You be the Judge! Read & Watch the Evidence!
Filed Under Climate Change, Environment, Radical Greens, Government, General
Forget God’s balancing acts such as earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes and seasonal droughts; these tremors of incidental human suffering will pale into insignificance hidden by the all encompassing shadow of the UN sanctioned Climate Change actions which will cause the demise of tens of millions of souls, along with the enforced slave like subservience of billions more, just so an elite few in global terms, will not just live like Lords, but will in fact be your Lords, and MASTERS
I have regularly said in my writings that the growth of expert opinion speaking out against this Y2K scam called “man made CO2 climate change” which is being pushed by the likes of Al Gore and his dangerous sycophantic followers, is a voice that is becoming exponentially larger, by the day.
Well those statements of mine are now more than well supported by the reporting of the US scientific world starting to seriously galvanise into one colossus of previously silent, but now loudly and publicly vocal, scientific, “anti global warming” cacophony. As I study all that I am able to in the time that I have, I fortify in my mind and hopefully yours out there, of the very fact that man induced CO2 climate change is not just a scam of immense proportions being perpetrated upon the globes poorest masses, but is in fact a pathway of UN sanctioning and legalisation, of a genocidal action that future generations will forever be left to deal with.
Global Warming’s New ‘Consensus’ There’s a new global warming consensus in town. It’s too bad the once-level-headed, but now chicken-hearted Bush Administration has already skedaddled, perhaps leaving our standard of living at the mercy of Barack Obama and his high regard for the international hate-America crowd. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine announced this week that 31,072 U.S. scientists signed a petition stating that “… There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate…” Eminent theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson is among the many distinguished signatories. The OISM petition represents a direct challenge to the Al Gore-touted notion that a consensus of scientists has determined that catastrophic manmade global warming is real and that any debate over the science is pointless. You might think that the Bush administration — which has been viciously attacked by Al Gore and the Greens for pulling the U.S. out of the Kyoto Protocol and being generally skeptical of the science underlying global warming alarmism — would have embraced the new petition as support for its resistance to mandatory greenhouse gas emission caps. But you’d be wrong. When given the chance to embrace vindication at a White House press briefing this week, deputy press secretary Dana Perino couldn’t run away fast enough. A White House reporter asked Perino: “WorldNetDaily reports that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists, including 9,000 PhDs, now signed a petition rejecting global warming, the assumption that human production of greenhouse gases is damaging the Earth’s climate. My question: What is the White House reaction to these 31,000 scientists?” While Perino could have responded with something akin to either “Yes, we know about the petition and we’re looking into it” or “No, we didn’t know about the petition but we will certainly look into it,” she instead dismissed the question with an abrupt, “I would say that everyone is entitled to their opinion. What’s your next question?” When the reporter tried to follow-up with “That’s all?”, Perino seemed to insist on remaining oblivious to the petition and its import by stating, “That’s all I’m going to say.” (See YouTube video) Well, at least Perino didn’t pull an ‘Al Gore’ and label Dyson and the other 31,071 scientist-signatories as members of the Flat Earth Society. In Perino’s defense, one might say that it is reasonable to disregard such petitions since science is about what is known or what can be proved about the natural world through systematic investigation, rather than the number of scientists who are willing to publicly commit to a particular opinion. On the other hand, global warming alarmism has been marketed to the public on the basis of the latter rather than the former. We’ve been told that there’s a “consensus” of scientists — most often exemplified by the group of scientists working under the auspices of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — that agrees manmade greenhouse gas emissions are or will wreak havoc on the climate. Although dispute exists over whether there is, in fact, an actual consensus within the IPCC, head counts of scientists seem to be the name of the global warming game. Since that is the case, the 31,000 scientist signatories assembled by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, would seem to trump the six hundred or so in the alleged IPCC consensus. Sadly, the White House has taken such a beating over the years on climate that facts no longer matter. As further evidence of its shell-shocked state of fact avoidance, just last week the Bush Administration announced that it was listing the polar bear as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act — even though there are many more polar bears today than 40 years ago and predictions of the bear’s demise are entirely based on politically-inspired speculation. The fact of the 31,000 scientists should matter to the White House, however, given what likely Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said this week. In a campaign stop in Oregon, Obama called for the U.S. to “lead by example” on global warming. “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK… That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen,” he said. A President Obama would apparently decide how to regulate the pantries, thermostats and modes of personal transportation of his fellow Americans based on the emotional temperature of every non-American who happens to harbor an opinion on how we should live. And although Republican presidential hopeful John McCain hasn’t been as blunt as Obama with respect to rolling back the American lifestyle, as reported in this column last week, he’s been drinking from the same batch of Green Kool-Aid. Sadly, the initial response from the Bush Administration to relevant new facts that could prevent the imminent Obama-McCain attack on our standard of living seems to be, “See no consensus, hear no consensus, speak no consensus.”
By Steven Milloy
May 22, 2008
Weather Channel Founder Wants to Sue Al Gore
John Coleman wants to sue Al Gore for fraud. Coleman, who founded the Weather Channel in 1982, thinks taking legal action against Al Gore would be a great "vehicle to finally put some light on the fraud of global warming." Coleman rejects the notion that people must take drastic actions to reduce their energy use.
<http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx>
Speaking at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change <http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/newyork08.cfm> on Monday, Coleman sharply chastised those who further global warming alarmism. Coleman believes that the station he founded has been captured by alarmists, such as the Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen, who has advocated revoking the license of meteorologists <http://climate.weather.com/blog/9_11396.html> that believe global warming can be explained by cyclical weather patterns and not human activity.
The majority of the scientific community seems to agree that humans are contributing to climate change. Do you think there's any merit to raising concerns about global alarmism? Would a lawsuit against Al Gore help the public determine fact from fiction?
<http://www.citizensugar.com/1093812>
4 hours 14 min ago by LibertySugar
<http://www.citizensugar.com/user/LibertySugar>
8,978 Views - 67 comments <http://www.citizensugar.com/1093812#comments>
************************************************
Man Made Global Warming is Bullish (part 1 of 9) Man Made Global Warming is Bullish (part 2 of 9)
The Man-made Global Warming Hoax (Part 1 of 8 ) The Man-made Global Warming Hoax (Part 2 of 8)
The Great Global Warming Swindle Global Warming - Every Breath You Take
*************************************************
Global warming to take a cold shower in
25 Feb 2008
The Carbon Sense Coalition (“Carbon Sense”) based in
This conference, sponsored by The Heartland Institute of Chicago, is co-sponsored by 19 other organisations all over the world including the Carbon Sense Coalition.
The Conference will feature internationally recognised speakers from
For more information on the Conference see:
http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/newyork08.cfm
The chairman Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that this conference would highlight the fact that a large number of eminently qualified scientists all over the world are rejecting the IPCC proposition that human emissions of carbon dioxide have caused or will cause dangerous global warming.
“We compliment Professor Garnaut for acknowledging that the science is not settled and for seeing value in expanding the global scientific effort beyond the IPCC. We urge Professor Garnaut, and Ministers Wong and Garret to attend the
According to Forbes, “Global warming hysteria will take a cold shower in
A copy of the submission by Carbon Sense to the Garnaut Review can be found at:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/garnaut-submission.pdf
“There is definitely no “consensus” on man-made global warming even if this were relevant to determining a question of science. In fact, far more scientists have openly rejected the IPCC propositions than are publicly supporting it.”
“The Carbon Sense Coalition, supported by the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition and other groups and individuals in Australia and New Zealand, recently called on the governments of Australia and New Zealand to set up an Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on the Science of Global Warming (to be known as “The ANZIG Royal Commission” – the Australia New Zealand Inquiry into Global Warming). We strongly believe that establishment of this enquiry should be a recommendation of the Garnaut Review.”
The submission by the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition to the New Zealand Parliament in 2006, calling for a Royal Commission can be found at: http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=205&itemid=1
“The interim report released recently by Professor Garnaut makes it more urgent that this independent scientific enquiry should take place.”
“Garnaut’s proposal that
“These people have already brainwashed our children into a state of fear about the future, now Garnaut will guarantee them lives of shortages and poverty. Without coal and oil the world could not maintain the world population, or produce and transport its food.”
“Coal fuelled the British Industrial Revolution, and coal-fired electricity cleaned the air of last century’s polluted cities in Europe and
“There is loose talk about how we can simply replace coal by non-carbon sources such as uranium, hydro, wind, solar, bio-energy or hydrogen.
“Of these, only nuclear power has the proven capacity to replace coal, but to do so would require more time, more capital, less political hurdles and cheaper supplies of uranium than are in prospect. There is almost zero prospect that
“Hydro is a good reliable source of energy, but all the best sites are taken or sterilised by World Heritage disease.”
“Gas can generate significant power, but it is enormously wasteful to use gas for base load power. Gas should be used for peak power, for standby power for solar or wind energy toys, for transport fuel to reduce our dependence on unstable Arab supplies and as a chemical feedstock. It is too valuable to be wasted on base load power generation.”
“Hydrogen does not occur naturally, and is thus not a source of energy – it can be used to store and transport energy if the considerable engineering and economic hurdles are overcome.”
“Nowhere in the world is wind or solar energy contributing significant base load energy for the simple reason that it is impossible. Neither can supply energy continuously and both supply ZERO power for significant parts of their operating cycle. Both must be supplemented by conventional power sources (such as gas or hydro) ready to start up instantly the wind drops or a cloud passes in front of the sun. Such backup power needs to be the same capacity as the solar/wind facility, thus doubling total generating capacity and making this option an expensive, unstable and wasteful exercise.
“Wind power is useful for pumping water to storage ponds for other use, and solar is useful for heating and storing domestic hot water. Beyond these applications, they will never survive without costly subsidies or mandated shares. No one runs a big city or a steel works solely on solar or wind.”
“The only efficient way to harvest the sun’s energy is to use plants such as grass, trees and algae. However, “Biofuel” is a costly con which does more harm than good to energy supplies, energy costs and the environment.”
Ends
984 words
Authorised by:
Viv Forbes, BScApp, FAusIMM, FSIA
Chairman
The Carbon Sense Coalition
MS 23
Rosewood Qld
0754 640 533
www.carbon-sense.com
info@carbon-sense.com
**************************************************
Glenn Beck and NewsBusters Expose Global Warming Bullies
