWAYS changed before the CO2.
The IPCC and their main prophet Al Gore seem to believe that an EFFECT happens before the CAUSE.
Cap & Trade is a method of making vast sums of money from a source with no inherent value. It will not affect climate change at all.
It appears that the Sun is the main driver of the climate. Many sunspots (1970-2000) gives warming while no sunspots (now) gives cooling.
The cycles are Ice Age 100 000 years, warm interglacial about 10000 years. We are close to the 10000 year mark.
Enjoy the warm interglacial while you can – Global Cooling will be a real disaster
When it comes to the global warming/climate change/greenhouse effect brouhaha, i remain an agnostic…
Want to save the planet refrain from being a comsumer. Wear your cloths until they drop off your back. Of coarse once we do all that a lot of people will loose their jobs and will have no money to spend anyway. NO ONE IS GOING TO MAKE THAT SACRIFICE
“If organic farming methods were practiced on all the planet’s food growing land, it would be like taking more than 1.4 billion cars off the road.”
Hmmm…if they took 1.4bn cars off the road, Mike Sutcliffe might be forced to get a better bus service going in Durban. And if organic farming methods were practised…
@Benzol
Just to really give you something to laugh about, watch the trailer of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”, http://www.climatecrisis.net/trailer/
I hope your computer can float if you live in a low lying area though. Ha, ha…
F.y.i – Denialism “is the refusal to accept an empirically verifiable reality. It is an essentially irrational action that withholds validation of a historical experience or event.”[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism
I guess that would be extemely funny if it were not true, ha, ha..
@Hugh Robinson
Important point you raise about consumers and overconsumption vs sustainable consumption.
“Sustainable consumption asks us to consider issues that go beyond the individual when we shop. These include not only the ecological impacts of what we buy but also the equity, human rights and political dimensions of sustainability in the production and consumption process. These aspects of sustainable consumption provide guidelines on how to reduce the social and ecological impacts of what we consume.”
I suggest you read the full article which gives a Just Shoppers Guide guide to what you should consider when making purchases.
http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/TLSF/theme_b/mod09/uncom09t06.htm
@Billy Fletcher
Go watch Mr Bean. Its on TV, it must be true.
To all the agnostics out there – yes, the climate has changed before, and there were always periods of cooling and warming, caused by a variety of factors.
However, this time it is different – the climate is changing at rate that has not been observed before. And this rapid increase in temperature can be CLEARLY linked to human activities. And the consequences of the current changes in climate can already be felt around the world.
The current “sixth” extinction also occurs at a much more rapid rate than all previous extinctions – again, this can be clearly linked to human activities.
We need to mitigate the changes NOW, and this includes making changes in our behaviour. Adaptation to the change is only the last resort. Please pull the wool off your eyes (and think of you children and grandchildren – you want them to live on a planet that is hospitable, don’t you?
@Robin Grant, Clay, Bensol, Billy Fletcher and Sipho Hlongwane
HOW LONG CAN YOU TRED WATER ??
@MLH
Please pass this onto Mike Sutcliffe,
“One of the world’s leading climate change gurus urged people to become vegetarian today, to help beat global warming.
Nicholas Stern, the author of an influential 2006 review of climate change, said methane emissions from cows and pigs were putting “enormous pressure” on the world and people needed to think about what they ate.”
Full article:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/10/27-6
Robin I concur with you.
Funny that we are never given the contrarian view in our media about Global Warming/ climate change and there are many eminent contrarian voices and research literature on the matter. It is just that they are the outcasts labelled as naked greedy capitalists who in fact preceded the bankers as the “scum” of the earth.
For Pete’s sake we even had some people blaming use of ethanol fuel for the food shortages ignoring contrarian views. Let us have some balance.
“1.2 billion child prostitutes continue to service paedophiles in India……..”
This can’t be correct. I’m sure you meant to say 1.2 MILLION or even 12 MILLION.
@Noah: “HOW LONG CAN YOU TRED WATER ??” Quite a long time. Problem is that the body dissolves when too long in the water. Hence we build ships to stay afloat
)
Coming from Holland, I have seen floods, the worst one in February 1953 very near my place. Helped refugees, over a thousand people drowned.
I lived in a house behind a dyke, 5 meter below sea level.
After 1953, the Dutch build higher and stronger dykes unlike the idiots who build paper shacks below the flood lines and cry foul when the see it going down stream. Please don’t tell me that poverty and stupidity go hand in hand.
The world will NOT be able to change the lifestyle of 7 billion people! Al Gore will be long forgotten when it all happens.
The answer? People respond to events. Tsunamis are convincing when you live on the coast in Sumatra but not in Johannesburg at 2000 mtr.
But…it is still difficult for the average person to make the connection between not driving a car to and from work and a reduction or reversion of climate change.
Advice: organise the related conferences in areas and in the right season where climate change can be seen and felt.
@Counter Spin, @Themba & @Noah – You miss the point of my first comment – We cannot actually do anything about climate change. It has happened since the planet came into existence. And will happen until the sun goes into supernova. I think the whole movement towards renewability is fantastic. We really do need to get over the consumerist culture that we have developed since the 50′s.
But there are a lot of snake oil salesmen busy blowing smoke up your arses regarding climate change (we cannot actually do anything to stop it), and by my account that is what this blog was about.
The doomsday picture you have in your heads is just part of the sales pitch of the snake oil salesmen.
By all accounts, global warming is actually a good thing. There will be a lot more rain, greener areas. Plants will thrive (more food). It will be generally warmer and pleasant. (and cooler in some parts of the world). A few coastal real estate investors may get peeved off, and a few Bangladeshis will have to move out of their swamp, and a few islands may disappear, but in the bigger picture its really not that concerning.
@Bravo
Those funny people who blame ethanol fuel for food shortages happen to be the World Bank, and a group of 400 scientists who produced a 2500 page report that took four years. This report was endorsed not only by the World Bank, but most United Nations agencies.
A seperate World Bank study found that 75% of current food inflation is due to food crops being converted to biofuels, feeding vehicles instead people. Twenty million people will die of malnutrition this year, and the grain it takes to fill the tank of a large 4×4 luxery vehicle once with ethanol biofuel would feed a hungry person for a year.
When someone sits down to a steak, the grain, resources and water that went into producing that steak would give each one of forty people a square meal. 40 people could be fed at that table instead of one.
Bravo, lets stick to science, economics and the real world, read: How to be Fuel and Food Rich Under Climate Change
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HTBFAFRUCC.php?printing=yes
well azad i agree – this climate change thing is completely nuts – so all governments agree that the climate shouldn’t increase about 2°C (Obama Angie a.s.o.)- but what if the climate doesn’t give a f*ck about what the governments agree on?
this whole idea is so anthropocentric makes me just laugh…
calling these idiots jerk offs is exactly right.
there are now 6 billion people on this planet and in 30 to 40 years there will be 9 to 10 billion – anyone who thinks that they will use less carbon based energy is just off his rocks.
Robin, you raise some interesting points, but the reality is that increased temperatures are just one aspect of climate change – hence the change in terminology. You’re also right in that there will be some areas that benefit from warmer temperatures, but the negative effects of a rapidly changing climate will FAR outweigh the small positive effects. Africa, Asia, Australia and South America will be particularly hard hit – food production in Africa could be reduced by 90% by 2100; weather patterns all over the world will be much more volatile, summers will be longer and drier, natural disasters more prevalent, rains more violent and infrequent. There’s a good weigh-up of some of the pros and cons here
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives.htm
The other point is that while we cannot do anything to stop rapid climate change from occurring (we’ve already pumped too much CO2 into the atmosphere for that), we must do as much as we can to mitigate further change; continuing on a business-as-usual schedule for fossil fuel usage will result in anything from a 3 – 7 degrees C increase by the end of this century. Human life will be all but impossible to sustain with a 5 – 6 degree increase: there’s a National Geographic vid on Youtube summarizing the effects of a 6 degree increase here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nRf2RTqANg
@Robin
Dude… the world’s climate does vary and has varied throughout the history of the earth… but the point of the climate “crisis” we are in is that we as human beings are having an unnatural impact on on the system… and that unnatural impact if unchecked and uncontrolled is likely to cause a very nicely balanced and stable system (with its inherent natural fluctuations) to go out of balance
A 6m rise is sea levels means that 50 million or so bangladeshi’s lose their homes – that is something i would consider quite concerning… there are already enough refugees in the world, the social consequences of something like that would be ENORMOUS!
And that is just one small part of the problem… the earth’s climate out of balance will mean more droughts/floods and thus less food… more natural disasters more often and of a greater intensity… and the thing that i think is scariest of all is that once a system becomes unstable it accelerates away from the happy balanced median where human prosperity is possible…
surely you can’t doubt humanity’s ability to break a working system… all climate change is about is saying – “hey, this earth is kinda nice, let’s not break it”
oh yeah… just wanted to say… 50 million people… that’s nearly the number of people killed in world war 2… yeah, the more i think about it, the bigger deal it seems…
forget about this research and that research and whatever… there is a very simple principle that makes climate change make sense:
it has taken millions of years for us to evolve and adapt to the earth as it is now… this is an incredibly complex system we are part of and there are infinitely many things going on that make it possible for us to simply walk around and breathe the way we are used to doing… if we change things drastically (and that’s exactly the pattern we are following) either it is going to take millions of years for it to come back into balance, or it is going to take millions of years for us to re-evolve and adapt to the changes we bring about…
either way – its a big problem…
Hooray for peak oil: “Twenty million people will die of malnutrition this year….”
As over population and associated lifestyles are pointed out as the culprits for global warming…….what a pleasure!!
Imagine, these 20 million all want to become rich and have a 4×4?? Global warming might just become global heating and we all get fried. Problem solved??
@The sane and balanced
Climate change denialists suffer from a similar affliction to those who believe the earth is flat.
Mainsteam science is not part of their little world, while governments conspiring to tax their hard earned cash is very much part of their universe.
The internet has allowed them to pop up in our faces like spam. Some of them have links to the oil industry and therefore a vested interest in propagating this nonsense.
Think of them as computers, garbage in, garbage out.
@Robin Grant
No one missed your point. Your point is incorrect.
There are two types of climate change, natural and anthopogenic.
Natural climate change has always taken place due to plate tectonics, solar output, orbital variations, volcanism, ocean variability etc.
Then there is anthopogenic climate change (caused by humans). In the last 50 years so much greenhouse gas has been pumped into the atmosphere it is preventing the sun’s radiation from reflecting back into space, causing a greenhouse effect that leads to global warming, which in turn affects weather patterns, hense the broader term climate change.
We cannot do anything about natural climate change but we certainly can do a lot about anthropogenic climate change.
We must and we will!
@Benzol
Maybe it has not occurred to you that the 20 million who will die of malnutrition this year could be sold electric 4×4′s charged by renewable energy when their living standards have been raised to be able to afford vehicles. Germany is going 100% renewable energy by 2050, why not the rest of the world?
Once peoples living standards have been raised to a certain level, they naturally have smaller families and negative population growth takes place. Google “sub-replacement fertility on Wikipedia”.
Go green, develop sustainable consumerism for all which will encourage sub-replacement fertility, feed the poor and starving, and stop anthopogenic climate change at the same time.
Nice solution, yes.
Hey Benzol
@”People respond to events. Tsunamis are convincing when you live on the coast in Sumatra but not in Johannesburg at 2000 mtr.”
I personally know people in Johannesburg who are as convinced about Tsunami’s as those in Sumatra. Ever heard of TV?
Billions of people even beleive I moored by ark on Mt Arrarat after lots of rain many years ago, and those people were not even there at the time.
Thanks for your avice “organise the related conferences in areas and in the right season where climate change can be seen and felt.”
However, the credibility crises about global warming is not as serious as you believe, most people that will go to the Copenhagen conference have understood the science and they don’t need to actually experience the 12 year drought in Western Australia due to climate change to believe it is real.
@Benzol
You say “As over population and associated lifestyles are pointed out as the culprits for global warming…”
The answer is to immediately steralise overconsumers, those who are using more than their fair share of natural resources per capita, or contributing more than their fair share of pollution or greenhouse gas emissions per capita, that will take care of overpopulation and overconsumption at the same time.
It naturally excludes those living on less than one or two dollars a day as they are not contributing to overconsumption or global warming.
Back in 2004 when that terrible tsunami hit those island GREENPEACE tried to blame GLOBAL WARMING showing that GREENPEACE is stupid
Revolutionary Food Labeling Helps Swedes Cut Carbon
Last week, we reported on cutting-edge research by the Rodale Institute demonstrating that by transitioning all of the world’s farmland to organic, we could sequester 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions. As Rodale and more and more soil scientists are pointing out, if we could combine a mass transition to organic agriculture with restorative grazing and forestry, we could sequester 100% of global greenhouse gas emissions!
It’s great to know we have a time-tested, low-tech, grassroots organic solution for global warming and climate chaos, but the burning question is how do we launch and supercharge this food, farming, and forestry revolution in time to save the planet? The Swedes have come up with a simple but revolutionary idea to actively mobilize consumers to do the right thing and strike a blow against global warming and chemical/GMO/energy-intensive agriculture, processing, and distribution: new food labels on grocery store and restaurant items listing the specific carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions embedded in each product.
From Organic Consumers Association, read more:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_19449.cfm
@Flu-bird
Wrong, Greenpeace never blamed global warming for the Tsunami.
If so find me the Greenpeace press release.
@Flu-Bird
View Greenpeace media releases on Tsunami:
Asian Tsunami: environmental and humanitarian disaster
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/tsunami-and-the-environment
Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior brings aid to Tsunami survivors
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/rainbow-warrior-aids-tsunami-s
If you click on this link it will search and find all Greenpeace International media releases on the “Tsunami”:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/footer/search?q=Tsunami
You do your anti-global warming cause no good by spreading misinformation about Greenpeace.
Global warming oops I mean climate change is a distraction designed to beguile the masses while the bosses loot the piggy bank. The anathema Al Gore, obviously a prodigy, inventor of the Internet and jester laughs at our folly – from his ox cart.