Posted on 12/07/2009 2:12:52 PM PST by dirtboy
Trying to find this with no luck - I figure someone (or twenty) on FR will know the answer.
Thanks in advance.
George Lakoff said something along these lines. He isn’t a climate scientist but a linguistics coach for the left (also one of Zero’s speechwriters).
He said you had to paint an exaggerated picture (my words) to get your point across and make it emotionally connect.
This isn’t the article I’m thinking of but it is around the same lines of how to manipulate the language in AGW discussions.
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/george_lakoff_says_environmentalists_need_to_watch_their_language
The quote I’m looking for was from the late 1990s, I believe. But your link is pretty interesting as well.
You might mean some of these libtard envirowackos...
The right to have children should be a marketable commodity, bought and traded by individuals but absolutely limited by the state.
—Kenneth Boulding, originator of the “Spaceship Earth”
concept (as quoted by William Tucker in Progress and Privilege, 1982)
We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age, where we might live like Indians in our valley, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion—guilt-free at last!
—Stewart Brand (writing in the Whole Earth Catalogue).
Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process…. Capitalism is destroying the earth.
—Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists
We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects…. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres of presently settled land.
—David Foreman, Earth First!
Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed.
—Pentti Linkola
If you ask me, it’d be a little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy because of what we would do with it. We ought to be looking for energy sources that are adequate for our needs, but that won’t give us the excesses of concentrated energy with which we could do mischief to the earth or to each other.
—Amory Lovins in The Mother Earth–Plowboy Interview, Nov/Dec 1977, p.22
The only real good technology is no technology at all. Technology is taxation without representation, imposed by our elitist species (man) upon the rest of the natural world.
—John Shuttleworth
What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.
—Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Senator (D-Colorado)
I suspect that eradicating smallpox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.
—John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal
Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.
—John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal
The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing....This is not to say that the rise of human civilization is insignificant, but there is no way of showing that it will be much help to the world in the long run.
—Economist editorial
We advocate biodiversity for biodiversity’s sake. It may take our extinction to set things straight.
—David Foreman, Earth First!
Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.
—Dave Forman, Founder of Earth First!
If radical environmentalists were to invent a disease to bring human populations back to sanity, it would probably be something like AIDS
—Earth First! Newsletter
Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, is not as important as a wild and healthy planets…Some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.
—David Graber, biologist, National Park Service
The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.
—Dr. Reed F. Noss, The Wildlands Project
If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.
—Prince Phillip, World Wildlife Fund
Cannibalism is a “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
—Lyall Watson, The Financial Times, 15 July 1995
Poverty For “Those People” - We, in the green movement, aspire to a cultural model in which killing a forest will be considered more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of 6-year-old children to Asian brothels.
—Carl Amery
Every time you turn on an electric light, you are making another brainless baby.
—Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists
To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.
—Lamont Cole
If there is going to be electricity, I would like it to be decentralized, small, solar-powered.
—Gar Smith, editor of the Earth Island Institute’s online magazine The Edge
The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States: We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the U.S. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are. And it is important to the rest of the world to make sure that they don’t suffer economically by virtue of our stopping them.
—Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund
The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population.
—Reid Bryson, “Global Ecology; Readings towards a rational strategy for Man”, (1971)
The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer.
—Paul Ehrlich, in The Population Bomb (1968)
I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.
—Paul Ehrlich in (1969)
In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.
—Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)
Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity…in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion.
—Paul Ehrlich in (1976)
This [cooling] trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.
—Peter Gwynne, Newsweek 1976
There are ominous signs that the earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production—with serious political implications for just about every nation on earth. The drop in food production could begin quite soon… The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologist are hard-pressed to keep up with it.
—Newsweek, April 28, (1975)
This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000.
—Lowell Ponte in “The Cooling”, 1976
If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. … This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.
—Kenneth E.F. Watt on air pollution and global cooling, Earth Day (1970)
Notice how absolutely right on the money ol’ Paul Ehrlich’s predictions were. And he’s still closely wrapped up with the current Globaloney War-mists. I’m sure his current predictions are just as totally valid as all his earlier one’s were. /sarc
Professor Stephen Schneider of Stanford University.
...Moore criticizes what he sees as scare tactics and disinformation employed by some within the environmental movement:
By the mid-1980s, the environmental movement had abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism. I became aware of the emerging concept of sustainable development: balancing environmental, social and economic priorities. Converted to the idea that win-win solutions could be found by bringing all interests together, I made the move from confrontation to consensus.
Interviewed in the 2007 film documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, Moore commented: "See, I don't even like to call it the environmental movement anymore, because really it is a political activist movement, and they have become hugely influential at a global level."
Moore calls global warming the "most difficult issue facing the scientific community today in terms of being able to actually predict with any kind of accuracy what's going to happen". While acknowledging that the increase of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere is caused by human consumption of fossil fuels, he claims that as of 2006, it cannot be proven as the exclusive reason the Earth has been warming since 1980. He stresses that it is scientific evidence, not consensus opinion, that would prove or disprove this relation.
I think one of the most pernicious aspects of the modern environmental movement is the romanticization of peasant life. And the idea that industrial societies are the destroyers of the world. The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is for preventing development in the developing countries. I think it's legitimate for me to call them anti-human.
It's become so complicated, there's so much snake oil around the whole subject... the best comment that was ever made was by Michael Crichton in his book State of Fear: 'I am certain there is too much certainty in the world'. And I am certain that he is right...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)
Yep, that's the one you want ... From my website -- Link Here follow the links.
See the eleven on this email string from the leaked cru emails, might be one of them?
http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/emails.php?eid=40&filename=880476729.txt
Years ago? I might have guessed Maurice Strong, tho’ I can’t lay a hand on a specific quote.
""Like most people, we'd like to see the world a better place... To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."
(Dr. Stephen Schneider, Professor of Environmental Biology and Global Change, Stanford University, Quoted in Discover, pp. 45–48, Oct. 1989)
--Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister
This eminent "scientist" is a nurse by training. Like most of the warmists, she can't differentiate a second degree polynomial, change a flat tire, or write a ten-line computer program, but feels entitled to lecture all the rest of us on how we should live our lives.
Thanks, that’s what I was looking for!
There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What's the right mix?
I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.
I wouldn't mind the lecturing, which I can avoid. But the legislating... =:^/
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.