Environmentalist wakos quote

Whoohoo! Quotes out of context!

What was the rest of what they said?

 

What possible context could that quote be taken from that would change the plain meaning of the sentence? The environmental extremists are just trying to use 'global warming' as an excuse for promoting what they would still believe in and promote even if all the evidence pointed to global cooling rather than warming. Or to no change at all. Or in the absence of any evidence that whatever global warming there might be has to have large negative effects. The science of it doesn't matter to them, and never has. Only the philosophy they have committed themselves to.

There's another quote out of context! We better look up the rest of what he said, right?

 

That's what I want to know.

That may be true, but are these people the extremists?

Is that a quote from him at all? I think you made that one up as something you think he would say. For a moment, in light of his actions, I didn't question it, but he is more verbose and philosophical than that, I think. Do you have a cite for that quote?

 

Considering

 

Considering it was Revmitchell who posted this, I tend to agree with you on questioning it validity!

 

Ah yes, "environmentalist whackos" - that is a textbook Rush Limbaugh phrase. He has been using that as long as I can remember, and I was a Dittohead for a number of years.

Although I don't personally agree with his logic, Richard Benedict does have a point. How many of you remember the CFC's that were causing problems with the ozone layer? Production was largely scaled back, and the problem does not seem to be getting worse. It shows what can happen. Now, imagine if we were PROACTIVE with respect to the environment rather than REACTIVE. As a proud TREEHUGGER, I don't see a problem with a good global policy with respect to the environment.

BiR (an environmentalist whacko)

 

It was actually Walguy who came up with that. I wasn't question the quote because of who posted it, but because it doesn't sound right.

 

Not that it matters, but Rev. have you ever heard of the KYOTO agreement? Did it even occur to you that Richard Benedict is a former US ambassador, who helped negotiate international protocols such as the KYOTO? Seems that you have a very real knack for taking things out of context, maybe you should switch careers.

 

:thumbsup: from one whacko to another :laugh:

 

And ya even know how to spell it! Here, have a genetically modified flower as your prize! :flower:

 

Does it make you sneeze less?

 

My point was that you have had a lot of trouble just getting Revmithcell to even answer a question. This makes me question his quotes that are posted without a link. After all, he could have been given false information without his knowing it.

 

Greetings Terry,

I trust that all is well with you and yours.
In this particular case, those quotes are valid. But there are more.....

God's Blessings to you,
BiR

 

The subject of this thread has now become RevMitchell instead of quotes of environmentalist wackos

This is a familiar tactic of liberals who are essentially too lazy to do their own research, but rely instead on always attacking the messenger.

It doesn't seem to matter that this quote has been around for years and Christine Stewart is a well known environmentalist wacko.

There is no question she said it. There is no question she meant exactly what she said.

The "context" protest, while sometimes valid, is just as often a coverup for lack of knowledge and lack of effort to discover if the essence of the quote is actually changed by making it a stand alone quote.

This is obviously not the case with this quote , but the caterwalling continues.:laugh:

I'll give you another messenger to attack. It seems to be the only thing some of you really excell at.

"Let me remind you of the quotation that I gave just a few seconds ago of Christine Stewart, then federal Minister of the Environment. Ms. Stewart, a nurse by training with international experience in Africa, believed and said openly that it was okay to subvert the science because the end result was that the world would be a more just place, presumably because the trading of carbon credits would equalize economies between the developing and developed world."

BB

Have fun.

 

Well Carpo, since I am obviously too lazy to do my research, where did Richard Benedict's quote come from and what was the context in which he said it? Since I did not even mention Christine Stewart's comment well just let that one be for now. Why we are on the subject will you please elaborate on the disadvantages of the KYOTO treaty?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvOn1BCM4IE

This may help...

 

BTW, who said this:

I consider it very relevant to the comments you posted from the "environmental whackos".

 

Instead, let's do it this way.

It is you that complained Benedict's quote was taken out of context.

In what context did Mr. Benedict make that statement that would alter the meaning of it as used by Revmitchell?

 

:laugh: I guess the liberals aren't the only lazy ones.

FYI, the global climate treaty Benedict was referring too was the Kyoto. BTW, the quote I previously posted was by President Bush. His administration did not disagree with the goals of the Kyoto, only with how it is implemented. In other words even he believes in stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, surely you do not consider him an "environmental whacko". Both of the quotes the good reverend posted dealt with the Kyoto and its precautionary principle, (i.e., focussing on the consequences of global climate change due to greenhouse gas emissions rather than waiting for a scientific consensus on the cause/effect of global climate change). Context is everything.......