Ext User(B0NZ0)
17-04-2008, 11:10 AM
The Hidden Agenda For Global Governance
Alan Caruba
December 16, 2007
http://howardwasright.com/index.php/more/3120
I have been witness to the complete subversion of science in the service
of an utterly corrupt new religion called environmentalism.
In the Middle Ages the Church determined what "truth" was. Today the
Green Church seeks the same power. From the fall of the Roman Empire in
the 5th century to the beginning of the Renaissance in the 15th century,
civilization experienced a period of ignorance and superstition.
Globally, via the media and the classroom, a distorted and debased
science is being used to advance the fraud of global warming.
The challenge is to say "no" when everyone else is saying "yes" to
global warming.
There is no dramatic warming of the earth. There is no indication of a
near-future warming. Carbon dioxide (CO2) plays such a minimal role in
the atmosphere that an increase would have no effect beyond the very
beneficial boost in the growth of forests, crops, and everything else
that is truly green. Indeed, climatologists will tell you that CO2
increases follow, not precede, warming cycles. They are not a trigger.
They are a response.
During the United Nations' Bali climate conference, a hundred prominent
international scientists released an open letter warning that any
attempt to control the Earth's climate is "ultimately futile" and would
constitute "a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better
spent on humanity's real and pressing problems."
"It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that
has affected humanity through the ages." The notion that mankind has any
impact on climate or weather is absurd.
In November, in Valencia, Spain, delegates from more than 140 nations
agreed to what they and the media echo chamber that disseminates the
global warming lie, called "an 'instant guide' for policy makers stating
more forcefully than ever that climate change has begun and threatens to
irreversibly alter the planet."
A science that can barely predict the weather next week is being
perverted for purely political purposes.
Having followed the IPCC since its inception and the environmental
movement in general for decades, I can tell you that what we are hearing
is a shrill message of desperation coming from those who fear that
people around the world may yet reject the global warming lie. An
Associated Press report said that the draft and coming IPCC report "is
intended to launch a political process on international cooperation to
control global warming."
How do you control something that is not happening?
Why is everything the IPCC proposes lead to "cap and trade" laws that
would impose limits on carbon dioxide emissions, something that reflects
human activity, from exhaling to the making of steel, the harvesting of
crops, the heating of one's home, and virtually all forms transportation
except bicycles.
Why do all of the proposed controls aim at crippling the industrial
advances that underwrite the success of Western nations in particular
and improvement of human civilization everywhere?
In Bali, there are voices calling for a global "carbon tax." It would be
collected by the United Nations and we know how well they handle such
funding. The Oil-for-Food fiasco is but one example. The funding of the
Bali conference is another.
Wouldn't limits put on the United States and European nations be
instantly cancelled by emissions from nations such as China and India
that are exempt from the Kyoto agreement? The answer, of course, is yes.
Doesn't the failure of the current agreement and the billions in fines
it portends for signature nations suggest still more failure?
Despite this, there is legislation making its way through the U.S.
Congress that would impose cap-and-trade limits on every industry and
business in America. At a time when the U.S. dollar is falling in value
and our national deficit has skyrocketed, why would Congress even
consider anything that would harm the economic engine of the nation?
This is, however, the same U.S. Congress that refuses to permit
exploration and access to our national energy reserves, leaving us
dependent on imported oil and natural gas while at the same time calling
for "energy independence."
If I were to devise a plan to destroy the greatest economy, creator of
wealth, center of innovation, and exemplar of individual liberty that
has ever existed in human history, I would patiently create fear of a
global disaster involving the one thing over which humans never had and
never will have control, the earth's climate. I would then propose a
"solution" that would cost that economy billions in "carbon credits" to
keep it from occurring.
What the former Soviet Union and its failed Communist system could not
achieve in some 45 years of the Cold War, the environmental movement is
seeking to achieve in its place. By undermining the economy of the
United States and Western nations with draconian limits on CO2
emissions, those behind this effort will create a world ripe for a
single ruling government composed of unelected bureaucrats whose only
purpose will be to feed at its trough.
The single greatest determinant of the Earth's climate, the Sun, will
continue to shine, but the world will be plunged yet again into the
darkness of ignorance and submission to the false religion of
environmentalism if the global warming lie succeeds.
--
Get The TRUE Facts At
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html
Excellent Links At
http://www.warwickhughes.com/
Regards
Bonzo
"If the atmosphere was a 100 story building, our annual anthropogenic
CO2
contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first
floor"
D'Aleo
"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences
"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen
[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen
Alan Caruba
December 16, 2007
http://howardwasright.com/index.php/more/3120
I have been witness to the complete subversion of science in the service
of an utterly corrupt new religion called environmentalism.
In the Middle Ages the Church determined what "truth" was. Today the
Green Church seeks the same power. From the fall of the Roman Empire in
the 5th century to the beginning of the Renaissance in the 15th century,
civilization experienced a period of ignorance and superstition.
Globally, via the media and the classroom, a distorted and debased
science is being used to advance the fraud of global warming.
The challenge is to say "no" when everyone else is saying "yes" to
global warming.
There is no dramatic warming of the earth. There is no indication of a
near-future warming. Carbon dioxide (CO2) plays such a minimal role in
the atmosphere that an increase would have no effect beyond the very
beneficial boost in the growth of forests, crops, and everything else
that is truly green. Indeed, climatologists will tell you that CO2
increases follow, not precede, warming cycles. They are not a trigger.
They are a response.
During the United Nations' Bali climate conference, a hundred prominent
international scientists released an open letter warning that any
attempt to control the Earth's climate is "ultimately futile" and would
constitute "a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better
spent on humanity's real and pressing problems."
"It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that
has affected humanity through the ages." The notion that mankind has any
impact on climate or weather is absurd.
In November, in Valencia, Spain, delegates from more than 140 nations
agreed to what they and the media echo chamber that disseminates the
global warming lie, called "an 'instant guide' for policy makers stating
more forcefully than ever that climate change has begun and threatens to
irreversibly alter the planet."
A science that can barely predict the weather next week is being
perverted for purely political purposes.
Having followed the IPCC since its inception and the environmental
movement in general for decades, I can tell you that what we are hearing
is a shrill message of desperation coming from those who fear that
people around the world may yet reject the global warming lie. An
Associated Press report said that the draft and coming IPCC report "is
intended to launch a political process on international cooperation to
control global warming."
How do you control something that is not happening?
Why is everything the IPCC proposes lead to "cap and trade" laws that
would impose limits on carbon dioxide emissions, something that reflects
human activity, from exhaling to the making of steel, the harvesting of
crops, the heating of one's home, and virtually all forms transportation
except bicycles.
Why do all of the proposed controls aim at crippling the industrial
advances that underwrite the success of Western nations in particular
and improvement of human civilization everywhere?
In Bali, there are voices calling for a global "carbon tax." It would be
collected by the United Nations and we know how well they handle such
funding. The Oil-for-Food fiasco is but one example. The funding of the
Bali conference is another.
Wouldn't limits put on the United States and European nations be
instantly cancelled by emissions from nations such as China and India
that are exempt from the Kyoto agreement? The answer, of course, is yes.
Doesn't the failure of the current agreement and the billions in fines
it portends for signature nations suggest still more failure?
Despite this, there is legislation making its way through the U.S.
Congress that would impose cap-and-trade limits on every industry and
business in America. At a time when the U.S. dollar is falling in value
and our national deficit has skyrocketed, why would Congress even
consider anything that would harm the economic engine of the nation?
This is, however, the same U.S. Congress that refuses to permit
exploration and access to our national energy reserves, leaving us
dependent on imported oil and natural gas while at the same time calling
for "energy independence."
If I were to devise a plan to destroy the greatest economy, creator of
wealth, center of innovation, and exemplar of individual liberty that
has ever existed in human history, I would patiently create fear of a
global disaster involving the one thing over which humans never had and
never will have control, the earth's climate. I would then propose a
"solution" that would cost that economy billions in "carbon credits" to
keep it from occurring.
What the former Soviet Union and its failed Communist system could not
achieve in some 45 years of the Cold War, the environmental movement is
seeking to achieve in its place. By undermining the economy of the
United States and Western nations with draconian limits on CO2
emissions, those behind this effort will create a world ripe for a
single ruling government composed of unelected bureaucrats whose only
purpose will be to feed at its trough.
The single greatest determinant of the Earth's climate, the Sun, will
continue to shine, but the world will be plunged yet again into the
darkness of ignorance and submission to the false religion of
environmentalism if the global warming lie succeeds.
--
Get The TRUE Facts At
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html
Excellent Links At
http://www.warwickhughes.com/
Regards
Bonzo
"If the atmosphere was a 100 story building, our annual anthropogenic
CO2
contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first
floor"
D'Aleo
"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences
"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen
[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen