Tags for this video have been changed from 'wow, copenhagen, street performance, jon magnusson, 1988, the boss' to 'springsteen, copenhagen, street performance, jon magnusson, 1988, the boss' - edited by volumptuous

Tags for this video have been changed from 'copenhagen, cop15, protest, activism, climate, disaster, politics, cops, police, suck' to 'copenhagen, cop15, protest, activism, climate, disaster, politics, fuck the police' - edited by peggedbea

That dog won't hunt, monsignor.

In reply to this comment by urstoopid:
Typical liberal idiocy. They keep screaming "Look at the facts! Look at the ice! Look at the polar bears!" Yet they totally ignore the REAL FACTS. The "facts" are right there in the emails you f*$#ing idiots! THEY ARE ADMITTING TO LYING AND OMITTING DATA!!!! How stupid do you have to be??? Only complete dumba$$es such as yourselves can be told, the earth is going through a 10 year cooling period due to global warming!!! Only idiots and hypocrites can see all these "climatologists" going to Copenhagen in all their private jets and limos and still believe the earth is in danger! If you honestly believe carbon dioxide is the problem, go hold your breath as long as you can, or stop breathing!

In summation, you're a complete idiot and a jack@$$!

I still don't get that argument that man made global warming is a moneymaking scam.

I don't get how you don't get it. The talks in Kyoto... Copenhagen... Cap & Trade... EVERY big 'solution' proposed by Warmers revolves NOT around actually improving the environment, but is all about money. The 'plan' under discussion in Carbonhagen is to take literally TRILLIONS of dollars from taxpayers. And you don't think that there is a single person among all those Warmers who isn't on the take for that big pile of largely unregulated, unsupervised, and unaccountable cash? You think that the so-called 'scientists' aren't on the take for millions in grant money to fund thier faux 'research' and churn out faux 'findings'? This is all about money.

Luckily we have google for people who don't get stuff. Here is a lobbyist. And here is a moneymaking scheme.

You can't deny this any more than you can deny global warming. Taxing oil makes little difference to the companies as the prices will go up, so you and I will be the ones paying for it. Whether or not warming is everything it's made out to be, the economic consequences cannot be ignored.>> ^MaxWilder:
I still don't get that argument that man made global warming is a moneymaking scam. As opposed to what? The trillions that are made annually by those honest, hardworking oil companies? If you follow the money on both sides of the argument, it's pretty damn clear who is trying to protect their assets.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'copenhagen' to 'copenhagen, environment, ocean, climate change, coral' - edited by eric3579

http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/09-12-2009/111008-Copenhagen%20-0


Danish secret? Any one know more about this? I saw it on CNN first.

Nobody reasonable doubts that global warming is happening. There are multiple independent data sources showing global warming. Temperature records, either on the ground or from space. Ice and glacier records, etc...

If you rephrase to say "no reasonable person doubts that Earth's climate has cycles" then I agree. But if you mean "no reasonable person doubts Anthropogenic Global Warming as defined by Al Gore, the IPCC, Kyoto, Copenhagen, and the "Green" movement and their bought & paid for scientists" then I strongly disagree.

Temperatures change, sure. I have seen no credible evidence to date that proves human activity has (A) caused it (B) could possibly prevent it or (C) can do jack-squat to 'fix' things. I don't mind sensible resource management. But the AGW movement is not about pollution so much as it is about wealth redistribution. No thanks. The next energy revolution will happen on its own without a multi-trillion dollar tax scheme.

I love that twist! Copenhagen Interpretation is so interesting!

Wikipedia says its Verschränkung. Entanglement is very, very interesting.

and now for a bit of global warming/climate change humor.

>> ^lucky760:

Nothing is real until it has been observed! This clearly needs thinking about. Are we really saying that in the 'real' world - outside of the laboratory - that until a thing has been observed it doesn't exist? This is precisely what the Copenhagen Interpretation is telling us about reality."


meteorites crash through people's rooftops. so, nope...

it's not all that strange as long as you stop looking at things from a hominid perspective, seeing a 3D world, with linear real-time causations etc.
fundamentally the universe is maths, just mathematic probabilities, laws and limits at certain values - of a possibly infinite array (this is just one branch of possibilities where things like us could occur).
so, when understanding it like this - the smallest detectable limits of this place all just comes down to probabilities, it's all just made of maths. not building blocks, not stuff, but just potentials.

A few things:

First, the links in the description don't work. Youtube seems to like to mangle them, so you can't just copy/paste and expect them to come across intact.

Second, the first two links are "globalclimatescam.com", obviously a respected nonpartisan entity with a credible reputation for factual, peer-reviewed studies, and World Net Daily (whose reporting on Obama being secretly born in Kenya has been absolutely impeccable) with an article containing the analysis of renowned international environmental policy scholar Chuck Norris.

Third, the PolitiF
act article on this (which Dr. Norris dismisses as "left-wing") does a pretty good job of knocking down the sovereignty claims by way of a civics lesson on how treaties get ratified and enforced under American law. That is to say, by reminding people that binding treaties need a 2/3 majority of the Senate to approve, which means 67 votes, plus the President's signature.

Fourth, the entire concern starts from the presupposition that concerns about carbon emissions are made up or at least grossly overstated, and therefore poses no alternative solution superior to cooperation amongst national governments.

Fifth, it seems to presuppose that a global government can a) form, b) be overtly anti-democratic, c) impose unpopular/overtly harmful policy on the population of not just the US, but the entire world via force, and d) not be destroyed both from within and without. As someone who generally believes in the potential for government action to engage in large, successful endeavors, I have to say, I don't think such a thing would be possible.

Sixth, the comment "Yeah - because everyone who has an opposing viewpoint is a right-wing-conspiracy-theorist-terrorist-extremist-racist-teabagger. I forgot about that, sorry." is crap. When someone who is ideologically anti-government presents a conspiracy theory about how a treaty on environmental issues will end freedom unless people "stop" Obama, it's not out of bounds to call them a right-wing extremist with a conspiracy theory endorsed by teabagger-central (World Net Daily), who is suggesting violence against people with whom they have an ideological disagreement to discourage the implementation of that ideology (a.k.a terrorism).

Racism being mixed in with this particular issue would be out of place, though vaporlock just called him a "right wing hack" which seems fairly innocuous, and not particularly racial.

The people saying that Bush would suspend the elections last year deserve the same kind of ridicule.

He was right to stress the fact that he really does not deserve it. The award seems like it's been given based on his aspirations rather than his accomplishments. If anything, he'd be most practically served by it by using it as a launching pad to lay out his plans on Israel/Palestine which he has been hesitant to do and to more definitively call for an end to settlement building in the West Bank. Then again with the Copenhagen summit on climate change looming and health care, it's unclear whether he'd be able to feasible accomplish anything with it.

Early this morning, nearly a million New Yorkers were stunned by the appearance of a "special edition" New York Post blaring headlines that their city could face deadly heat waves, extreme flooding, and other lethal effects of global warming within the next few decades. The most alarming thing about it: the news came from an official City report.

Although the 32-page New York Post is a fake, everything in it is 100% true, with all facts carefully checked by a team of editors and climate change experts.

Distributed by over 2000 volunteers throughout New York City, the paper has been created by The Yes Men and a coalition of activists as a wake-up call to action on
climate change. It appears one day before a UN summit where Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon will push 100 world leaders to make serious commitments to reduce carbon
emissions in the lead-up to the Copenhagen climate conference in December. Ban has said that the world has "less than 10 years to halt (the) global rise in
greenhouse gas emissions if we are to avoid catastrophic consequences for people and the planet," adding that Copenhagen is a "once-in-a-generation opportunity."

"This could be, and should be, a real New York Post," said Andy Bichlbaum of the Yes Men. "Climate change is the biggest threat civilization has ever faced, and it should be in the headlines of every paper, every day until we solve the problem."

via http://vimeo.com/6676567
Online issue of this "Special Edition" New York Post.

That's a very invasive law (The UK has plenty too) to have your sent and received emails read from your own home - wow - thats a bullshit law - annoyed as well since I fly out of Copenhagen so any email I sent from there is logged - I don't even know it.