Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Lifestyle

Home loans made clear

Is Deb Foskey the Anti-Christ?

By Ari 5 March 2007 57

Rumours have reached Canberra from the Vatican that the ACT’s own Greens Party hypocrite Deb Foskey could be the Anti-Christ.

The Times reports: An arch-conservative cardinal chosen by the Pope to deliver this year’s Lenten meditations to the Vatican hierarchy has caused consternation by giving warning of an Antichrist who is “a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist”.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
57 Responses to
Is Deb Foskey the Anti-Christ?
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
zephyr9673 7:45 pm 13 Oct 08

No, Deb Foskey is in the same category as ‘Good Samaritans’ for those who find comfort in the bible, or Prophets as the older testament referred to nice people who could prophesy and warn of terrible fates before they occurred. The Greens, unlike Cassandra are able to do a lot with a little, and in the wasted power of Australian Politics where most of the electorate should not be allowed to vote as they are incapable of exercising reason nor common sense, and instead trade insults as the ‘Duopoly’ wants.

No, Deb is a lovely lady, who came and visited me while I was locked up for protesting against the ‘atrocities’ of the Federal Magistrates and Family courts.

Yes fellow Plebs, these institutions steal children, (even after the government apologized for the Policy of the Stolen Generations) our children, expect us to bow to them as they do it, and gain considerable profit from said exercise.

No Deb is a lovely green that has had to put up with a lot of abuse from a lot of drongos, and will be sadly missed from ACT politics.

theGeeves 3:12 pm 08 Mar 07

There is no such thing as 100% probable because it can never be until it has happened. All we can ever do is plan for what we think will happen.

There is a slim possibility that global warming is a natural cycle but simply putting your head in a bucket and chanting so others don’t hear or believe it the overwhelming majority scientific opinion about it is moronic.

barking toad 3:59 pm 07 Mar 07

90% was the best the zealots could come up with.

I theorise 00.000000%

If you send me money to plant trees for you I’ll happily hold a shovel looking stupified.

Maelinar 3:07 pm 07 Mar 07

But will you have, or are you just stoopid ?

You will have contributed to water purification, oxygen production, CO2 depletion, and any number of emissions soaking, animal habitat, erosion mitigation, and soil superstructure.

And of course, you too will be holding a shovel looking stupefied.

Of that I’m 90% certain. 90% in my books gives it a very high probability of it happening as I just said it. What does a 9 in 10 chance mean to you ?

barking toad 2:19 pm 07 Mar 07

Astro, I tested that theory once and it was eminently provable.

No one has proved that human produced carbon is the cause of global warming. Because it can’t be done.

The political document released by the IPCC recently was a summary for decision makers. The real report will be released in May after the scientists have adjusted it to ensure everything agrees with the political statement. Great scientific consensus.

Even the policy statement produced by the zealots talks about a probability of 90%. Nothing proven.

While you hippies are continuing to hurt Gaia by using electricity and driving cars I am prepared to do my bit to help. Send me money amd I will plant trees to off-set your carbon foot print.

As we go into the next cooling period I will, of course, chop these down for my fireplace which, according to gorebal alarmists, will emit carbon and cause gorebal warmening. It’s a win win situation. You’ll feel smugly happy believing you’ve made a difference and I’ll be laughing ‘cos I’ve ripped you off.

bonfire 1:45 pm 07 Mar 07

Found an intesting series of articles from a candian perspective.

“The Deniers — The National Post’s series on scientists who buck the conventional wisdom on climate science”

located here

and i hope that link works – i know how cranky jb can get…

i spoke to a geologist this morning who says that in age terms, man is a blink in earths history. she also said that 20 years of turning off cars and not burning coal for power could be undone with one mt pinatubo eruption.

Maelinar 1:24 pm 07 Mar 07

Yes she is. Unbeknownst to the twit staffers she has, she has infiltrated the social greens and then actively sought to wreck the party and turn it more (insert any avaliable political party here that actively lies and cheats), so when it gets into power there’s already a seed of destruction planted.

It’s all covered in several Hollywood movie plots…

Thumper 12:36 pm 07 Mar 07

So?

Is she the anti Christ or not?

And we have been pouring massive amounts of smoke into the atmosphere since the Industrial revolution. one would logically think that it could make a difference given time.

Anyway, there’s an ice age coming in about 10-20K years.

Maelinar 12:33 pm 07 Mar 07

astro, natural balance means that the impact of the minority, that being BT, myself etc, don’t actually affect things on such a global scale as we might imagine in our delusions of megalomania.

Widescale change needs – and is, taking place that negates any idiot out there with their bonfire on a conservation day, multiple of hundreds fold.

Idiots, frankly, generally don’t find themselves in a position where they can do widescale damage…

astrojax 11:56 am 07 Mar 07

and scientific theory also suggests that plummeting from a great height into a hard surface is not very good for your continuing healh, barking toad. care to disprove that one as well? just for balance, you understand…

what will it take to convince imbilciles like you that a) there is a problem and b) we need to do stuff about it or there will be detrimental consquences. there is NO dispute among those who research this stuff for a living, usually through a driven passion for the field (s’not like science pays very well…)

i don’t intend to die of dehydration and/or starvation because idiots act like bogan school kids and do the opposite of what is required just to be a dickhead…

barking toad 6:57 pm 06 Mar 07

Gorebal Warmening is a fact. As is Global Cooling.

The cycles have been happening for millions of years and will probably continue to do so.

To say that warming is primarily caused by human activity is a great big tree hugging hippie piece of crap that is nothing more than a theory the ‘proof’ of which relies on computer climate models with inputs based on getting the desired result.

We’ll go into a cooling phase sometime in the not too distant future and the hippies will blame said cooling on humans and their CO2. That will also be a great big tree hugging hippie piece of crap.

Can’t wait for earth day or whatever the zealots call it when they want all electrical devices turned off for an hour or so at the end of March.

I’ll be turning everything on, start the car and light the barbie (wood, not gas) to provide balance.

seepi 2:29 pm 06 Mar 07

Proving global warming with fact is what we are all hoping will not happen.

Maelinar 2:04 pm 06 Mar 07

Don’t forget you’re left holding the shovel as well Ralph…

bonfire 2:03 pm 06 Mar 07

as opposed to the fine ‘science’ supporting the scaremongers.

much of which is ‘speculation’ and not ‘fact’.

Ralph 1:46 pm 06 Mar 07

Shhhhhhhhh, they’re getting paid off by the big oil companies too. That really is laughable.

Fine list of other scientists here.

Sorry it’s OT and I’m getting sick and tired of it. I’m a proud economist, libertarian and climate change denialist.

astrojax 1:24 pm 06 Mar 07

I asked a friend who works and studies in the area about the fraser institute – the authors of the so-called doco on the argument against climate change and received this reply (slightly editied to remove identifying material and some non-related comments):

[dunno how to make the links link, but you can cut n paste urls…]

The Fraser institute recently produced in independent IPCC summary for policy makers’ that got touted as refuting the latest IPCC findings (or at least pointing out that we shouldn’t quite trust the IPCC). This report has been cited by a number of conservative columnists running the anti IPCC/bad for the economy line. The institute is linked with the Institute for Economic affairs.

In 1999, the Fraser Institute sponsored two conferences on the tobacco industry: “Junk Science, Junk Policy? Managing Risk and Regulation” and “Should government butt out? The pros and cons of tobacco regulation.” {Ibid]

More recently, the Fraser Institute has led the campaign to deny the science behind and the dangers of climate change, with several of its fellows and authors signing letters to political leaders and writing Op Eds to that effect. ExxonMobil donates to the Fraser Institute for “climate change” work.

Professor Ross McKitrick, author of the popular book that denies climate change “Taken By Storm” and known for his opposition to the Endangered Species Act in Canada, is also a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fraser_Institute

See also here. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/02/fraser-institute-fires-off-a-damp-squib/

Note that the authors of the independent summary include Ross MckIntrick and William Kinnimonth. The latter is a key figure in the Lavoiser group:

William Kininmonth is a known Australian climate change skeptic. His only listed qualification is “Director of the Australasian Climate Research Institute” [1], but the Institute is listed as simply a trading name for “Kininmonth, William Robert”, and is based at his private residence in Kew, Australia. [2]. It has no website, phone number or existence separate from Kininmonth. and

William Kininmonth, MSc, M.Admin — whose most recent paper is “Don’t be Gored into Going Along” in the Oct-Nov issue of Power Engineer. To be fair, he did publish a paper on weather forecasting, back in 1973.

Overall, the FI are a free market think tank, conservative and privately funded which and they’re entitled to their opinion. However, in my personal opinion they very clearly have an agenda and are in no way impartial, so be careful quoting as a source because it is in no way a credible one…..they’ve got some key points wrong on the science (see the real climate link)

If you want more detail google McIntyre and McKintrick (ones an economist and ones a statistician) – they tried to refute Mann’s hockey stick and were found out to be incorrect and using dodgy techniques – ie, they’re discredited in CC circles (Soon and Belarus is similar studies to M & M that have also been discredited). Kinninmonth pops up all over the place and is an Aus ‘skeptic’, not really credible (lots of info on web), Bob Carter, paelontologist at JC uni in QLD, not peer reviewed in this areas I think? Lindzden and Singer are two US names that pop up a lot. Discredited reports include House of Lords Committee report, Fraser institute, the Oregon petition (Ginger spice signed it!) and there’s a few more out there. [reply ends]

So, can you find me any (more) ‘reputable’ scientists? maybe ralph and bonfire can scrounge up another couple. Aren’t there plenty of them?

Thumper 1:16 pm 06 Mar 07

Why would you put a gerbil or a goblin in an oven?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site