A SHOCKER! – Installment 10 – May 30, 2008
A SHOCKER! – Installment 10 – May 30, 2008
Re-post. Originially posted on May 29, 2008.
Soon, the Senate will hold hearings on a “Cap and Trade” bill, an effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere and prevent further global warming. It will be costly (multiple billions) and have far-reaching consequences (many decades and possibly beyond). Whether Cap and Trade will have any real benefit to the globe is still as unclear as the science of global warmings’ existence or cause. Senate Bill 2191 is offered to the Senate by Barbara Boxer (D – CA), Joe Lieberman (D-CONN) and John Warner (R-VA).
The “Cap” part of the bill places limits or “caps” on how much CO2 a company is allowed by government to emit into the air. This is usually measured in tons. The limit will be determined by the government’s estimate of current total emissions minus the reduction goal which will be a steadily reduced percentage annually. S. 2191 requires that emissions decline to 15% below 2005 levels by 2020, without regard to population increases and rising energy demands. Each unit of emissions allowed is called a carbon credit.
Company A may be allowed to emit 500 tons of CO2 this year, while Company B is allowed 600 tons. What happens if Company A exceeds the goal and only emits 450 tons, a savings of 50 carbon credits? What happens if Company B is unable to reduce emissions enough and exceeds the cap by 50 tons? No problem. Company B purchases the unused 50 carbon credits from Company A and is considered carbon neutral. In reality, Company A has done part of the reduction work for Company B and Company B hasn’t done its share.
How does Co. B absorb the cost of buying the additional carbon credits from Co. A? It doesn’t. It simply adds it to the cost of its goods and services, and you and I, the consumers, pay for it. Does the government give the annual carbon credits to companies for free? Nope. The government sells them and, by some estimates, expects to collect billions in new revenue. Who pays the cost of buying carbon credits from the government? You guessed it. The consumers – you and I. Companies add all of their costs of doing business to the prices of their goods and services and we pay for it. Our lives are getting more and more expensive, especially as the rate of reduction is constantly tightened year after year, making it increasingly more difficult for companies to comply. The harder it is, the more it will cost – US.
Companies will have to become experts in CO2 emission reduction technology, science and engineering. Instead of concentrating their efforts on making their product or providing their service, they will have to spend time and resources on emissions reduction. Most companies will hire someone to figure it out and get it done, passing the cost of the new employee/s on to us, again. Like losing weight, the last 20% of reduction may be very difficult to do, resulting in costly efforts. Just because the government decided to make a company reduce emissions by a number they picked, doesn’t mean it’s possible in reality. Of course, they can always purchase whatever extra carbon credits they need – and pass the cost on to you and me.
How will companies buy and sell carbon credits? Will they need to hire someone to handle that? Maybe not, but if they do, they will pass that cost on to…you guessed it…you and me. The American Chronicle online has a good article explaining carbon credit trading, the “Trade” part of “Cap and Trade”, entitled “‘Carbon Credit Trading’ is the New ‘Derivatives’ Game”, by Ugur Akinci, Ph.D., May 14, 2007 http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/27045
A carbon credit is basically the right to pollute sold by those less-polluting companies to those who do not, for one reason or another, want to curb their carbon dioxide emissions yet. The prices of these credits probably rely more on the laws passed by legislative bodies in respective parliaments than on net corporate worths, or any classical technical ratios or interest rates.
The market to buy and sell such credits is especially hot in Europe where most countries have signed the U.N. Kyoto Protocol to curb CO2 emissions. The United States as of May 2007 still has not signed the Protocol.
To sell these credits as individual companies, you need to register your energy-saving and carbon-suppressing projects with the United Nations and get U.N. certification. Therefore, the U.S. companies cannot do that yet directly. That’s why London is right now the busy hub of the $25 billion carbon credit trading market where 60% of all transactions take place compared to only 10% in the U.S.
(MY NOTE: Al Gore’s company, Generation Investment Management is based in London (where all the money is flowing) with an office in Washington, D.C. (where he can push legislation in his favor.) This is a fund management company that trades “green” companies. Al Gore uses it to offset his own huge use of carbon fuels. He invests his money in these green companies thinking that he is investing enough in someone else’s effort to be eco-friendly and that will balance his “way out of the norm” use of energy in his mansion in Tennessee. He has two other homes around the country and I bet he flies to them. Maybe he drives a Prius between states? He invests his money in GIM, which then pays him a salary and a return on his investments. His “carbon neutral money scheme” keeps his money revolving from one of his pockets to another of his pockets, picking up more profit along the way. Clever guy, this Al Gore.)
However, the U.S. investors already take part in this new exciting market through various hedge funds that deal in the 200-member Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc.
(MY NOTE: The name ENRON keeps popping into my head. Carbon Credits bought and sold and they are not based on anything, just thin air. They have no concrete value.)
The pressures on Washington to sign the Kyoto Protocol and to participate more directly in the world-wide carbon credit trade comes from major states like California.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed in September 2006 a law that mandates cutting down the CA carbon emissions by 25% as of 2020. This would of course increase the attention paid to CC trading as well since it is a lucrative way to self-finance many alternative energy projects.
(MY NOTE: Just order companies to lower their emissions by a percentage every year and be done with it. Don’t create this new carbon trading industry, in which the people are fleeced andthe government makes billions, as do the promoters of this pyramid scheme. It’s a mass wealth re-distribution scheme that moves money from yours and my bank accounts to the government treasuries and the promoters bank accounts.)
A major development to spur Washington in that direction would be the launching of a carbon credit exchange soon in Beijing, China. I’m sure we are witnessing only the beginning of a brand new trading sector that will make itself felt strongly in the months and years ahead.”
(MY NOTE: By all means, we must keep up with the Jones’ or China.)
You probably get the picture that just like oil, whose price is affected by speculators and traders bidding up the prices, carbon credits will be traded on an exchange and the prices will be bid up as well. The more scarce and the greater the demand for carbon credits, the higher the price will go. And that expense will be passed down to… YOU AND ME AGAIN.
The bottom line for me is that global warming hasn’t been satisfactorily proven yet. It certainly hasn’t been proven that human activities are causing detrimental global warming. And financing this whole scheme is YOU AND ME. If it turns out that the globe is not warming dangerously, but is only experiencing normal cycles OR that humans can’t and don’t cause warming and cannot prevent it, then you and I have been fleeced again by politicans who pushed this into law. Al Gore opened Generation Investments Management to capitalize on global warming and stands to make millions and perhaps billions. He will never allow anyone or anything to interfere with it, not even scientists who can show evidence contrary to Gore’s theory.
THE SENATE AND CONGRESS SHOULD WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE ACCURATE AND CONCRETE EVIDENCE PROVING THAT THE COMPANIES THAT WOULD BE FORCED TO BUY CARBON CREDITS ARE INDEED THE CAUSE.
CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND TELL THEM NOT TO PASS LEGISLATION UNTIL WE HAVE THE PROOF. Remember, Gore’s professor and mentor, Dr. Roger Revelle said repeatedly that “there is no harm in waiting. It is not an imminent threat.” Another Inconvenient Truth for Al Gore and his buddies that hope to profit from this.
There is no more time to do nothing.
Please read all the previous installments and the future installments of which there will be at least five more, perhap six or seven.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )A SHOCKER! – Installment 9 Global Warming/Climate Change
A SHOCKER! – Installment 9 – May 29, 2008 Re-Post
In 1991, Al Gore wrote his book, Earth in the Balance, in which he cites his mentor and former professor, the late Dr. Roger Revelle, a renowned oceanographer and the first to recognize the effects of rising atmospheric CO2 on the earth’s temperature. Gore’s book called for awareness of carbon dioxide emissions into the air and its effects, and drastic changes in society to combat the perceived problem. The book was published in 1992. Gore spoke before Congress and the U.N. expressing his position that the end was only ten years away and measures must be implemented immediately. Gore put his reputation on the line with his global warming alarmist messages.
About the same time that Gore was writing his book, Prof. Revelle was writing a paper for the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) on greenhouse warming with co-authors Dr. Chauncy Star and Dr. S. Fred Singer, which was later presented to the Cosmos Club of Washington, D.C. and published in their monthly journal. According to Dr. Singer, the conclusion was a simple message: “The scientific base for greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time.” These words were almost identical to those written by Dr. Revelle to members of Congress after their hearing on global warming in 1988, which was instigated and chaired by Senator Al Gore.
It is noted that then Sen. Timothy Wirth (D., CO) ignored Revelle’s scientific opinion and joined with Gore in escalating the alarm over Earth’s warming climate. On a PBS “Frontline” special, “Hot Politics”, he explained Gore’s ploy, with Wirth’s help, to set the stage for the hearing. They called the weather station and asked what the hottest day of the year was. When they were told that historically it was June the 6th (or the 9th – Wirth didn’t remember), they scheduled the hearing for that day in June, which turned out to be the hottest day on record for Washington, D.C. Wirth tells that the night before the hearing, they went into the chambers and opened all the windows so that the air conditioners wouldn’t work. It was a set up. During the hearing, people were wiping sweat off their brows. Gore, of course, pushed for immediate legislation to restrict activities that produced CO2 and caused a greenhouse effect. http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDk2YjVlYTYzZjZkNTRhZWU2NGNkNzcw…=
Revelle’s paper in the Cosmos didn’t get much attention right away. It was a year later, when journalist Gregg Easterbrook, contributing editor to Newsweek, referred to it in a piece entitled “Green Cassandras” in the July 6, 1992 issue of the New Republic, and gave it a political slant. He made the allegation that Gore credited Revelle with introducing him to the problem of climate change, but failed to mention that before his death a year earlier, Revelle had published a paper that concluded that “the scientific base for greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time. There is little risk in delaying policy responses.”
Other columnists and editors, including George Will, picked up on this and the contradiction got traction. Just as this embarrassment for Gore was breaking out, he was selected by Bill Clinton to be his running mate in the presidential election of 1992. Gore couldn’t afford the negative press and the controversy, which came up in a vice-presidential debate. Sen. Gore deflected it, charging that Dr. Revelle’s views had been “taken completely out of context.”
In July of 1992, Dr. S. Fred Singer received a phone call from Dr. Justin Lancaster at the Environmental Science and Policy Institute, Harvard University, claiming to be a former associate of Dr. Revelle’s. Lancaster demanded that Singer remove Revelle’s name from the article to be reprinted in the Geyer volume. Aghast at the demand, Singer refused, saying that he could not do that without the author’s permission and the author had died. Also that the copyright belonged to Cosmos.
Lancaster then waged a smear and pressure campaign on Singer to the extent that Singer filed a law suit against him and won! Lancaster took opportunities to say that Dr. Revelle had not really co-authored the piece, then Revelle’s mental capacities were failing at the time. There was evidence to disprove all of the smear tactics engaged in by Lancaster, a fact which he admitted in a legal statement after losing the court battle. During the trial, it was revealed that Al Gore had called Lancaster after Easterbrook’s article came out and asked about Revelle’s mental capabilities and views at the time this paper was written. Lancaster had replied in a letter that Revelle was sharp and these were his stated views.
A member of Gore’s staff, Dr. Anthony D. Socci, tried the same tactics, writing to the Geyer publishers requesting that the Cosmos article be dropped. The “request” was denied. Sadly, Gore was not satisfied with the outcome of Lancaster or Socci’s attempt to squash the inconvenient truth.
http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817939326_283.pdf (direct quote with some abbreviations)
On February 24, 1994, Ted Koppel revealed on his Nightline television program that Vice-President Al Gore had called him and suggested that Mr. Koppel investigate the political and economic forces behind the “anti-environmental” movement. In particular, VP Gore had urged Koppel to expose as fact that several U.S. scientists who had voiced skeptical views about greenhouse warming were receiving financial support from the coal industry and/or groups such as the Lyndon Larouche organizations or Reverend Moon’s Unification Church.
Mr. Koppel didn’t do the VP’s bidding and asked rhetorically, “Is this a case of industry supporting scientists who happen to hold sympathetic views, or scientists adapting their views to accommodate industry?” He closed the show by chastising Gore for trying to use the media to discredit skeptical scientists:
“There is some irony in the fact that Vice-President Gore – one of the most scientifically literate men to sit in the White House in this century – {is} resorting to political means to achieve what should ultimately be resolved on a purely scientific basis. The measure of good science is neither the politics of the scientist nor the people with whom the scientist associates. It is the immersion of hypotheses into the acid of truth. That’s the hard way to do it, but it’s the only way that works.” Ted Koppel
There is no more time to do nothing.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 9 so far )A SHOCKER! – Installment 8 Global Warming/Climate Change
A SHOCKER! – Installment 8 – May 27, 2008 Re-Post
“Not every scientist is part of Al Gore’s mythical consensus. Scientists worried about a new ice age seek funding to better observe something bigger than your SUV – THE SUN!” http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175, Investor’s Business Daily, Editorial, February 7, 2008
The Danish Meteorological Institute released a study, using data that covered centuries, showing that global temperatures closely tracked Solar cycles. This was in 1991 – just about the time Al Gore was beginning to get the word out that the earth was going to burn up from gas emissions produced by man. He had created a slideshow in 1988 about the atmosphere and used it to teach on the subject. It was this slideshow that was the basis for An Inconvenient (and inaccurate) Truth (falsehood).
There was convincing data then, and Canadian scientists want more funding to study global cooling NOW. The Sun impacts Earth’s climate more than anything else. Elementary schools teach kids that our seasons are the result of our closeness to or distance from the Sun. In the past, we’ve been warned of solar storms affecting us with power blackouts, satellite failures and even pipeline explosions.
Gore and the Gaia worshipers pound everyone into submission by stating that “scientists agree” and that it is” scientifically proven”. They use the words “science, scientists, evidence and proven” as incontrovertible. What they don’t say is how many scientists disagree with Gore and have science that disproves the Gore truth. Al Gaia Gore never mentions all the evidence to the contrary. The following website presents a great deal of evidence and studies that cover centuries of data proving that solar activity changes Earth’s climate in cycles. An eleven year cycle is one of the main topics discussed, and yes, by scientists with very respected credentials. It also explains the ozone layer and the holes environmentalists claim are caused by gas emissions and blame for global warming.
http://www.solarstorms.org/SClimate.html
“The most well-documented connection between solar activity and climate change is the Maunder Minimum. This was a 40-year period when extreme cold weather prevailed in Europe. It also coincided with astronomers watching the sun and not seeing many sunspots! Astronomer Jack Eddy pointed this out in the 1970’s, and since then many other sun-climate connections have been looked for and in some cases uncovered.
The sunspot cycle and Boston Weather…. This study by Dave Henry at NOAA is based on 207 years of daily temperature data from Boston. It shows a 0.8 F drop in the average annual temperature near sunspot maximum, a 3-inch difference in the annual average precipitation near sunspot maximum, and a 7-inch increase in annual average snowfall at sunspot maximum.
The sunspot cycle and Annual Precipitation in Beijing.… This article by Juan Zhao and his colleagues at Beijing Normal University was published in the Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics (2004, vol 4 pg 189) and is based on rainfall records from 1870 to 2002. Their wavelet analysis of the rainfall data identifies four periods of 11, 22, 33 and 72 years. The wavelet analysis of the sunspot data for the same period reveals periods of 11, 22, 33 and 78 years.
The sunspot cycle and Extreme Weather over Portugal…. This 2005 study by P.S. Lucio at the Center for Geophysics in Evorea was published in the Geophysical Research Abstracts (vol. 7 p. 129) and is based on cosmic ray and rainfall data from 1901-2000. A statistically significant correlation was found between rainfall and temperature extremes, and cosmic ray fluxes beginning in 1980.
The sunspot cycle and the Global Stratosphere…This study by H. van Loon and K. Labitzke at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NOAA) shows that the heights and temperatures of the lower stratosphere vary in step with the sunspot cycle. It was published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Research (1999, vol. 61 pg. 53) and is an extension of a Northern Hemisphere study that they completed in 1997. The correlation between the sunspot cycle and the zonally averaged temperatures are highest between the tropopause and the 25-km level of the ozone layer.”
The amount of UV from the sun ( specifically UV-B) changes during the sunspot cycle. At sunspot maximum, there is 0.1 % more UV-B radiation than at minimum. Scientists have detected this sunspot cycle-effect in a 2% change in ozone concentrations. For more details see ” Solar Cycle Variability, Ozone, and Climate” by Drew Shindell, David Rind, Nambeth Balachandran, Judith Lean, and Patrick Lonergan in journal Science 1999 284: 305-308.
The difference in total ozone between maximum and minimum conditions during the sunspot cycle were estimated using yearly averages of total ozone. For solar cycle 21, 1.16% and 1.26% for solar cycle 22, a larger difference of 3.8% and 4.1% were found. The corresponding variation in UV-B at 3000 Angstroms, using Beer’s law, is 4-10% with maxima occurring during the minimum of the solar cycle. E. Escher, V. Kirchoff, Y. Sahai and N. Paes Leme published in the Advances in Space Research, Volume 27, Issue 12, p. 1983-1986.
“The correlations between the total column ozone observed by TOMS and the 11-yr sunspot cycle are lowest in the equatorial region, where ozone is produced, and in the subpolar regions, where the largest amounts are found. In the annual mean the highest, statistically significant, correlations lie between the 5° and 30° parallels of latitude in either hemisphere — between the area of production and the areas of plenty. This position of the largest correlations suggests that the association between the Sun and the ozone is not a direct, radiative one, but that it is due to solar induced changes in the transport of ozone, that is, to changes in the atmospheric circulation. The highest tropical-subtropical correlations move with the Sun from summer hemisphere to summer hemisphere. The subtropical geopotential heights in the ozone layer are higher in the peaks than in the valleys of the 11-yr sunspot cycle. It is probable that the higher subtropical geopotentials in solar maxima depress the poleward transport of ozone through the subtropics and therefore create an abundance of ozone in the tropics relative to the solar minima. These results are based on a 15-yr series of ozone observations and may thus not necessarily be representative of a longer period. “ K. Labitzke and H. van Loon published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics V. 59, p. 9-19, 1997
Cosmic rays stream down into Earth’s atmosphere from the sun and elsewhere beyond the solar system. Recent studies show that these particles penetrate into the troposphere and alter the way that droplets condense to form clouds, rain and snow with important weather and climate consequences. Changes in the sun’s ultraviolet light affects the ozone layer and the energy input into the upper atmosphere. As the upper atmosphere is heated, it expands into space causing increased friction for satellites.
There is enough opposing science to bring Gore’s hypothesis into question. It is far too soon in this debate to pass laws changing a free people’s way of life and bringing down the economies of developing nations, not to mention our own here in America.
There is no more time to do nothing.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )CLIMATE-GATE EMAIL SCOUNDRELS WON’T BE PROSECUTED
Phil Jones:
“The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here! … The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick. Leave it to you to delete as appropriate! Cheers Phil
PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !”
The scientists (and I use that term loosely) who hid climate data which refuted the “global warming” theory broke the law, expressly the Freedom of Information Act. However, they will escape prosecution simply because the crime was committed more than six months ago. The crime is part of a conspiracy which will cost citizens of the world billions of dollars and more importantly, their basic freedoms, to satisfy the requirements of climate change laws. The crime of withholding critical information used as a basis for climate change legislation and propaganda truly has an adverse and damaging effect upon all of us. It amounts to a swindle and, to some degree, enslavement. This is no small matter and should not be overlooked. Prosecution must take place and an example must be made of these biased scientists.
It’s important to show others who may be engaging in this practice that they too will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. There’s too much at stake to let this continue. They are lying to the governments of the world, providing false testimony, and benefiting monetarily by receiving research grants to continue what they know to be false.
Americans and citizens of those countries whose leaders are signing on to climate change legislation are victims of a scheme designed to convey power and money to those who have positioned themselves advantageously. The internet is a gold mine of information for those who are willing to look for evidence of this charge. A thorough investigation of the big players, their backgrounds and their business connections will shed light on the scheme. Do your own homework, familiarize yourself with the big players and contact your representatives in Washington, D.C. as well as locally.
THERE IS NO MORE TIME TO DO NOTHING!
Mick Kelly:
“Yeah, it wasn’t so much 1998 and all that that I was concerned about, used to dealing with that, but the possibility that we might be going through a longer – 10 year – period of relatively stable temperatures beyond what you might expect from La Nina etc. Speculation, but if I see this as a possibility then others might also. Anyway, I’ll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again as that’s trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent cold-ish years.”
VISIT:
http://www.nocapandtrade.com/climategate/
FOR INFORMATION REGARDING THE SCIENTISTS INVOLVED, THEIR TITLES AND THE CONTENTS OF THE EMAILS.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
A SHOCKER! – Installment 7 Global Warming/Climate Change
A SHOCKER! – Installment 7 – May 25, 2008 A Re-Post
From the website: http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
Comments in red are mine.
Newsweek, The Cooling World, April 28, 1975
There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.
Where have we heard this before? in only 10 years. Al Gore says that we have only 10 years to save the planet, to avoid catastrophy, to save the oceans, to avoid passing the point of no return, to save our lives.
The terms used in the 1975 article are “ominous, dramatically, drastic, serious, every nation.” We’re hearing the same urgency in today’s warnings of global warming as was trumpeted in 1975 about global cooling.
The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.
Like Gore and his crowd today, the voices in ’75 claimed to have piles of evidence to prove their predictions. Yet, no calamaties befell Earth. No ice age. No cooling disasters occurred. Still using urgent words, such as “massively, drought, desolation, devastating.” Scientists were among the incorrect crowd, like today. The claim was made that a very small climate change caused death and destruction, and yet, it didn’t.
To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”
The revered National Academy of Sciences was wrong. We know that now. They are wrong again about global warming.
A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.
To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.
Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”
Meteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies.
“The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines.
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult they will find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
—PETER GWYNNE with bureau reports
Thank goodness the government was unwilling to take drastic actions to prevent global cooling. The harm they would have caused would have been unnecessary and difficult to recover from. Today, the governments of the world are already taking steps to “prevent global warming.” The harm they will do may take decades to recover from, if then.
Plans to change our sovereignty, national borders, business practices, individual freedoms, laws and enforcement, transportation, even our religious beliefs, are already being crafted and eased into our daily lives. Some truly scary ideas have been put on the table for altering Earth’s atmosphere to head off the perceived warming trend. If they are successful, climate change will occurr by the hands of people who don’t know what they’re doing.
There is no more time to do nothing!
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Climate Change Summit Breaking News!
As limosine liberals jet in to Copenhagen from all over the world to spend a few nights in $1,000+ hotel rooms, eat lavish cuisine and be chauffeured around in limos brought in from over 200 miles away to meet the demand, the temperature and snow is falling at record levels! (I admit that I prayed for the world’s worst winter storm – a blizzard of record levels piling up snow so deep that these crooks are stuck in their hotels for days – to smother Copenhagen for weeks. God just may be answering my prayer in the affirmative. Perhaps He knows something the libs, socialists, Marxists and dictators don’t. In fact, I’m certain He DOES.)
The WeatherNetwork at http://www.theweathernetwork.com/index.php?product=weather&placecode=daxx0009&switchto=f is reporting 20 degrees F. with wind chill of -12 degrees (feels like).
Weather Forecast: Copenhagen, Denmark
Weather Warning
Current Weather Updated: Thursday, December 17, 2009, 18:00 CST – Copenhagen
20°F Whether it snows or not isn’t important. That only measures the amount of moisture in the air. The temperature is unusually cold for Copenhagen. Their average is 32-35 degrees F. Even the hot air being spewed by all the global warming enthusiasts can’t raise the temps enough to support their cause. That’s because they’re wrong – totally. While some blindly accept the concept, others are in it for the money. These are the people we need to defeat. It’s our money they’re after.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )A SHOCKER! Climate News Update
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html
Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out, By Gerald Traufetter
“Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium, and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.”
“Ironically, climate change appears to have stalled in the run-up to the upcoming world summit in the Danish capital, where thousands of politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, business leaders and environmental activists plan to negotiate a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Billions of euros are at stake in the negotiations.”
This is a very inconvenient truth for the Gore/Gaia/GE/Obama crowd who expect to become billionaires from forcing legislation on this. The computer models were wrong. Gore was wrong. We didn’t die in ten years and we’re not going to die in the next ten years. The sincere chicken littles were duped and don’t need to run for cover.
Yet, there are still those politicians who intend to force this down our throats and clean out our bank accounts, while they remove our freedoms ten at a time. Do everything you can to stop this. Contact your elected officials today.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )A SHOCKER! – Installment 6 Global Warming/Climate Change
A SHOCKER! – Installment 6 – May 23, 2008 – RE-POST
http://www.arkofhope.org/ Please visit this site.
Called “The Ark of Hope”, containing the Earth Charter (a revised edition by Maurice Strong and written on handmade papyrus), Temenos Books (temenos: a magical sacred circle where special rules apply and extraordinary events inevitably occur. Temenos book: a handmade book filled with pages of visual prayers/affirmations for global healing, peace and gratitude) and Temenos Earth Masks worn and made by children with Earth’s elements ( leaves, pebbles, feathers, paints, scraps of paper).
This wooden box was deliberately fashioned after the Ark of the Covenant in the Bible which contained the Ten Commandments, Aaron’s rod that budded and a golden pot of Manna from Heaven. God’s Ark was born by two poles overlaid with gold and the Gaia ark is carried by two poles referred to as unicorn horns. God’s ark resided in the Holy of Holies in the Temple.
Gaia’s ark has been carried to many places in the world for ceremonies, usually on Earth Day, but its overseers hope its final resting place will someday be the meditation room in the United Nations Building. The greatest difference between the two arks is that God’s Presence was manifested upon His ark and Gaia’s ark is made of dead wood and no power is discernable. The Golden Ark of the Bible represents a covenant with God Almighty, Creator of the Universe, while Gaia’s ark is a symbol of defiance of that God and directs all to worship the creation rather than the Creator. The Ark of Hope is based on man’s hope that he can “fix” everything in the world by his own power.
Political correctness has outlawed the teaching of anything Christian in American schools, but it’s critical to note that Gaia, presented as environmentalism, is being taught in our schools and universities at all grade levels. Notice that children are used to make the temenos books and masks and figures of children are painted on the side of the ark of Gaia. Brainwashing humans from birth is the plan for spreading Gaia worship throughout the planet without using force or violence.
http://www.mettaearth.org/articles_ark.php4
Metta Earth Institute, A Center for Contemplative Ecology
“Toward a Sustainable World: The Earth Charter in Action,” by Cameron Davis and Sally Linder
Teachers from Indiana, USA to Johannesburg, South Africa embraced the project as a means to relate their curriculums to a global expression of sustainability and non-violence. One Temenos Book’s accordion pages unfold in long trains of painted oceans and jungles teeming with endangered species; another has paintings of trees watered by clouds while birds fly amongst sari, chador, and jean clad children skipping rope. Its last page displays a huge hand touching big red lips with the caption, “Let Our Smiles Touch One Another.” Crafting hand-dyed felt covered books, 900 children in one Vermont school witnessed their connection with farmers, sheep, wool, vegetables, and the world community. Older students added another link by using their Temenos Books to educate local governments about the Earth Charter; encouraging its endorsement by twenty-two Vermont towns. University students unleashed their own creative ways to introduce the Earth Charter; beating drums, wearing costumes, and zooming into schools and cafes on roller blades.
Connect the dots: Earth Charter, temenos books, in our schools and local governments. This is NOT just “take care of our planet”. This is FULL BLOWN GAIA PAGAN IDOL WORSHIP disguised as environmentalism because its adherents know that people will not put up with replacing their own religious beliefs in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, atheism or political correctness. However, Buddism and Hinduism is embracing Gaia worship.
Maurice Strong has said, “The real goal of the Earth Charter is that it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments.”
And, The Los Angeles Times, May 8, 1997
“Do not do unto the environment of others what you do not want done to your own environment…My hope is that this charter will be a kind of Ten Commandments, a ‘Sermon on the Mount’, that provides a guide for human behavior toward the environment in the next century.” Mikhail Gorbachev.
He also said, “Cosmos is my God. Nature is my God.” PBS Charlie Rose Show, October 23, 1996
There is no more time to do nothing.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )A SHOCKER! – Installment 5 Global Warming/Climate Change Follow Up
A SHOCKER! – Follow up for Installment 5 – May 22, 2008 RE-POST
The links in this article won’t work because I transferred this article from its original location on the website of Investor’s Business Daily. Please visit http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=295139326448571
The emphasis is mine.
This is information everyone should be armed with when facing the United Nations’ onslaught of heavy legislation designed to bring every citizen in the world (and I mean the whole world and so do they) under submission to their Gaia Agenda 21 to save goddess Mother Earth from the harm perpetrated by human activities.
Al Gore And Climate Ka-ChingBy INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, May 08, 2008 4:20 PM PT Junk Science: Al Gore blames the Burma tragedy on global warming despite growing evidence to the contrary. Could the hype be related to his financial interests? Read More: Global Warming Gore’s reaction to the death and destruction caused by a cyclone ravaging Burma was to utter an emphatic “I told you so” Tuesday on National Public Radio. In an interview on NPR’s “Fresh Air” broadcast, the jolly green giant made the charge while talking about the paperback release of his ironically named book, “The Assault on Reason.”Ignoring the fact that the rising death toll is due in part to an incompetent, isolationist and authoritarian government that allows most of its people to live in shanty towns of tin and bamboo, Gore claimed that “we’re seeing consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming.”In other words, people die in Rangoon because of an SUV in Richmond, Va. There’s a “trend toward more Category 5 storms,” Gore claimed, and this trend “appears to be linked to global warming and specifically to the impact of global warming on higher ocean temperatures in the top couple of hundred feet in the ocean, which drives convection energy and moisture into these storms and makes them more powerful.” Except, as we recently noted, the trend in the world’s oceans — as shown by measurements taken by a fleet of 3,000 high-tech ocean buoys first deployed in 2003 — is toward cooling. As Dr. Josh Willis, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, noted in a separate interview with National Public Radio, “there has been a very slight cooling” over the buoys’ five years of observation. As Joseph D’Aleo, the Weather Channel’s first director of meteorology, told National Review Online’s Deroy Murdock that the slight warming trend “peaked in 1998, and the temperature trend the last decade has been flat, even as CO2 has increased 5.5%. Cooling began in 2002.” He added: “Ocean buoys have echoed that slight cooling since the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration deployed them in 2003.” In fact, Ryan Maue of Florida State University’s Center for Ocean-Atmosphere Prediction Studies says 2007 “will rank as a historically inactive tropical cyclone year for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole.” It was! In the past 30 years, Maue adds, only 1977 had less hurricane activity from January through October. Last September had the lowest activity since 1977 while the Octobers of 2006 and 2007 had the lowest activity since 1976 and 1977, respectively. So why the hype? Well, global warming is a growth industry designed to keep Earth and some bank accounts green. Gore himself joined the venture capital group, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers just last September. On May 1, the firm announced a $500 million investment in maturing green technology firms called the Green Growth Fund. The group announced another $700 million to be invested over the next three years in green-tech startup firms. But if the green technology business, uh, cools down, there will be no return on that investment. There would be no need for such investments if global warming wasn’t a threat. So Gore just launched, among other things, a $300 million ad campaign to convince us it is so. Speaking at a conference in Monterey, Calif., on March 1, the former vice president admitted to having “a stake” in a number of green investments into which he recommended attendees put money rather than “subprime carbon assets” such as tar sands and shale oil. He also is co-founder and chairman of Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offsets that allow rich polluters to continue polluting with a clear conscience. We have a prediction all our own — that disastrous global warming will not occur. Then the greenies will take credit for preventing it and ask us if we’re glad we spent trillions in fighting it. Al Gore will be laughing all the way to the bank. |
There is no more time to do nothing.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
A SHOCKER! – Installment 5 Global Warming/Climate Change
A SHOCKER! – Installment 5 – May 20, 2008 Re-Post
Sustainability results in Blood and Gore!
Or does Blood and Gore create a crisis, promote hysteria and then devise a “solution” that puts mutiple millions of dollars in their personal bank accounts?
Former Vice President Al Gore and business partner, former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, have founded an investment firm, Generation Investment Management, LLP, with offices in London and Washington, D.C.
Gore is the chairman, flying around the globe hyping global warming, essentially generating customers for his firm. Maybe that’s why he named it “Generation” Investment Mgmt. He’s also chairman of the advisory board. (? He advises himself?) Blood manages the daily operations and who better than the former CEO of Goldman Sachs. With Gore’s ties to the U.S. government and the United Nations and an office in D.C., he has virtually unlimited opportunities to make a buck (or millions of bucks.)
Their scheme is to convince the world that life as we know it will be history in ten years. Therefore, all companies, governments and individuals MUST fight climate change no matter the cost, sacrifice or “INCONVENIENCE”! The TRUTH is that climate change fluctuates and is cyclical. There are enough scientists who now say that there will not be a significant warming, but in fact, the reverse is true. Earth temps are beginning to cool. The dreadful one degree rise in temperature did little to jeopardize our well-being or upset Earth’s balance, but to hear Gore in front of a microphone, Chicken Little was ahead of his time.
With approximately $1 billion from institutional investors, Generation Investments Mgmt. combines traditional securities analysis with thematic research into issues such as climate change, water, global poverty, and HIV/AIDS. Every one of these “issues” comes straight from the United Nations’ Agenda 21.
“Sustainability, defined as environment, social, governance and ethics, matters to business. It’s not only about risk management or cost, but about revenue, profit and competitive positioning.” says David Blood.
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4DKUS_enUS221U… for further research.
Their holdings include General Electric who stands to make a fortune when the new government lighting efficiency standards take effect, edging out incandescent and substituting GE’s compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL). But don’t be fooled. While fluorescents burn longer, they are not friendlier to the environment. How will millions of light bulbs containing mercury be safely disposed of?
Sufficiently persuaded that climate change is real, loss of habitat for animals is increasing, species are lost and more are in peril of extinction, and the biggie, over-population of people on the planet, we will bow without resistance to whatever the United Nations and our national governments deem necessary, even the micr0-management of our day-to-day living. (which doesn’t resemble freedom in any way)
Gore and Blood will be standing ready to take investors money and put it into all the companies scrambling to comply with the UN mandates for sustainable development. There are also plans to build sustainable cities, and they will patronize companies capitalizing on sustainability products and methods. Gore and Blood have strategies for getting a piece of that pie, as well.
Gore was criticized for the extravagant energy consumption of his Nashville, TN mansion, which consumed an enormous 191,000 KW hours in 2006, far exceeding what the average home uses. What could he do? Tear it down and start over? No need. He simply plays “slight of hand”, “robbing Peter to pay Paul”. In his shell game, according to his image protectors, he “offsets” his luxurious and very “CONVENIENT” lifestyle by purchasing carbon “offsets” to “offset” the Gores’ carbon footprint. What does that mean? What green power does he purchase? According to an article in USAToday Online, Gore’s office put out this statement:
“Gore’s family has taken numerous steps to reduce the carbon footprint of their private residence, including signing up for 100% green power through Green Power Switch, installing solar panels, and using compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy saving technology.” (I wonder where those bulbs came from?)
Green Power Switch is sold to residential consumers in 150-kilowatt-hour blocks, about 12% of a typical household’s monthly energy use. However, Gore’s is not a typical household account. Gore gets his power from the Tennessee Valley Authority, which produces most of its power from coal-burning power plants. Most of the power used by the Gores comes from carbon-emitting sources. If he really believes that we only have ten years left, why doesn’t he cut his consumption and emissions in some serious way for the sake of his children? (I believe he knows it’s all a money-making farce which also elevates him to an elite and powerful position on the world stage, i.e. academy award, Nobel prize, VIP.)
“Gore has had a consistent position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — .”
A carbon offset, according to Wikipedia, is a service that tries to reduce the net carbon emissions of individuals or organizations indirectly, through proxies who reduce their emissions and/or increase their absorption of greenhouse gases.”
In other words, Gore continues his lavish lifestyle and pays money to someone else who is making changes to reduce their consumption and/or emissions. He’s got the money to keep on trucking while someone else works to become more efficient and cleaner. He simply buys into their progress. The spin is that this creates a carbon neutral situation for Gore. How so? Gore still consumes as much and someone else still reduces, which they would have done regardless of what Gore does. Gore is still part of the conceived problem. In reality, Gore’s consumption cancels out the reduction of someone else.
Bottom line: Do as Gore says, not as he does. Gore has the money to buy carbon credits and continue his comfortable lifestyle and maybe you don’t. So you feel the inconvenience of having to comply with all the new “world sustainability laws” and Gore doesn’t. AND, IF GORE REALLY BELIEVES THE WORLD WILL END AS WE KNOW IT IN A FEW SHORT YEARS, WHY ISN’T HE DOING EVERYTHING HE POSSIBLY CAN TO CONSERVE?
But wait. It’s gets better. Where does Al Gore buy his carbon credits? Why, from Generation Investments Management, of course. And who owns that company? Al Gore. Who makes a profit from the investments? Al Gore. Who gets paid a salary as chairman of the board of AIM? Al Gore. Soooo, just maybe he’s getting back every dollar he spends on carbon credits? It’s a shell game. Moving his money from one of his bank accounts to another and picking up a ton of profit along the way. Are you getting that same advantage? I doubt it.
It’s true that Gore’s home was retrofitted with solar panels and CFL’s. Perhaps we should investigate how the money to pay for that was acquired.
By the way, Gore has three homes and we’ve only looked at one.
How should the average citizen view this? Gore is still using just as much power as before, but he is still calling for you to cut back, make sacrifices and change your lifestyle to one that is inconvenient.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )« Previous Entries
Marbie's Blog 
