Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rio +20 Earth Summit: The End of International Environmentalism: Watching green ideology crash...
Reason ^ | June 26, 2012 | Ronald Bailey

Posted on 06/27/2012 6:33:29 PM PDT by neverdem

Watching green ideology crash and burn

Twenty years ago the first Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro marked the ascension of environmentalism as a political force in international affairs. That conference in 1992 produced the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity. At the time, Chris Flavin of the Worldwatch Institute crowed, “You cannot go to any corner of the globe and not find some degree of environmental awareness and some amount of environmental politics.” Flavin added that with socialism in disrepute, environmentalism is now the “most powerful political ideal today.” At the conclusion of the Rio +20 Earth Summit, it is clear that that is no longer so.

The largest United Nations conference ever—featuring more than 50,000 participants from 188 nations —was a flop. For most of the environmentalist ideologues at the Rio +20 conference the only question was whether it was a “hoax” or a “failure.” Oxfam chief executive Barbara Stocking preferred "hoax" while "failure" was Greenpeace spokesperson Kumi Naidoo’s dismissive term.

In response to outcomes of the Rio conference, more than a thousand environmentalist and leftist groups signed a petition entitled The Future We Don’t Want. That is a play on the title of the platitudinous outcome document, The Future We Want, agreed to by the diplomats at the end of the conference. Greenpeace’s Kumi Naidoo lamely vowed that disappointed environmentalists would now engage in acts of civil disobedience in order to bring about the world they want.

Should the people of the world be disappointed by the “failure” of the Rio +20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development? No. First of all, sustainable development as a concept is a Rorschach blot. The canonical version reads: "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." This has no specific meaning and can be used by anyone to mean anything that they would like. So it is not at all surprising that the representatives from 190 rich and poor nations meeting in Rio de Janeiro could not agree on anything substantive with regard to sustainable development.

Nevertheless, since the first Earth Summit, the world has experienced a lot of development. In 1992, 46 per cent of the world’s population lived in absolute poverty (defined as income equivalent to less than $1.25 per day). Today that is down to 27 percent. In addition, average life expectancy has increased by three and a half years.

At the Rio +20 Earth Summit, environmentalists and the leaders of poor countries were hoping to shake down the rich countries for hundreds of billions in official development assistance annually. However, most of the actual development achieved over the past two decades was not the result of official development assistance (a.k.a. taxpayer dollars) from rich countries being sent to poor countries. In fact, some researchers have found [PDF] that development aid often actually retards economic growth and “has an insignificant or minute negative significant impact on per-capita income.” Why? Largely because the aid is stolen by the kleptocrats who run many poor countries and the rest is “invested” in projects that are not profitable. So what has produced so much improvement in the lot of poor people in developing countries since the first Earth Summit 20 years ago?

“Remember in the 1960s, official development assistance accounted for 70 percent of the capital flows to developing nations, but today it amounts to only 13 percent, while at the same time, development budgets have actually increased,” explained U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the Rio +20 Conference. “Why is that? Well, you know very well. Because while continuing to provide assistance, the private sector investments, using targeted resources and smart policies, have catalyzed more balanced, inclusive, sustainable growth.” Summary: The way to development is trade, not aid.

After a week spent listening to environmentalist hopes and objectives, one particularly puzzling and disturbing activist brainchild emerged and that is their undertaking to maintain and expand open access commons. Many participants at the People’s Summit, which was run by 200 activist groups in parallel to the official summit, evidently do believe that property is theft. In the original Marxist version capitalism would collapse as its “contradictions” mounted. In the Green update capitalism will collapse as its pollution mounts. For lots of the hardcore, the solution to environmental problems is a kind of eco-socialism in which nature is not “privatized” or “commodified.” This trend in environmentalist thinking might be called “commonism.”

Looking across the globe, it is the case that various aggregate environmental measures have deteriorated. Since 1992, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) claims [PDF] that biodiversity has declined by 12 percent, 740 million acres of primary forests have been cut down, and 85 percent of the all the fish stocks in the oceans are overexploited, depleted, recovering, or fully depleted. Are environmental calamities the result of rapacious capitalism? Not really. The same report notes that 80 percent of the world’s forests, which harbor the bulk of the world’s biodiversity, are government owned. In most parts of the world, government-owned nets out to owned by no one. Essentially these aspects of nature already exist in the commons for which many environmental commonists are agitating. As Sarah Palin might ask, “How’s that working out for you?” Not too well if the UNEP data are to be believed.

The fact is that in nearly every place where what most people would regard as an environmental problem is occurring, it is happening in an open access commons. A river is polluted? No one owns it and stands ready to protect it. Forest is being cut? Same problem. Overfishing? Yes. A water shortage? Yes, again. Empirically, calling for the enlargement or re-imposition of a commons with respect to an environmental resource or amenity is tantamount to calling for its slow destruction.

Countries with strong property rights generally see environmental improvement, e.g., air and water pollution are declining, fishery stocks are stable, and forests are expanding. First, because owners protect their resources since they directly suffer the costs and consequences of not doing so. And a second indirect effect is that countries with strong property rights are more prosperous and can thus afford to bear the costs of environmental regulations, even inefficient ones, applied to those environmental commons that still remain.

Looking back the failure of environmentalism as an ideology looks inevitable since has misconstrued the causes of many of the problems to which it claims to have a solution. At the close of the Rio +20 Earth Summit last Friday, environmentalism reached its highwater mark and is now ebbing as a political force internationally. It will be interesting to see in which direction those cherishing a permanent animus against democratic capitalism will go.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: climatechange; environmentalism; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; greenenergy; rio20earthsummit

1 posted on 06/27/2012 6:33:41 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Its not crashing. Its changing form and looking at other methods.


2 posted on 06/27/2012 6:41:05 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
researchers have found that development aid often actually retards economic growth and “has an insignificant or minute negative significant impact on per-capita income.” Why? Largely because the aid is stolen by the kleptocrats who run many poor countries and the rest is “invested” in projects that are not profitable.

Oh, you mean exactly like the "Porkulus package" which went to phony "green energy" companies, labor unions and other thieves right here in the US?

3 posted on 06/27/2012 6:41:05 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Environmentalists are like watermelons; green on the outside and red on the inside.


4 posted on 06/27/2012 6:49:12 PM PDT by Repeat Offender (While the wicked stand confounded, call me with Thy Saints surrounded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Oh, you mean exactly like the "Porkulus package" which went to phony "green energy" companies, labor unions and other thieves right here in the US?

You're right ROCKLOBSTER - it's the same...

5 posted on 06/27/2012 7:04:09 PM PDT by GOPJ (The 'doting court eunuchs' of the MSM fail to notice...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Its not crashing. Its changing form and looking at other methods.

They may be repackaging, but they have been dealt some serious blows, although I think this article doesn't grasp it. International environmentalism during the time of the Rio conference was primarily coming from rich countries and focusing on developing nations in an effort to keep them from developing. They touted things like eco-tourism of old growth rainforests, instead of industrialization. And of course, global warming, which is made worse by third world aspirations to own their own cars.

What happened in the meantime, is that developing countries said "BS," and developed in their own best interests anyway.

The end result of this new industrialization will also have many positive effects for the enviromnet,as for instance, the 1.3 billion Chinese are leaving the countryside and concentrating themselves in new cities, complete with sewage treatment for the first time, and trash removal. But environmentalists fought this.

6 posted on 06/27/2012 7:04:31 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“At the close of the Rio +20 Earth Summit last Friday, environmentalism reached its highwater mark and is now ebbing as a political force internationally. It will be interesting to see in which direction those cherishing a permanent animus against democratic capitalism will go.”

Which direction?

1. Through onerous regulations and oppressive taxation of any business that has a “high” carbon footprint

2. By advocating as many social entitlements the body politic will allow, thereby bringing about an economic collapse (and duly blamed on those greedy capitalists and “big” corporations)..all in the name of compassion and the “moral duty” to redistribute the wealth, etc.

3. By forcing developed and prosperous nations to severely restrict exploration, acquisition and use of natural resources, especially oil, coal and natural gas.

In other words, they will keep doing what they are doing already.


7 posted on 06/27/2012 7:09:19 PM PDT by Let_It_Be_So (Once you see the Truth, you cannot "unsee" it, no matter how hard you may try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Maybe you should explain it to someone who doesn’t pay an electric bill 300% higher than it was a decade ago as my electric company builds wind farms to replace the coal fired plants they’re closing.


8 posted on 06/27/2012 7:09:56 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek; TEXOKIE; ELVISNIXON.com; SunkenCiv; E. Pluribus Unum; CharlyFord; OneLoyalAmerican; ..
"Its not crashing. Its changing form and looking at other methods."

Correct-O-Mundo! This environmental movement and U.N. Agenda 21 is a religion. These people will not sleep, will not rest, will not stop in their efforts to control all people using the environment as their shield.

Whether you know it or not, people like THIS are all around you!

9 posted on 06/27/2012 7:31:01 PM PDT by Baynative (REMEMBER: Without America there is no free world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The global communist party really doesn’t need the enviro-useful idiots anymore. They’ve just about finished pulling off their global coup. Freedom is toast. Commie style slavery is back in style. The “college students” love it.


10 posted on 06/27/2012 7:36:23 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (America! The big pinata!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Greenpeace spokesperson Kumi Naidoo...

Do ya think he got the job because he has an enviro-hip name?

11 posted on 06/27/2012 7:48:00 PM PDT by randog (Tap into America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

You’re right.

The Marxists influence, if not control, every aspect of life in America.


12 posted on 06/27/2012 7:49:44 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Eco-tourism is incredibly elitist of an economic model. “You must not develop these resources to improve your quality of life, keep it pristine so that the visiting elites can enjoy it, and you’ll get enough money to barely survive.”
It’s worse than colonialism, because the locals don’t get the infrastructure or institutions colonization brings. If the eco-tourism fails, the locals have nothing to show for it, and may have lost rights to the natural resources that they previously had.


13 posted on 06/27/2012 7:56:55 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

The addition of highly variable renewable power also drives up the infrastructure costs, because you have to add energy storage, natural gas plants that trigger on demand and smart grid / electronic monitoring to keep the lights on.
http://tamarawilhite.hubpages.com/hub/Smart-Grids-The-Promise-and-the-Potential-Problems


14 posted on 06/27/2012 8:01:20 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Greenpeace’s Kumi Naidoo lamely vowed that disappointed environmentalists would now engage in acts of civil disobedience in order to bring about the world they want.

Seppeku?

15 posted on 06/27/2012 8:07:05 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

I just saw a report that 80% of the stimulus money went overseas.

I assume Michelle spent it shopping.

Or maybe she bought rocket launchers for Mexican drug cartels.

Same thing I guess.


16 posted on 06/27/2012 8:11:34 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer; Baynative
The end result of this new industrialization will also have many positive effects for the enviromnet,as for instance, the 1.3 billion Chinese are leaving the countryside and concentrating themselves in new cities, complete with sewage treatment for the first time, and trash removal. But environmentalists fought this.

Oh, so I take it that you are a big fan of the Agenda 21 and UN Sustainable Development? That is certainly what your post indicates.

Take it from this habitat restorationist for nearly 25 years: You have no idea what is "good for the environment." What you are describing is both an urban prison and the destruction of topsoil.

China is an anthropogenic landscape and has been for thousands of years. For that entire time, the soil received the minerals that people consumed in vegetation. To suddenly pull the people off that land is a horrible idea. What will grow there? Who will weed it? Or are they going mechanize farming, feed it natural gas, and deplete that soil? How are they going to separate out the toxic minerals from that sewer cake while leaving the trace elements for growing food? What makes you think sewage treatment plants are such a good idea compared to composting. Do you know what the THM in that treated outfall will do to their fisheries?

I promise you, a third, at least of the farms in the American Midwest would blow away and turn to sand in three years without additional ammonia. My take is that the same will happen to China once they've used up what has been built.

Worse, once the people are gathered into cities they are ripe for extermination at the throw of a switch unless they obey. So I take it you are a big fan of tyranny and population control as well.

So I suggest you dispense with the popular whiz-dumb as regards what is "good" and start thinking about what is good for topsoil over the long run. It is the most precious resource on earth.

17 posted on 06/27/2012 9:00:37 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party: advancing indenture since 1787.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
...sustainable development as a concept is a Rorschach blot. The canonical version reads: "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." This has no specific meaning and can be used by anyone to mean anything that they would like. So it is not at all surprising that the representatives from 190 rich and poor nations meeting in Rio de Janeiro could not agree on anything substantive with regard to sustainable development.

Typical liberal strategy. "Sustainable development" "Climate change" "Justice" "Hope and Change"

Buzzwords that can mean anything to anybody.

18 posted on 06/27/2012 9:52:14 PM PDT by Rocky (Obama is pure evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer; Carry_Okie
"...1.3 billion Chinese are leaving the countryside and concentrating themselves in new cities, complete with sewage treatment for the first time, and trash removal. But environmentalists fought this."

People being crammed into multi level boxes will reduce their quality of life and make them easier for the government to control. Environmentalists aren't fighting this. Using U.N. Agenda 21, they are pushing it. Once you take a good look at the environmental movement you will see that it has nothing to do with ecology or the environment. Those who think so are the pawns in the game ...useful idiots.

19 posted on 06/27/2012 10:11:10 PM PDT by Baynative (REMEMBER: Without America there is no free world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Non-Farming Americans, or city/urban folk do not understand that the corporate and family farms are professionally managed. In High School there is the Future Farmers of American, and those students learn how to manage their business, e.g., the farm. In college and technical schools, the same science is further enhanced and refined for higher level farming. All this education is valid because the people taking it are living it - there are not too many city kids/urban folk not on farms trying to get into a lifestyle/business that they have not lived or understand.

Non-farming Americans have no true understanding of the land, other than a logical expectation of cause and effect.

The concept of urban prisons is wonderful, because after all the taxation and denial to the farmers and red-country folk they will not be so generous when it comes to basic survival. Let the truckers stop rolling for 4-7 days in the US and the cities will be in trouble; a disruption in gas/oil will prevent follow on products and food.

I actually look forward to the day that the cities self consume themselves along with their political clout and socialist mentality; only those individuals and the familys on corporate farms shall remain in this vision.

20 posted on 06/28/2012 2:56:57 AM PDT by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Locally I have the Raisin Valley Land Trust. They play themselves off as local small town folks but they’re driven from above and have state and federal help.

They claim to be about protecting the river but they’re really about restricting land use. They lure people in with the promise of tax breaks for protecting their own land. Before long the victims discover that they’ve lost control of their own property with approval required for building and tax penalties imposed for doing so. Try selling property that’s virtually off limits and see what its worth.

They want the property but don’t want to pay for it so to get rid of it you basically have to let the state have it. This happened to a little half acre woodlot just down the street from me. The owner found that he couldn’t cut the trees or do anything with it so he just quit paying the taxes on it.

http://www.rvlt.org/

Another group we’re fighting is the Waterkeeper alliance. They’re a group founded by Robert Kennedy and are opposed to petty much all human activity from private wells, to farming and logging.

My congressman (Tim Walberg) is sponsoring some good legislation that is a step in the right direction. Its the Defending America’s Affordable Energy & Jobs Act. If you have the time, be sure to encourage your congressman to get on board. What it does is takes the decision making out of the hands of the EPA and puts it back in the hands of congress and by extension, we the people.


21 posted on 06/28/2012 3:32:30 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jumper
Non-farming Americans have no true understanding of the land

Make that non rural. I'm not a farmer but grew up around them and worked on them plenty as a youngster. After 50 years in the Michigan countryside I couldn't run a farm to save my life but I have a far better understanding of everything from where food comes from to farm and forest ecology.

How bout this idiocy. They want to farm Detroit amid lord knows how many acres of fallow Michigan farmland. In my opinion its just another scheme to grab taxpayer dollars for everything from soil restoration to irrigation projects.

Think about it, would you eat anything grown in the heavily contaminated soil of a defunct Detroit factory? The only thing that makes any sense to me is tree farming in Detoit.


22 posted on 06/28/2012 3:51:35 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Worse, once the people are gathered into cities they are ripe for extermination at the throw of a switch unless they obey.

The ever "benevolent" Maurice Strong plan. The SOB has openly stated that he would like to eliminate 3/4 of the people from the north American continent and force the rest of us to live in a massive sustainable city on the plains.

The only reason that rabid animal even lives in China is because he can buy greater control over individual lives than he can here. In China he can buy government complicity without having to worry about the people fighting back.

Maurice Strong is a man who deserves to be taken out in a field, forced to his knees, and shot. He's no different than Stalin, Pol Pot, or Hitler. His methods are only slightly different but he doesn't have the courage to do it openly where he'll face consequences.
23 posted on 06/28/2012 4:18:00 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Maurice Strong is a man who deserves to be taken out in a field, forced to his knees, and shot.

Damn Cripplecreek, I hoped it would not have to come to that.

I always get Maurice Strong and Charles Ogletree confused, but he is one of Ubama's mentors.

24 posted on 06/28/2012 6:19:53 AM PDT by KC_Lion (I am finished with listening to empty promises of the great GOP saving me in 4 more years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion
Damn Cripplecreek, I hoped it would not have to come to that.

Me too, at his age he should have died on his own a long time ago.
25 posted on 06/28/2012 6:24:15 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jumper; cripplecreek; GladesGuru
Non-farming Americans have no true understanding of the land, other than a logical expectation of cause and effect.

That "logical expectation" sees their farm in isolation from its extended surroundings. It is a logic built upon the purposeful construction of control boundaries that make such constructs practicable. Without them, the control variables would be meaningless. They presume the existence of the farm's supply chain, utilities, and access to fuel. Without them, those models for land management are completely useless. Nor do we maintain the means to adapt, as we would if we had a logical risk management architecture.

From what I have seen of the soil in a lot of these "professionally managed" farms, they don't get it either. Those deep soils in the Midwest were built with grasses. Learning how to reconstruct that pastoral rotation is critical, long term. Although the mineral bases for those soils are enormous because of their geological youth, the amendments they receive are barely beyond what Nelson & Barber called, "the bare economic optimum."

All this education is valid because the people taking it are living it -

"All this education is valid" only under conditions within that presumptive control boundary. That's a "taught ology" my FRiend. The method will only go so long, particularly as we continue to neglect the land outside said boundary. The effects I am talking about are continental in scope, and capable of REAL climate change. Therein is the failure to comprehend how the fires in Colorado affect the sand hills of Nebraska.

In fact, it is my contention that both the Saudi and Sahara deserts are anthropogenic in origin, not by overgrazing, but by assimilating and killing the people who knew how to run it for over 14,000 years. Once Abel was dead, the locusts won, and there was no going back. If you think we're immune now, I've got bad news for you.

I have every confidence you have no idea what I'm talking about.

I actually look forward to the day that the cities self consume themselves along with their political clout and socialist mentality; only those individuals and the familys on corporate farms shall remain in this vision.

Worse, if you think farming will make it without the recombinant technology that keeps us ahead of pests, (wheat rust, for example), or keeps that ammonia truck coming, or brings in the sewer cake, or refines your diesel, or supplies parts for pumps, or pesticides, or electrical power, keeps the satellite data coming in, upgrades your optimization software, negotiates prices, organizes delivery, well, those "professional farmers" you cite have no idea how to make it without that URBAN industrial infrastructure, and you have only to look at the San Joaquin Valley once the delta smelt charade cut off ONLY their water, never mind the rest of that list, to recognize what I mean. Once the dust storms get going, no amount of preparation will protect any of their neighbors.

I'll bet you still don't know what I'm talking about, but believe it or not, this thesis was explained 3,000 years ago, describing a relationship between agro-urban settlers and nomadic pastoralists as coupled to the survival of nations. It predicted the process that led to industrial ag today. And I'm CERTAIN you have no idea what I'm talking about there, as I'm just finishing up my translation of Genesis 4. It doesn't say what everybody thinks it does.

26 posted on 06/28/2012 8:29:27 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party: advancing indenture since 1787.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
“Maurice Strong is a man who deserves to be taken out in a field, forced to his knees, and shot. He's no different than Stalin, Pol Pot, or Hitler. His methods are only slightly different but he doesn't have the courage to do it openly where he'll face consequences.”

As a matter of historical continuity, would it not be more appropriate to do a “Kyhmer Rouge” - while kneeling alongside a tree, place the side of the prisoner's head against the tree and then use a hammer on the temple.

Saves a bullet, said Pol Pot.

27 posted on 06/28/2012 2:58:06 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."...the public interest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Given the nastiness of Soviet military planning which included using nukes and then three different bacteriological weapons on each targeted cities, I am reminded of “the survivors will envy the dead”.

Even if there are sufficient survivors, many before the Great Debacle were so poorly educated and acculturated that continuation of a representative Republic is questionable.

PS Isaiah 5:8 would seem to be critical of much of our present tract home building.


28 posted on 06/28/2012 3:06:36 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."...the public interest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; 11B40; A Balrog of Morgoth; A message; ACelt; Aeronaut; AFPhys; AlexW; America_Right; ...
Good.

DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Dodging another UN bullet

Latest from CO2 Science

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News

Latest from Real Climate

Latest from Climate Depot

Latest from Greenie Watch

Latest from Junk Science

Latest from Terra Daily

29 posted on 06/28/2012 6:15:34 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Occupy DC General Assembly: We are Marxist tools. WE ARE MARXIST TOOLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson