Donna LaFromboise, William Kay and others have exposed environmentalists and the IPCC global warming scam. These “scientists” cited their own unpublished and non-peer reviewed ‘research’, and acted as their own ‘editors.’ It has become clear that the biggest ‘carbon bomb’ is disinformation.
And look out if you publicly disagree with AGW! SLAPP suit coming your way to silence you – Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.
Disinformation and public myth-making has left people believing that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant. Or that carbon dioxide exists in overwhelming volume.
Carbon dioxide is a trace gas in the air – an essential one for all of life at that.
In a June 2011 letter to the American Meteorological Society, Professor Emeritus Bill Gray, U of Colorado, AMS Fellow and member for over 50 years decries the hijacking of the AMS on the global warming mythology.
He points out that the modelers have misinterpreted the water feedback loop in the upper troposphere, assuming that a nominal increase in CO2 would cause a large increase in water vapour; that they have mishandled rainfall processes and that they “… lack an understanding and treatment of the fundamental role of the deep ocean circulation (i.e. Meridional Overturning Circulation – MOC) and how the changing ocean circulation (driven by salinity variations) can bring about wind, rainfall, and surface temperature changes independent of radiation and greenhouse gas changes. These ocean processes are not properly incorporated in their models.”
If this is the case, you say, then why do the AGW – human-caused global warming commentaries and government climate change initiatives continue?
The answer is found in a Harper’s magazine article of February 2010 “Conning the Climate: Inside the carbon-trading shell game”.
In it, author Mark Schapiro tags along with an ‘emissions assessor’ to various global work sites. At each one this individual sets out to prove that GHG emissions do not exist, but would have if different technology had been used. The assessor then documents that whatever emissions the new technology puts out is evidence that something worse didn’t happen. That premise is worth lots of money.
Sound like a lot of hot air?
If you follow-the-money, the trail leads straight to the UN and Wall Street…again.
The UN has established some 26 firms. They are called Designated Operational Entities. Their employees are called “validators”. They review industrial project proposals to ensure that new technology included in the project will cut emissions. These validators will later have to verify that the supposedly-cut emissions didn’t happen.
Then they will also prove ‘additionality;’ that is, that the renewable energy project would not happen without the capital generated by selling carbon credits.
Shapiro cites an example where a project had a goal of not producing 67,000 tons of carbon dioxide.
Do some math. Those invisible tons of carbon dioxide are worth $22 per ton. That equals carbon credits of some $1.5 Million.
Who is buying and selling these carbon credits? Financial houses like Cantor Fitzgerald (Cantor CO2/bgc), Goldman Sachs (Blue Source) and JP Morgan (Eco-Securities).
Hey – these are the same guys that just plunged the world into a global recession with their sub-prime mortgage bundle scams – now they are literally dealing in hot air!
So many people have bought into the myth of humans causing global warming. You want to get elected? You want to sell anything these days? Put a “green” eco-tag on it and blather something about reducing emissions.
Those who object are SLAPPED into silence or grant money for research is denied.
The biggest carbon bomb is that this entire ‘green’ industry revolves around carbon as a novel commodity, as Shapiro says – “one whose value resides entirely in the promise of its absence.”
The Kyoto green priests’ scaremongering has overridden common sense and science. Yet it’s funny how many supposedly “green” folk in Tides or similar organizations have former backgrounds as investment managers. What’s up with that?
We humble taxpayers pay the ‘eco-taxes’ on it all while these eco-gods, investment firms and grant recipients laugh all the way to the bank.
Whatever happened to the proofs required of the scientific method? How did law suits and popular opinion become the means of ‘rational’ decision-making?
SLAPP suits are the new scientific method it seems.
Now ‘free’ speech will cost you a lot of money.