Monday, April 30, 2007
GREEN LEADER SEMI-OFFICIALLY SUPPORTS FREEZING PENSIONERS & ECONOMIC RETREAT
In Scotland on Sunday there was a discussion on the likelihood of the Greens being able to become part of the coalition government. Since this would absolutely negate us replacing the 50% of our power facing retiral I think this would be disastrous. Some of the participants were people I had debated with previously & I knew their tactics:
Stuart Doulgas, Edinburgh / 1:54pm 29 Apr 2007
#58 Neil, 9% Growth party
I wondered how long it would be before you appeared with your false claims (and save me the "prove I'm telling lies" crap.)
I followed the links on your on-line blog (you have a very high opinion of yourself by the way - if you were chocolate you'd eat yourself) and it showed that every time you ask someone for evidence and they provide it you just ignore it and ask a different question.
How do you expect to be taken seriously when you spout rubbish like "blackouts & deaths would certainly be inevitable."
It sounds like the ramblings of the paranoid. It's no wonder the Lib Dems booted you out - imagine being booted out the Lib Dems
66. Neil, 9% Growth party / 3:24pm 29 Apr 2007
Stuart "Douglas" I am not going to spare you the request that you try to prove what you say.
You have been identified as a Green party member paid to post here.
I accept that saying that it is untrue that blackouts will happen if we lose 50% of our power represents the highest standard of honesty & indeed arithmetic of which the Green party is capable. It is also quite obviously a complete, total & absolutely deliberate lie.
Or perhaps you would like to prove that electricity can be produced without generation.
67. Comment Removed this was from a Susan MacLeod (you will see why I say "a" Susan) which was so offensive it was deleted. She asked me to prove my point.
71. Neil, 9% Growth party / 4:17pm 29 Apr 2007
Certainly Susan 67
Here is a Herald discussion board where you & a "Stewart" & a Mr Smith were clearly colluding to do me over & disappeared when I asked
"Yet again - I repeat "And you still haven't come up with a single eco-scare story which, over time, turned out to be truthful." Come on - 1 single catastrophe scare story out of hundreds which turned out to be fully & entirely truthful isn't a lot to ask."
Perhaps you would care to answer now.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1342...
And here is another where the height of your debating skills was to say that you had "shot me down in flames" previously but made the mistake of saying that you greens were anti-growth after you Mr Stewart had gone to some lengths to assert you weren't.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1347...
"I look forward to May 4th so we don't have to put up with any more of your annoying drivel and your demented belief that the answer to all of the worlds ills in economic growth."
I replied
Yes. According to Help the aged we have 24,000 UK pensioners dying from fuel poverty each year but our political masters, both official Greens & others want to go entirely to windmillery which is intermittent & would double electricity costs, rather than nuclear which the French have been producing at half our price for decades.
If pointlessly freezing people to death is a good thing then I am a looney & if it isn't then I am the only sane person standing in this election.
Again Susan I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills. As a Green with whom I have clashed before perhaps you would care to dispute your point with fellow Green Michael Stewart who attacked me for saying that you Greens were, at least in practice & often in theory as well, anti-growth.
Or perhaps, having been shot down in flames you will decline to answer - again."
You did decline then & seem to be trailing smoke here too.
75. Susan MacLeod*, Glasgow / 6:24pm 29 Apr 2007
Neil 9% Growth
Thanks for the helpful links. I've cut and pasted the evidence that someone else provided for you previously which, as always, you chose to ignore.
Evidence of destroyed forests:
http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e55/55a.htm
http://www.acidrain-articles.info/effects-of-acid-rain.html
Current state of the hole in the ozone layer:
http://www.theozonehole.com/ozonehole2006.htm
& 79. Susan MacLeod*, Glasgow / 6:41pm 29 Apr 2007
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"Greens & others want to go entirely to windmillery which is intermittent & would double electricity costs"
Lie.
Ocean wave, solar and hydro power are also put forward by the Greens, coupled with more efficient homes and energy saving technology.
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills."
Wrong!
We as a nation were at our happiest in 1976 when we were poorer and led a less materialistic lifestyle. See link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0331/p01s03-woeu.html
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"I am a looney"
I'm not arguing with that
85. Neil, 9% Growth party / 7:43pm 29 Apr 2007
Susan MacLeod* I assume you are a senior Green Party member unlike Susan MacLeod without the asterisk. I take it she was seriously out of her depth for something beyond the hysteria that got her post #67 deleted.
Your #75 says I have not previously answered the links you put up.
Anybody following my previous link back can see that that is a deliberate lie. I did answer all 3 & pointed out that what your co-worker had said they said they didn't. Par for the course with the greens.
79 - Wrong again. "Windmillery" refers to windmills & similar useless nostrums, hence the "ery". All the power sources you mention, except hydro, are intermittent. A 7 year old child would be able to point out the custardheadedness & dishonesty of promising to produce continuous power from intermittent sources. To be fair Nicol Stephen {Liberal Democrat Party leader} is making the same promise but nobody ever accused him of having brains either.
You say that it is a lie that"I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills."
Well that is indeed what I would say & if it is the official assertion of the Green Party that money solves zero problems we will have to accept that that is your opinion.
Your link to your happiness index proves absolutely nothing since it is not a measure of happiness but of things you wish to measure. For example by that definition measuring loss of farmland as a component of happiness, building homes for people reduces happiness.
Again that is merely Green Party opinion, it is not mine, nor, I suspect that of most people.
Finally you have obviously read the statement you have partially quoted.
"If pointlessly freezing people to death [in the blackouts which will follow the loss of 50% of our power]is a good thing then I am a looney & if it isn't then I am the only sane person standing in this election."
I stand by that. Perhaps "only" is a slight exaggeration but certainly none of the big parties appear sane.
You are now saying, as a senior Green activist on party work, that your party's official opinion is that pointlessly freezing people to death is a good thing. Just as you approve of denying them homes & indeed as your eco-fascist movement has undeniably killed more people than Hitler by bringing about the DDT ban.
http://9percentgrowth.blogspot.com/2007/01/has-green-move...
You are a party of wholly dishonest mass child murdering fascist parasites who would demean the human spirit & drive us back to the caves because you haven't the guts to take on the real world.
88. Susan MacLeod, Glasgow / 7:55pm 29 Apr 2007
# 85 Neil
That is one of the most sickening comments I've ever read. You are an absolute disgrace. How someone who comes out with comments like that could put themselves forward for election is beyond me.
I actually felt physically sick reading that. I can put up with your paranoid ramblings about me but to describe people who care about the environment as mass child murdering fascist parasites is disgusting.
and a few others like that from the the obviously colluding Greens but..
90. Borderman, Borders / 8:15pm 29 Apr 2007
#87 "I thought about reporting your message as unsuitable"
Why would you do that? Why not answer the points raised? Neil obviously feels strongly about them. He's got me interested.
Are you for or against DDT?
#79 "We as a nation were at our happiest in 1976 when we were poorer and led a less materialistic lifestyle."
Wrong. As a child, I was reliably informed by older relatives that things were best during the war.
92. Borderman, Borders / 8:44pm 29 Apr 2007
#91
Oh, come on! On these boards, every day Tony Blair gets accused of being a child-murdering war criminal. No-one talks about "unsuitabalising" those posts. The idea of censoring an unpleasant opinion is far worse than anything Neil said. He also introduced the terms "windmillery" and "custardheadedness" to the discussion. He should get credit for that.
But which part of Neil's statement really upset you?
"dishonest" - he was referring to a political party. It seems fair.
"child murdering" - a bit strong, but will you criticise #89 for accusing SUV drivers of killing children?
"fascist" - none of us like that, but as you've suggested stifling his comments, and another poster reponded to his points with single word utterance such as "wrong" and "lie", I can see where he gets his opinion.
"back to the caves" -- well I share that fear if we're to rely on windmills and wave farms.
Frankly, I share many of Neil's concerns about the Green Party and the Green movement in general. They seem to have a long list of things to ban. And they tell me I will be happier for it
93. Stuart Doulgas, Glasgow / 8:48pm 29 Apr 2007
Borderman
I refuse to argue with you. If you're going to defend someone like him then you have a problem which I think you need to get sorted.
Take care.
97. jayceebee / 11:03pm 29 Apr 2007
Is it true that the jackal is the symbol for the Greens?
101. Neil, 9% Growth Party / 11:22am 30 Apr 2007
I note that in all the outrage from the Greens none of them dispute anything I said on a factual basis.
That the DDT ban has killed more than 50 million people, by allowing malaria to revive as a mass killer is a matter of fact. Iain you may not like DDT but I feel that over 50 milliion 3rd world children's lives is a high price to pay for banning it. Silent Spring is work of fiction not a scientific paper.
You also do not dispute that you have been caught faking & that Susan MacLeod & Susan MacLeod* are not the same posters & that probably many if not all of the posters attacking me are fakes part of a Green party campaign. In particular that Susan* is indeed a party leader & that his claims to be in favour of freezing pensioners to death & the desireability of going back economicly to at least 1976 represent your true agenda. The mask has indeed slipped.
102. Neil, 9% Growth Party / 1:49pm 30 Apr 2007
PS Iain as an "applied chemist" & not just another organised Green Party poster you will be able to confirm that DDT is so harmless to humans that men can & have eaten it by the spoonful without harm.
The "problem" with it is solely that it takes a relatively long time to break down (which is also the benefit since it thus kills flys for far longer).
No further responses - I claim game, set & match
Stuart Doulgas, Edinburgh / 1:54pm 29 Apr 2007
#58 Neil, 9% Growth party
I wondered how long it would be before you appeared with your false claims (and save me the "prove I'm telling lies" crap.)
I followed the links on your on-line blog (you have a very high opinion of yourself by the way - if you were chocolate you'd eat yourself) and it showed that every time you ask someone for evidence and they provide it you just ignore it and ask a different question.
How do you expect to be taken seriously when you spout rubbish like "blackouts & deaths would certainly be inevitable."
It sounds like the ramblings of the paranoid. It's no wonder the Lib Dems booted you out - imagine being booted out the Lib Dems
66. Neil, 9% Growth party / 3:24pm 29 Apr 2007
Stuart "Douglas" I am not going to spare you the request that you try to prove what you say.
You have been identified as a Green party member paid to post here.
I accept that saying that it is untrue that blackouts will happen if we lose 50% of our power represents the highest standard of honesty & indeed arithmetic of which the Green party is capable. It is also quite obviously a complete, total & absolutely deliberate lie.
Or perhaps you would like to prove that electricity can be produced without generation.
67. Comment Removed this was from a Susan MacLeod (you will see why I say "a" Susan) which was so offensive it was deleted. She asked me to prove my point.
71. Neil, 9% Growth party / 4:17pm 29 Apr 2007
Certainly Susan 67
Here is a Herald discussion board where you & a "Stewart" & a Mr Smith were clearly colluding to do me over & disappeared when I asked
"Yet again - I repeat "And you still haven't come up with a single eco-scare story which, over time, turned out to be truthful." Come on - 1 single catastrophe scare story out of hundreds which turned out to be fully & entirely truthful isn't a lot to ask."
Perhaps you would care to answer now.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1342...
And here is another where the height of your debating skills was to say that you had "shot me down in flames" previously but made the mistake of saying that you greens were anti-growth after you Mr Stewart had gone to some lengths to assert you weren't.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1347...
"I look forward to May 4th so we don't have to put up with any more of your annoying drivel and your demented belief that the answer to all of the worlds ills in economic growth."
I replied
Yes. According to Help the aged we have 24,000 UK pensioners dying from fuel poverty each year but our political masters, both official Greens & others want to go entirely to windmillery which is intermittent & would double electricity costs, rather than nuclear which the French have been producing at half our price for decades.
If pointlessly freezing people to death is a good thing then I am a looney & if it isn't then I am the only sane person standing in this election.
Again Susan I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills. As a Green with whom I have clashed before perhaps you would care to dispute your point with fellow Green Michael Stewart who attacked me for saying that you Greens were, at least in practice & often in theory as well, anti-growth.
Or perhaps, having been shot down in flames you will decline to answer - again."
You did decline then & seem to be trailing smoke here too.
75. Susan MacLeod*, Glasgow / 6:24pm 29 Apr 2007
Neil 9% Growth
Thanks for the helpful links. I've cut and pasted the evidence that someone else provided for you previously which, as always, you chose to ignore.
Evidence of destroyed forests:
http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e55/55a.htm
http://www.acidrain-articles.info/effects-of-acid-rain.html
Current state of the hole in the ozone layer:
http://www.theozonehole.com/ozonehole2006.htm
& 79. Susan MacLeod*, Glasgow / 6:41pm 29 Apr 2007
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"Greens & others want to go entirely to windmillery which is intermittent & would double electricity costs"
Lie.
Ocean wave, solar and hydro power are also put forward by the Greens, coupled with more efficient homes and energy saving technology.
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills."
Wrong!
We as a nation were at our happiest in 1976 when we were poorer and led a less materialistic lifestyle. See link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0331/p01s03-woeu.html
Neil 9% Growth Party says:
"I am a looney"
I'm not arguing with that
85. Neil, 9% Growth party / 7:43pm 29 Apr 2007
Susan MacLeod* I assume you are a senior Green Party member unlike Susan MacLeod without the asterisk. I take it she was seriously out of her depth for something beyond the hysteria that got her post #67 deleted.
Your #75 says I have not previously answered the links you put up.
Anybody following my previous link back can see that that is a deliberate lie. I did answer all 3 & pointed out that what your co-worker had said they said they didn't. Par for the course with the greens.
79 - Wrong again. "Windmillery" refers to windmills & similar useless nostrums, hence the "ery". All the power sources you mention, except hydro, are intermittent. A 7 year old child would be able to point out the custardheadedness & dishonesty of promising to produce continuous power from intermittent sources. To be fair Nicol Stephen {Liberal Democrat Party leader} is making the same promise but nobody ever accused him of having brains either.
You say that it is a lie that"I would say that getting richer is an answer to quite a few ills."
Well that is indeed what I would say & if it is the official assertion of the Green Party that money solves zero problems we will have to accept that that is your opinion.
Your link to your happiness index proves absolutely nothing since it is not a measure of happiness but of things you wish to measure. For example by that definition measuring loss of farmland as a component of happiness, building homes for people reduces happiness.
Again that is merely Green Party opinion, it is not mine, nor, I suspect that of most people.
Finally you have obviously read the statement you have partially quoted.
"If pointlessly freezing people to death [in the blackouts which will follow the loss of 50% of our power]is a good thing then I am a looney & if it isn't then I am the only sane person standing in this election."
I stand by that. Perhaps "only" is a slight exaggeration but certainly none of the big parties appear sane.
You are now saying, as a senior Green activist on party work, that your party's official opinion is that pointlessly freezing people to death is a good thing. Just as you approve of denying them homes & indeed as your eco-fascist movement has undeniably killed more people than Hitler by bringing about the DDT ban.
http://9percentgrowth.blogspot.com/2007/01/has-green-move...
You are a party of wholly dishonest mass child murdering fascist parasites who would demean the human spirit & drive us back to the caves because you haven't the guts to take on the real world.
88. Susan MacLeod, Glasgow / 7:55pm 29 Apr 2007
# 85 Neil
That is one of the most sickening comments I've ever read. You are an absolute disgrace. How someone who comes out with comments like that could put themselves forward for election is beyond me.
I actually felt physically sick reading that. I can put up with your paranoid ramblings about me but to describe people who care about the environment as mass child murdering fascist parasites is disgusting.
and a few others like that from the the obviously colluding Greens but..
90. Borderman, Borders / 8:15pm 29 Apr 2007
#87 "I thought about reporting your message as unsuitable"
Why would you do that? Why not answer the points raised? Neil obviously feels strongly about them. He's got me interested.
Are you for or against DDT?
#79 "We as a nation were at our happiest in 1976 when we were poorer and led a less materialistic lifestyle."
Wrong. As a child, I was reliably informed by older relatives that things were best during the war.
92. Borderman, Borders / 8:44pm 29 Apr 2007
#91
Oh, come on! On these boards, every day Tony Blair gets accused of being a child-murdering war criminal. No-one talks about "unsuitabalising" those posts. The idea of censoring an unpleasant opinion is far worse than anything Neil said. He also introduced the terms "windmillery" and "custardheadedness" to the discussion. He should get credit for that.
But which part of Neil's statement really upset you?
"dishonest" - he was referring to a political party. It seems fair.
"child murdering" - a bit strong, but will you criticise #89 for accusing SUV drivers of killing children?
"fascist" - none of us like that, but as you've suggested stifling his comments, and another poster reponded to his points with single word utterance such as "wrong" and "lie", I can see where he gets his opinion.
"back to the caves" -- well I share that fear if we're to rely on windmills and wave farms.
Frankly, I share many of Neil's concerns about the Green Party and the Green movement in general. They seem to have a long list of things to ban. And they tell me I will be happier for it
93. Stuart Doulgas, Glasgow / 8:48pm 29 Apr 2007
Borderman
I refuse to argue with you. If you're going to defend someone like him then you have a problem which I think you need to get sorted.
Take care.
97. jayceebee / 11:03pm 29 Apr 2007
Is it true that the jackal is the symbol for the Greens?
101. Neil, 9% Growth Party / 11:22am 30 Apr 2007
I note that in all the outrage from the Greens none of them dispute anything I said on a factual basis.
That the DDT ban has killed more than 50 million people, by allowing malaria to revive as a mass killer is a matter of fact. Iain you may not like DDT but I feel that over 50 milliion 3rd world children's lives is a high price to pay for banning it. Silent Spring is work of fiction not a scientific paper.
You also do not dispute that you have been caught faking & that Susan MacLeod & Susan MacLeod* are not the same posters & that probably many if not all of the posters attacking me are fakes part of a Green party campaign. In particular that Susan* is indeed a party leader & that his claims to be in favour of freezing pensioners to death & the desireability of going back economicly to at least 1976 represent your true agenda. The mask has indeed slipped.
102. Neil, 9% Growth Party / 1:49pm 30 Apr 2007
PS Iain as an "applied chemist" & not just another organised Green Party poster you will be able to confirm that DDT is so harmless to humans that men can & have eaten it by the spoonful without harm.
The "problem" with it is solely that it takes a relatively long time to break down (which is also the benefit since it thus kills flys for far longer).
No further responses - I claim game, set & match
