Are our live being threatened by "Climate Change", or just threatened by Climate Change alarmists? --

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/murder-charge-follows-water-row/2007/11/01/1193619059253.html

Good work, Desmogblog.

Rob, what a stupid remark. Are you actually dumb enough to think that Australia has water restrictions because of a false alarm? They have had drought for years, and yes, it probably is a result of global warming, if you had the honesty to admit it.

You are so consistently dishonest, I doubt you could tell the truth even if you wanted to.

VJ, I guess you missed the part about the psychotic Global Warming fanatic killing a man, because he mistakenly believed his victim was contravening local lawn watering restrictions.

I assume that murder was completely justified in your view.

You need to give your head a shake, dude. Or quit abusing solvents. Hard to tell in your case.

Rob, your insults would carry more weight if you demonstrated some knowledge or clarity of thought. You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. And another problem with pinning assumed motivations on people. It's amazing that you have the audacity to chide others regarding "proof". [Folks, evidence of these problems occurs on many threads; see this one for example: http://www.desmogblog.com/air-force-to-make-the-wild-blue-yonder-a-little-less-wild#comment ]. I went to the article Rob cited above and found no reference to Global Warming. I've quoted from the article below.

From: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/murder-charge-follows-water-row/2007/11/01/1193619059253.html
The court heard he was on a cocktail of prescription drugs for a chronic back problem, and visited a doctor on the day of the attack over problems with four screws in his back.

A court psychologist told the magistrate, Jayeanne Carney, Munter was taking a prescription drug similar to morphine as well as sleeping pills to treat his back problem, but had no signs of mental illness. "There's just a touch of depression, but that's probably in the context of his chronic pain," she said.
[end quotation]

Now I see. Up until you explained it, I had no idea that going on a murderous Global Warming inspired rampage was okay, so long as you're high on drugs.

Thanks for clearing that up.

You call the guy a "psychotic Global Warming fanatic", but you don't show that he cares about Global Warming at all. You ascribe a motive without evidence and then misinterpret a simply-written comment pointing that out. What are you, twelve?

Rob, you are a liar and a fool.

Rob has nothing sensible to say, but he opens his mouth anyway.

We all know where Rob comes from and what he's trying to do. Don't encourage him. Just let it roll off your back and focus on more productive dialogue. If we ignore him, maybe he'll even GO AWAY!!!

I've struggled with this a little bit, Femack. I mean, maybe you're right that he might go away if ignored. I know that I would have liked to reply to Caroline's thoughtful posts rather than focus on Rob's comments. On the other hand, I think productive discussion needs counterpoints sometimes, and I confess to hoping I could shame Rob into applying his critical energy more productively (or to at least read). Also, although I suspect that I know what he's trying to do, I don't know what his motivations are for trying. So by engaging him I am trying to satisfy my curiosity somewhat. If folks think that's too distracting I'll try to be less selfish and I will ignore him, too.

It does pose a problem. He claims NOT to be the political blogger from North Dakota (http://sayanythingblog.com/) that we nailed a couple of months back, but I haven't noticed any break in the continuity of his posts that would suggest that a NEW Rob had joined our conversations. That "Rob" is a very disturbed character who seems to sit at his computer in Bismarck and spew venom all day every day (except when he is walking miles & miles to work for the benefit of his health).

If you really think you might find out something by carrying on the conversation, don't stop on my account, or anyone else's. That's what these pages are for, after all.

No, it doesn't need a think tank, does it? The fact is climate change has caused wars and migrations as long as there have been humans. Didn't the melting of the last ice age encourage humans to expand northwards? Didn't the Vikings go- well, go a-viking because of population pressure from the Eastern folks? Didn't the Vandals sack Rome because of deteriorating conditions in their homeland? Isn't the spat between the Israelis and the Palestinians exacerbated by the unequal posession of water? Isn't division of the the Indus and its tributary rivers a bone of contention between Pakistan and India? Hasn't Sudan gone through fifty years of civil war largely because of "allocation" of potential oil supplies?

However CSIS is concerned not with history but the present, and with passing indisputable knowledge on to those who make public policy. They may be stating the bleedin' obvious, but it's probably good that they are, because they are exactly the kind of conservative (with a small c) body that policy-makers will listen to. In short, they may succeed where environmentalists have failed, in getting the attention of those who have the power to make change.

Rob, do you ever read past the title? You link to another thread, but I don't think you've even read the story that is supposed to be the topic of this thread. And as I've indicated above, you don't even seem to have read the story for which you provide the URL. You sure are an odd duck.