[WSMDiscuss] Climate in movement…. : Fwd: [climate justice now!] Larsen C calving: one of the largest icebergs on record

David Stodolsky dss at secureid.net
Fri Jun 30 21:18:45 CEST 2017

> On 30 Jun 2017, at 21:01, JS CACIM <jai.sen at cacim.net> wrote:
> I’m not sure I comprehend the full implications of what this post is about

It is about making you a climate colonialist:

Xapuri Declaration: “We reject any form of climate colonialism”

From 26 to 28 May 2017, a meeting took place in Xapuri, in the state of Acre, Brazil. The meeting brought together Apurinã, Huni Kui, Jaminawa, Manchineri and Shawadawa indigenous peoples, representatives of traditional communities, rubber tappers, academics and supporting organisations. The meeting’s theme was, “The effects of environmental / climatic policies on traditional populations”.

The meeting was supported by Friends of the Earth International, the Indigenous Missionary Council (CIMI), the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation and the World Rainforest Movement.

United Nations under Pressure to denounce Human Rights Abuses in Carbon Offsetting Scheme

http://carbonmarketwatch.org/press-release-united-nations-under-pressure-to-denounce-human-rights-abuses-in-carbon-offsetting-scheme/ <http://carbonmarketwatch.org/press-release-united-nations-under-pressure-to-denounce-human-rights-abuses-in-carbon-offsetting-scheme/>

From a previously transmitted email:

https://www.john-daly.com/history.htm <https://www.john-daly.com/history.htm>
Following the General Election of 1979, most of the incoming Cabinet had been members of the government which lost office in 1974. They blamed the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) for their 1974 defeat. They, therefore, desired an excuse for reducing the UK coal industry and, thus, the NUM’s power. Coal-fired power stations emit CO2 but nuclear power stations don’t. Global warming provided an excuse for reducing the UK’s dependence on coal by replacing it with nuclear power. . . . A rational assessment of appropriate policies would include cost/benefit analysis, but imagined risk is not rational. All the proposed responses to the imagined risk of man-made global warming would increase starvation and poverty while inhibiting economic development throughout the entire world. And CO2 emissions would not be reduced and may be increased. In practice, politicians are accepting the predictions of climate models as being predictions of the future, and they are acting to change that future. This is similar to the behaviour of people who believe horoscope predictions of future harm so they avoid situations where that harm could happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle>
The programme asserts that the view that global warming is man-made was promoted by the British Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as a means of promoting nuclear power and reducing the impact of strike action in the state-owned coal industry by the National Union of Mineworkers.


David Stodolsky, PhD                   Institute for Social Informatics
Tornskadestien 2, st. th., DK-2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark
dss at socialinformatics.org          Skype/Twitter: davidstodolsky

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/wsm-discuss/attachments/20170630/755a66e8/attachment.htm>

More information about the WSM-Discuss mailing list