# IPCC Official Reveals True Motive Behind Climate Change Movement



## packsaddle (Nov 21, 2010)

"First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole."

- Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chair of IPCC


----------



## conarb (Nov 21, 2010)

Thanks for that Pack, that's right from the IPCC itself, the truth will come out.



> _*Climate policy has almost  nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German  economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate  summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the  distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated. *_ Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 14 November 2010¹


The Green Police are becoming more relevant, anyone enforcing the Green Codes is a traitor, and should not be able to rely upon the Nuremberg Defense of "just following orders".  Anyone profiting off the green fraud should be treated as criminals just like the World War II war profiteers were, be they LEED certified, BuildItGreen raters, or architects or contractors profiteering off this worldwide scam. . ¹ http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1877-ipcc-official-climate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth.html


----------



## peach (Nov 21, 2010)

I DON'T CARE... tell me what to enforce, and I'll enforce the CODE... not some standard..


----------



## jpranch (Nov 21, 2010)

Pack, dose this mean what I think it means? Hang the cow leadership? Well, they are giving the igcc away for free!???

Just my 2 cents but... any jursidiction that adopts that pos (igcc) is too far gone to expect any rational behaviour. In other words they are NUTS!!!


----------



## conarb (Nov 21, 2010)

Peach said:
			
		

> I DON'T CARE... tell me what to enforce, and I'll enforce the CODE..


Sorry Peach, that's what the Nazi war criminals said. I have a friend who "was" a motorcycle cop, he like to smoke and drink in a bar, 12 years ago, when California was debating it's no-smoking ban in bars I met with him, I said: "If they pass this law will you arrest the people in here if you see them smoking like you are sworn to do?  He responded: "No, I will never enforce an immoral law like that, if they pass the law I'll quit my job."  They did and he did.

Adolph Hitler is know as the first "Green":



> Historians have either overlooked or forgotten that sweeping Nazi  environmental laws, all signed by Hitler and considered to be his pet  projects, preceded the racially charged Nuremberg Laws, reflecting the  fact that Nazi racism was rooted in ecology.¹


If you enforce these laws you are no better than the Gestapo, the whole country is on to it.¹ http://www.aim.org/aim-report/hitlers-green-killing-machine/


----------



## Mark K (Nov 21, 2010)

At a certin point we should ask if this has become a tea-party forum.  I actually believe that my rights and my quality of life are at more risk from the tea-party and the likes of Conarb than from those concerned about global warming.

There is a principle that your rights end where mine begin.  When there is a lot of space between people and the ability of an individual to poison the common environment was small we do not have much of a problem.  But when we have a lot of people close together and each as a large ability to impact the environment we share, then there needs to be consideration for the rights of others.  The laws, as imperfect as they may be, are the result of some inividuals acting without concern for others.

If you want to be free of the need to be considerate of others then move to someplace where there are no other people and not use poluting technologies.

On the other hand the claims of conspiricies takes me back to the 60's and 70's.  I think there was a high correlation between conspiricies and the drugs that were being taken.


----------



## mark handler (Nov 21, 2010)

Mark K said:
			
		

> At a certin point we should ask if this has become a tea-party forum.  I actually believe that my rights and my quality of life are at more risk from the tea-party and the likes of Conarb than from those concerned about global warming.


*That point has long passed* And yet they wonder what killed the ICC website.


----------



## conarb (Nov 21, 2010)

Oh yeah, when we are engaging in social engineering based upon scientific fraud? When we as a nation are printing fiat money and the world is calling for abandoning the U.S. dollar?



> (Reuters) - A new  United Nations report released on Tuesday calls for abandoning the U.S.  dollar as the main global reserve currency, saying it has been unable  to safeguard value.  But several European officials  attending a high-level meeting of the U.N. Economic and Social Council  countered by saying that the market, not politicians, would determine  what currencies countries would keep on hand for reserves.
> 
> "The  dollar has proved not to be a stable store of value, which is a  requisite for a stable reserve currency," the U.N. World Economic and  Social Survey 2010 said.
> 
> The report says that developing countries have been hit by the U.S. dollar's loss of value in recent years.¹


If we keep this up we will have no wealth to distribute and no buildings to build.¹ http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65S40620100629


----------



## packsaddle (Nov 21, 2010)

mark/mark,

i posted the above quote to solicit feedback from other members here.

i agree conarb's nazi analogy is a bit extreme, but each member has his/her own opinion on the subject.

so, why don't you address Ottmar Edenhofer's comments instead of attacking a straw man?

read the quote again.

do you think Ottmar Edenhofer is a credible person?

do you agree with Ottmar Edenhofer?

if not, why?

if so, does Ottmar Edenhofer's admission change your opinion about the "climate change" movement?


----------



## mark handler (Nov 21, 2010)

So, only when you start a thread, all posts must stay on target.

You can hijack, and throw snide comments others threads, but not your own.


----------



## RJJ (Nov 21, 2010)

Each of us need to decide what is best for ourselves. This is an open site. It is not a tea party movement. The thread Tea anyone is only directed at the issues that surround ICC. Both Marks are good contributors and I often enjoy what they post, although I may not agree on all position they present. The whole green movement and global change for me is a bit over the top. In short I don't agree. However, I do agree with the comments about rights and how they start and stop.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 21, 2010)

Edenhofer is right. Lose the profit motive, there is no green movement. Watch as utility prices climb as business and governments finance themselves on utilities in coming decades. Gotta create the scarcity before you raise the prices. Remember the lines at the gas pumps in the seventies.

This is a tea party forum of sorts. Only took me about an hour to fiqure that out, and I am a dull bulb. Just bright enough to keep coming back for more.


----------



## Mark K (Nov 21, 2010)

Ottmar is not commenting on the science behind the environmental concerns.  I do not know the context of the comments.  If he is saying that the efforts to change will have unequal impacts on different communities, there will be unintended consequences, or that special interests groups will distort it to further their interests I probably could agree with him.

This does not mean that we should not change.  It just means that we need to be thoughtful in how we make the changes.  We also need to see the special interests and fear mongers for who they are.

I would suggest that those who claim global warming is a conspiracy and deny our impact on the environment are partners with the special interests resisting change because it will not be to their personal advantage.  If you are into conspiracies you might suggest that they were part of a conspiracy to deny climate change.  On the other hand they may have a symbiotic relationship.


----------



## mark handler (Nov 21, 2010)

conarb said:
			
		

> Oh yeah, when we are engaging in social engineering  If we keep this up we will have no wealth to distribute and no buildings to build.


Oil companies will keep the advertizing companies  in the green.

California—Proposition 23

Oil companies dumped $9.5 million into a campaign against it


----------



## conarb (Nov 21, 2010)

Mark said:
			
		

> Oil companies dumped $95 million into a campaign against it


More misinformation, "Big Green" outspent the "evil oil companies" 3 to 1.



			
				Contra Costa Times said:
			
		

> Opponents  of Proposition 23, the ballot measure that would suspend California's  landmark global warming legislation, have long argued that supporters of  the measure were prepared to flood the state with money for the  initiative. But with little more than two weeks until the Nov. 2  election, that flood has yet to materialize. And the No on 23 campaign  -- a coalition that includes environmentalists, venture capitalists,  social justice groups and some of Silicon Valley's hottest cleantech  companies -- is outpacing Yes on 23 in fundraising by more than a 2-1  ratio.
> 
> Donations of $1,000 or more must be filed with the  California Secretary of State's Office within a 24-hour period, so  fundraising tallies fluctuate daily. As of 1 p.m. Thursday, Yes on 23 had raised  $9.1 million, while  the various committees working to defeat Prop. 23  had raised $19.6  million, according to MAPLight.org, a nonpartisan research organization that tracks the influence of money on politics.
> 
> If  you subtract the $2 million that Yes on 23 had to spend to gather   signatures to put the measure on the ballot, the disparity is closer to   3-to-1.¹


 ¹ http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_16344465?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com


----------



## mark handler (Nov 21, 2010)

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/10/james-cameron-avatar-environmental-prop-23.html

the $9 million raised so far by the initiative's backers.


----------



## jpranch (Nov 21, 2010)

"There is a principle that your rights end where mine begin."

My right to swing ends at the edge of your nose" My quote. Mark, discorse is a good thing. Tea party??? Well... that is a national debate. But I have to side with canarb.

peach,??? " I DON'T CARE... tell me what to enforce, and I'll enforce the CODE..." If the icc (cow) code says to execute all that stand against the green code would you follow? I think not. I know better. Push come to shove??? The bunny huggers better be better armed. I hope that it never comes to that but if it dose please come to my front door. Then we will both know. God help me.


----------



## jpranch (Nov 21, 2010)

mark, your points are well taken. Who among us does not want lowed our utility bills? Who among us wants alturnitive energy sources? Perhaps the same goels with different perspectives? Perhaps this country is in fact too big like the former USSR?

Tea Party??? Ya, right. Not even close. I don't belong to any party except the Constitution of the United States of America.


----------



## conarb (Nov 21, 2010)

Latest numbers from MAPLight.org  are Big Green $31 million, Big Oil $10 million. still 3 to 1.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 21, 2010)

Okay. Tea party is an exaggeration.

Like RJJ points out, the freedom of exchange of ideas about where rights start and stop is excellent. For me personally, it has energized the building code and made it much more of a dynamic thing.

I am inspired to make some difference . . . to become more engaged.

Of course, it might have just been something i ate.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 22, 2010)

The post on this board represent on a small scale the truth of the bigger picture. Not everyone thinks and believes alike and that fact that we can express this openly in this country and on this board is one reason to be Thankfull this Thursday.


----------



## conarb (Nov 22, 2010)

But Log Cabin, it also demonstrates that we have to be ever alert to those who seek to impose their values on others.


----------



## Mark K (Nov 22, 2010)

Think Conarb, are you trying to impose your values on me?


----------



## conarb (Nov 22, 2010)

Mark said:
			
		

> Think Conarb, are you trying to impose your values on me?


If you equate my desire to impose the values of freedom this country was founded upon, with a value system of confiscating the wealth of the first world and redistributing it to the third world as imposing my values on you, the answer is yes.


----------



## mark handler (Nov 22, 2010)

conarb said:
			
		

> If you equate my desire to impose the values of freedom this country was founded upon, with a value system of confiscating the wealth of the first world and redistributing it to the third world as imposing my values on you, the answer is yes.


So, in your mind, the Climate Change Movement is about "confiscating the wealth of the first world and redistributing it to the third world"?

And that is why the Third world is fighting the global warming initiatives, does not make sense. Don Quixote.


----------



## conarb (Nov 22, 2010)

That's what Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chair of IPCC says in Pack's link.


----------



## texasbo (Nov 22, 2010)

Mark K said:
			
		

> Think Conarb, are you trying to impose your values on me?


Mark, if I could respond to this: those of us who feel that there is fraud, sleight of hand, and alchemy involved in the Green Movement aren't trying to impose our values on you. We just don't want you imposing your will or your legislation on us. If you want to build a windmill in a wind zone where the payback is approximately 200 years after the warranty expires, go right ahead. Just use your own money, and not my tax dollars.

And build your hay bale houses until your heart's content; just don't tell me I have to live in one.


----------



## mark handler (Nov 22, 2010)

texasbo said:
			
		

> Mark, if I could respond to this: those of us who feel that there is fraud, sleight of hand, and alchemy involved in the Green Movement aren't trying to impose our values on you. We just don't want you imposing your will or your legislation on us. If you want to build a windmill in a wind zone where the payback is approximately 200 years after the warranty expires, go right ahead. Just use your own money, and not my tax dollars. And build your hay bale houses until your heart's content; just don't tell me I have to live in one.


I have no legislation. I have no Agenda. I have never designed a windmill or a hay bale house, so none of those can be mine.

The photo above represents Don Quixote's fight against Imaginary enemies represented by windmills.

It’s an old story, but still relevant when it comes to Dick’s rantings.

I will kick in money if he wants to move to Texas....


----------



## Mark K (Nov 22, 2010)

Actually I am not trying to impose the green codes on anybody.  I realize they are a fact of life and am trying to deal with them.  Intelectually I recognize that there are environmental issues that we need to deal with.

Are games being played?  The answer is yes both by the deniers who believe we need to do nothing and by the green fanatics that are imposing some feel good requirements.

I do believe that we need to start making changes now because of the time delay in seeing results.  I recognize that there will be disruptions as a result of the needed changes.  We need to do a better job of minimizing the impact of the disruptions but we can not expect to go back to the days of yesterday.

Because we live close to each other and our individual actions impact society as a whole, this is a sociatal problem that our government must deal with.  I appreciate your concern about your tax dollars but consider that I am not wild about my tax dollars being spent in Iraq and Afganistan.

The third world will industrialize and they will make the environmental excesses of the 1800's and 1900's in the US look small in comparison unless we do something.  These problems will impress us here at home.

My comments on imposing values was primarily meant to make the point that when you exist in a society like ours it is difficult if not impossible to have conflicts in values.  Your desires to express your values will step on mine.  It cannot be avoided.  We need to learn to deal with change.

Regarding straw bale houses, I do not live in one and nobody is asking you to.  Actually I doubt that they are very sustainable.


----------



## jpranch (Nov 22, 2010)

Mark K, well stated. I do agree that building practices need to change. Just not to the degree that the green leftist wackos are taking us.

The igcc is just one example of the extreme left. Anybody go the Charlotte? Watch the hearings on the iecc? Or go to some of the wine drinking, extended pinkie, nose up in the air type events that were held there. I did. Wow, what an eye opener. The rest of us are just a bunch of uneducated buffoons who need their guidance and they are gone to give it to us for our own collective good.


----------



## conarb (Nov 22, 2010)

I actually agree with parts of the "sustainable" part of green, we should build buildings that last and don't need to be continually replaced.



			
				Voice of San Diego said:
			
		

> Homeowners who paid in some cases more than a million dollars for condos in a pricey La Jolla enclave five years ago want their money back.                      So do a lot of people who bought new houses in 2005.
> 
> Instead of sawn wood or steel beams, Seahaus's skeleton is made of "parallel strand lumber" beams -- long strands of wood from small trees glued together to make beams. The homeowners' lawsuits allege that the developers knew the rainy winter of 2005 was exposing the buildings' frames to rain, that they knew the beams could become an unglued mushy mess.
> 
> ...


1) What they are not saying, and don't know at this point in time, is that all WRBs become "overwhelmed" at some point and moisture enters the structure, moisture also enters the walls from the interior, particularly with residents who do a lot of steam or wok cooking, or residents who take a lot of showers, the structure doesn't have to get rained on during construction to show the kind of damage indicated.

2) The usage of engineered lumber is at times mandated by the Green Codes to "clean up the forest floor" as it was in this home addition, nobody wanted it, it was mandated on the "G" sheets.

Of course the public thinks the architects, engineers, and contractors who built these crummy condos should feel the wrath of the legal system, yet if they were only following the Green mandates should they?

¹ http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/housing/article_8a26ee30-7da9-11df-9cd4-001cc4c03286.html


----------



## TJacobs (Nov 25, 2010)

texasbo said:
			
		

> Mark, if I could respond to this: those of us who feel that there is fraud, sleight of hand, and alchemy involved in the Green Movement aren't trying to impose our values on you. We just don't want you imposing your will or your legislation on us. If you want to build a windmill in a wind zone where the payback is approximately 200 years after the warranty expires, go right ahead. Just use your own money, and not my tax dollars.And build your hay bale houses until your heart's content; just don't tell me I have to live in one.


AMEN!  This nation is on the way to financial ruin and it isn't because we are too warm.


----------



## jeffc (Dec 17, 2010)

JPranch, post # 17 said, "The bunny huggers better be better armed. I hope that it never comes to that but if it dose please come to my front door. Then we will both know. God help me."

Do we really need to threaten our peers? How far has our state of discourse deteriorated to? If your point of view is not resonating, threatening someone with a gun is not going to convince them of the merits of your augment. If your point is to sound like a tough guy, that will not swing people to your side either. Can we all just play nice in the sand box?


----------



## fatboy (Dec 18, 2010)

I think my friend JP is merely pointing out that if he is forced to comply with something that, he should not in reasonble thinking comply with, then yes, the forces that be, better be packing. I agree. No different than our forefathers..........


----------

