Think Global Warming Is Bad? Wait Until You Meet Sustainability

The problem with global warming is that eventually it must meet reality. Either the globe is warming up at horrific rates as the models have promised, or it isn’t. And if it isn’t, then those still calling themselves “scientists,” and meaning it, must admit failure and move on.

Incidentally, the globe is not heating up as promised, and hasn’t been for decades. Stand by for scientists to admit it.

The good thing about global warming, while it lasted, was that it called for government to cure it; indeed, government was the only possible solution. And this was very welcome news for government, which is why it fought so hard to support those scientists and organizations that were sure they saw global warming lurking in every shadow.

Therein lies the true cause of the global warming movement: government-as-solution, a way to push and insist upon progressive ideals for the salvation of the planet.

But what happens now that global warming has met reality? Well, as said, it has to disappear. Sadly, its absence leaves nothing for government to cure.

Enter sustainability, a secular religion which is gaining converts faster than “outrage” spreads across the Internet.  Rachelle Peterson and Peter Wood at the non-progressive National Association of Scholars call sustainability “Higher Education’s New Fundamentalism“, and have written a report describing this new form of paganism.  Anybody interested in the future of the Western university should read it.

Global warming had a mortal weakness. It was testable. Sustainability does not suffer from the same fault. It need never meet reality.  No matter what any individual or organization does, its activities can always be labeled “unsustainable.” This is because there is nodefinition of what sustainability is. It always means just what someone claiming to be more eco-holy than thou wants it to mean. True sustainability is a goal ever disappearing into the distance, one which can never be reached, but which must be pursued with ever increasing vigor — and funded by ever burgeoning taxes.

read more:

Views: 507

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

In the late 70's it was another ice age  all going to freeze to death,  no oil to heat our homes  oil shortage bs,   now we're going to fry to death.  can't cool our homes,  more bs

I remember "the coming ice" age quite well!!!!! and then came the "we will all burn up" bullshiite.  now they call it climate change.  we have 4 seasons designed by God so the climate changes regularly!!!!!  the chicken little "scientists" say what they are paid to say by the NWO GLOBALISTS to say in order to keep the bribe money rolling in!!!!!

You sure are correct on this my friend.

I was in highschool in the late 1960s.  I had a Science teacher who would "swear" that we were heading for another "ice age."

Sounds like my science teacher too. Trouble is, she never gave us reasons for it.

There needs to be a list of those who continue to prostitute themselves for global warming. These individuals are constantly exploiting the ignorant and the largest contributor is our own government with continued grants that pays for their crap.

Sustainability, is the root of communism.

These leftist liberal idiots are the only thing that is unsustainable! GET RID OF EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM AND WE MAY SEE A MIRACULOUS RETURN OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY EVER TO INHABIT THE EARTH.THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!Which was always great until we started letting idiots run the country no look at us!We have to purge our great country of these idiots one way or another and then make sure to never let them back into power ever again!

Hmmmmmmmm. . . . I truly believe that the growth of and spending of the U.S. Govt and the State of California is definitely NOT sustainable . . .

This is simply another scheme by the MARXIST/COMMUNIST/ISLAMISTS to control the planet and humanity.  They will never stop, but they must be challenged and contained or our rights, freedoms and Western Civilization are going to be overrun and destroyed for all time.

The Governor is responsible for that.  Didn't want to build dams for emergency water and now has a ton of illegals drinking and using all their water.  The illegals are all here to use and take whatever they can get.

PHIL 2411 - Ethics of Eating


Spring. 4 credits.

A University Course - this class highlights cross-disciplinary dialogue and debate.

W. Starr, A. Chignell.

We all face difficult moral decisions on occasion. This course introduces students to the idea that we face such a decision several times a day in deciding what to eat. How should facts about animal life and death inform this decision? Is the suffering involved in meat, egg, and dairy production really bad enough to make the practices immoral? How do our dietary choices affect local and non-local economies, the environment, and other people generally? Finally, given the deep connections between eating practices and various ethnic, religious and class identities, how can we implement a reasonable food policy for an expanding world population while also respecting these important differences? The goal of this course is not to teach some preferred set of answers to these questions. The goal is rather to give participants the basic tools required to reflect clearly and effectively on the questions themselves. These tools include a working knowledge of the major moral theories developed by philosophers, and an understanding of basic empirical issues related to food production, distribution, consumption, and disposal. In addition to readings, lectures, and required sections, the course will involve trips to some local food-production facilities, as well as supplemental lectures by experts from Cornell, Ithaca, and beyond.




Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Al Goodwyn


Gohmert: Dems Will Drag Out Impeachment — Try To Get ‘Best Socialist’ Nominated For President

During an appearance on Huntsville, AL radio’s WVNN on Thursday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) offered his best assessment of what House Democrats were trying to accomplish with their impeachment efforts.

Gohmert told WVNN’s “The Jeff Poor Show” impeachment could tie up the Democratic Party’s presidential campaign efforts but predicted Democrats would use the occasion to nominate “the best socialist” they can.

“They would lose in the Senate,” Gohmert said on impeachment. “And besides that, the entire time it was on trial in the Senate, the Democrats who are running for president wouldn’t be allowed to campaign. That’s in the Constitution. They wouldn’t be able to campaign. I just can’t imagine them wanting to do that because if they send it to the Senate, they have now perfectly set up the scenario of 1996, where they will reassure Donald Trump is reelected as president. They don’t want to do that. They’re probably going to drag this thing out as long as they possibly can … through Iowa, through primaries — try to get the best socialist they can to be nominated.”

“Then just end up and say, ‘Now we’re close enough to the general election. We’ve thrown mud at the president through the House,’” he continued. “What they’re really doing — they’re using taxpayer funds to campaign against Trump. That’s all this is — a campaign fund that taxpayers are paying for in order to try to throw mud at the president. I’ll be surprised if they have that vote, but I can’t imagine they want to set up this president for reelection by having a trial in the Senate where they lose.”

Veteran's Day Tribute

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service