Charles Manson...Environmentalist

[OrochiEddie]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/19/charles-manson-global-warming_n_851187.html

Charles Manson, the notorious cult leader, has broken his 20-year silence, and is speaking out about global warming.

Manson, now 76 years old, was accused of brainwashing members of his commune known as “The Manson Family." He was jailed 40 years ago for orchestrating the murders of eight people -- carried out at his instruction -- including Roman Polanski’s pregnant wife, Sharon Tate.

The Telegraph reports that during a recent interview with Spain’s Vanity Fair magazine, Manson warned of a danger that he thinks is greater than himself -- global warming.

Manson said, "Everyone's God and if we don't wake up to that there's going to be no weather because our polar caps are melting because we're doing bad things to the atmosphere… The automobiles and fossil fuels are destroying the atmosphere and we won't have air to breathe.”

Before trailing off, Manson added, 'If we don’t change that as rapidly as I’m speaking to you now, if we don’t put the green back on the planet and put the trees back that we’ve butchered, if we don’t go to war against the problem...'

According to The Daily Mail, Manson is also a founder of ATWA (Air Trees Water Animals or All The Way Alive). The mission statement warns of the planet’s destruction from pollution.

Charles Manson is likely not the advocate that environmentalists would like on their team to fight climate change. Will Manson's comments bring further controversy and political ammunition to an already hotly debated issue, or are they to be disregarded as the ramblings of a madman?

"I only killed 8 people, but this will kill billions!"

 

[rarehero]

It's comforting that Charlie is looking over all of us like that.

 

[LoneSage]

silence? what silence?

 

[SouthtownKid]

silence? what silence?

Not all of us hear his voice constantly the way you do.

 

[abasuto]

You'd have to be as nutty as Manson to buy into global warming, so this makes sense.

 

[Orpheus]

You'd have to be as nutty as Manson to buy into global warming.

 

[Gigaton Chode]

Doesn't he know they're calling it "climate change" these days?

 

[ki_atsushi]

Doesn't he know they're calling it "climate change" these days?

He's been in jail for 40 years. He probably doesn't even know what the goddamned internet is. I know if I was the warden I wouldn't let that sick bastard anywhere near one.

 

[abasuto]

Manson is only a few catch phrases short of a quality Faux News host.

 

[LWK]

Notice how global warming just disappeared? I thought there was overwhelming evidence of it? Why did it just disappear if its so fucking vital we tackle it? I mean c'mon. Are we all this gullible to fraud?

Politics isn't science, and the two need a lifetime restraining order.

I will be vindicated on my views of this subject one day. Nobody can get away with corruption forever, and corrupting scientific information itself is just something totally off point. I mean, its getting bad in other area's regardless of science. Even economics is being corrupted by pay offs some professors are getting to make the criminal behavior of the leading investment banker activity 'okay'. Its insane what some professors are teaching.

 

[Nesagwa]

Its insane what some professors are teaching.

Thats a tad ironic.

 

[LWK]

Since this is being used against me, the professor I had is not being paid off by outside sources, hes a poorly paid citrus professor. Also, it doesn't make anyone insane to not believe that the entire planet is warming up due to our actions. If this was true, the effect would be so devastating now that we'd already be dead. Everything is to widely balanced and continuous via cycle for our actions to have a significant enough effect to melt polar ice caps and doom polar bear populations. I'll leave that to poaching. This whole movement is not about big dirty smoke stacks, its about cornering it down to individual in home regulations,.

The entire agenda is just a big 'one over' on using guilt and fear mongering to push agenda. BP was one of the main global warming pushers out there, right along with lord browne and others, investment scumbags with zero morality for the destruction they caused human beings. What did they do? Fucked up and polluted the ocean with terrible level oil spills. What happened, why weren't they dismantled? If they believe so strongly in global warming, why don't they use their entire existing net worth to curb or fund direct fixes to the problem.

Why don't they use the money to fund alternative energy cars?

Also, its totally suspicious this movement has changed names. You know why? When it got cold, its to obvious to state 'global warming', so those idiots called it 'climate change.' So basically when it gets really hot this summer, and hits a record or something, someone can take the reading out of context, blame society and all industry, then push agenda's for new laws that regulate the crap out of everything we do. Of course, american's being dumb and lazy will back it up due to being hot and not think for a minute what's really causing temperature changes.

The only thing green about this entire movement is the $$$. Environmentalism and belief in this are entirely different subject matter, and good meaning environmentalism to prevent obvious issues like trash dumping in ocean's should be funded, not some hokum pseudo science.
'Global warming is not about human beings vs the planet, its about a small collection of very wealthy people with psychopath style mentality who don't give a fuck about anyone. Its about controlling us and regulating us with new taxation. The well meaning idiots who back it up, just seek to make it seem more credible.

 

[abasuto]

Notice how global warming just disappeared?

Isn't it funny how science was Gore's worst subject in college ?

He only took two science courses in college, got a D and C- in them.

He's nothing more than a former pot smoking hippy who became a yuppie. He just remembered that "saving the planet" was a slogan that got the college liberals out to vote.

 

[OrochiEddie]

Why don't they use the money to fund alternative energy cars?

lobbying from big oil

 

[cannonball]

Politics isn't science, and the two need a lifetime restraining order.

It's funny that you say this considering your entire argument thus far against global warming has been political or religious in nature.

 

[LWK]

It's funny that you say this considering your entire argument thus far against global warming has been political or religious in nature.

How has my argument been political or religious? What political party or religion even in 'nature' example am I backing? Earth process through its natural cycles does not mean I'm religious.

 

[Decepticon]

Global warming is just God hugging the earth a little tighter.

 

[fake]

Heh. I remember there was a System of a Down song called ATWA. I read that they think he should have been found innocent.

 

[Late]

Earth process through its natural cycles does not mean I'm religious.

It is a natural process, but one that has been greatly accelerated by human endeavors and this speeding up is what could create far greater problems for the biosphere in general. Read James Lovelock or Pentti Linkola

Let's state, just for the sake of argument, that global warming is a global conspiracy/hoax. What bad is there in "conning" people into weaning themselves off mindless consumerism, weren't you just advocating this in that war room thread that blew up in your face?

That said, all hail Charles Man-Son, one of the very few actually interesting American public figures.

o7

 

[OrochiEddie]

I'm surprised no one made a joke like
"well it makes sense. You can't spell environmentalist without MENTAL"

 

[fake]

It is a natural process, but one that has been greatly accelerated by human endeavors and this speeding up is what could create far greater problems for the biosphere in general. Read James Lovelock or Pentti Linkola

I could be mistaken, but I think you've got it wrong. Wouldn't Lovelock and Linkola argue that global warming wouldn't cause many problems for the biosphere? Yes, it would cause harm to humans, but the rest of the biosphere is a self-regulating framework that more or less can't be destroyed short of an asteroid impact several times larger than the one that people mistakenly think wiped out the dinosaurs. (Most birds evolved from dinosaurs.) The biosphere / Gaia / whatever you want to call it is fully capable of mending its wounds or at the very least compensating for them and minimizing damage.

 

[LWK]

It is a natural process, but one that has been greatly accelerated by human endeavors and this speeding up is what could create far greater problems for the biosphere in general. Read James Lovelock or Pentti Linkola

Let's state, just for the sake of argument, that global warming is a global conspiracy/hoax. What bad is there in "conning" people into weaning themselves off mindless consumerism, weren't you just advocating this in that war room thread that blew up in your face?

That said, all hail Charles Man-Son, one of the very few actually interesting American public figures.

o7

You're sort of saying its okay to deceive people. I don't agree. Just raise awareness if you want to push a cause, they did it before and its no problem. A simple sign here and there does it.

The fact they try pushing legislation is exactly why I fight it. You can believe whatever you want, but its no different then pushing a bill that favors a specific god. Remember, this is a theory, a theory unlike others. East Anglia is the main university behind it, with admitted collusion of data checking, which means non valid peer reviews. It'd be like having my brother peer review me. There is to much bias... Here is what is bad with lying to us, we turn against each other, declare our basic living actions as enemy type behavior. A lot of bad can come from it. Nazi style movements start from beliefs like this. Its not even environmentalism. Its something totally foreign.. There is extreme dangers involved with submitting to this. In house regulations could pass as a law, which means inspectors monitoring your TV's space to the wall, how many cats you have, etc. Its literally a blank check to regulate practically anything at its worst.

I know it sounds paranoid, and I sound crazy talking about it, I'm well aware, but nazi germany became a living example of how this reality comes about. You won't believe its real, then it just happens..
After seeing COP's opening video, which was blatant propaganda from the goebbels bible of fear mongering, which can easily trick gullible world leaders to buy into things with no scientific counter point presented. (During COP, a group of other scientists hosted a outside meeting denouncing it) I no longer see the IPCC as well meaning, but many of its bigger members involved in side investments. Pechauri needs to be investigated first..

 

[JRedmond3]

smokey gonna kill atmospherey!

 

[fake]

My abridged view of global warming and shit:

A. I don't see how our polluting doesn't hurt the environment. Even if it doesn't hurt the environment as a whole, there's localized cause/effect. Pollution can easily fuck up the local wildlife.

B. That said, there's been massive profiteering stemming from global warming. I have little doubt that 20 years from now, our kids will be watching VH2's I Love the 2000s / 2010s and laughing at the green trend, not to mention Al Gore's decked out, fully illuminated, energy-inefficient house(s).

C. The facts are somewhat shady on global warming. On one hand, you have scientists saying we've fucked shit up but not having a whole lot of consistent proof.. What do they have to gain from asserting this? On the other hand, you have the establishments, who act like those scientists are crazy people. They have a whole lot to lose if oil, coal, and all traditional energy take a hit. Who do you side with?

 

[LWK]

My abridged view of global warming and shit:

A. I don't see how our polluting doesn't hurt the environment. Even if it doesn't hurt the environment as a whole, there's localized cause/effect. Pollution can easily fuck up the local wildlife.

B. That said, there's been massive profiteering stemming from global warming. I have little doubt that 20 years from now, our kids will be watching VH2's I Love the 2000s / 2010s and laughing at the green trend, not to mention Al Gore's decked out, fully illuminated, energy-inefficient house(s).

C. The facts are somewhat shady on global warming. On one hand, you have scientists saying we've fucked shit up but not having a whole lot of consistent proof.. What do they have to gain from asserting this? On the other hand, you have the establishments, who act like those scientists are crazy people. They have a whole lot to lose if oil, coal, and all traditional energy take a hit. Who do you side with?

Side with people like me who fight it based on it becoming regulations.

I also agree about polluting. That is a serious issue, and those fucking cruise ships do it with zero respect. Anyone caught doing that shit pay a 10 million dollar fine. Make it so costly that nobody makes a mistake again.

Seeing all that marine life dissected with plastic particles in them is just sad beyond words.