03-12-2008, 12:59 AM #1
Big Money Behind Global Warming Propaganda
Since we here in BC are going to be Carbon Taxed this summer, I plan to start a new entry in the books so I can be the first in line to get the refund once they are exposed. Plus interest
Professor: Big Money Behind Global Warming Propaganda
Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
A retired physics professor became the latest public figure to debunk the myth of a "consensus" behind man-made global warming when he slammed big money interests for pushing climate change propaganda that was at odds with real science in a speech yesterday.
Howard C. Hayden, emeritus professor of physics from the University of Connecticut, told a Pueblo West audience that he was prompted to speak out after a visit to New York where he learned that scaremongering billboards about the long-term effects of global warming were being purchased at a cost of $700,000 a month.
"Someone is willing to spend a huge amount of money to scare us about global warming," Hayden said. "Big money is behind the global-warming propaganda."
Hayden pointed out that global warming is taking place throughout the solar system, underscoring the fact that natural causes and not human beings are driving climate change, which has occurred throughout history. "Yes, the polar ice caps are shrinking . . . on Mars," he said, "On Mars, the ice caps are melting and small hills are disappearing," adding that warming trends were also being observed on Jupiter, Saturn and Triton.
Citing the fact that human activity is responsible for just 3 per cent of carbon-dioxide emissions on earth, Hayden said that carbon levels in the atmosphere have been rising and falling for 400,000 years.
"We are at the lowest levels in the last 300,000 years," he said. "During the Jurassic period, we had very high levels of carbon dioxide."
"About 97 percent of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere comes from natural sources, not humans," Hayden concluded, adding that global warming is being pushed not by grass roots advocacy groups, but by giant corporations who stand to gain from selling concepts such as carbon tracking and carbon trading.
As we reported last year, During the secretive Trilateral Commission group meeting in March 2007, elitists gathered to formulate policy on how best they could exploit global warming fearmongering to ratchet up taxes and control over how westerners live their lives.
At the confab, European Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberger and chairman of British Petroleum Peter Sutherland, gave a speech to his cohorts in which he issued a "Universal battle cry arose for the world to address “global warming” with a single voice."
Echoing this sentiment was General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, member of the House of Lords and former chief of the Defense Staff in London, who urged the Trilateral power-brokers to "Address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide."
A common charge leveled against those who question the official orthodoxy of the global warming religion is that they are acting as stooges for the western establishment and big business interests. If this is the case, then why do the high priests of the elite and kingpin oil men continue to fan the flames of global warming hysteria?
In his excellent article, Global warming hysteria serves as excuse for world government, Daniel Taylor outlines how the exploitation of the natural phenomenon of "global warming" was a pet project of the Club of Rome and the CFR.
"In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991) published by the Club of Rome, a globalist think tank, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."The fact that global warming hysteria is being pushed by governments that have been caught lying to the public on a regular basis, along with elitists whose stated goal is to push fearmongering as a means of increasing taxation and control over our lives, emphasizes the reality that, allied to the its phony scientific foundation, global warming is just the latest hobby-horse on which control freaks have piggy-backed their agenda to dominate and rule.
"Richard Haass, the current president of the Council on Foreign Relations, stated in his article "State sovereignty must be altered in globalized era," that a system of world government must be created and sovereignty eliminated in order to fight global warming, as well as terrorism. "Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function," says Haass. "Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves..."
03-12-2008, 08:31 AM #2
so you are saying that because other worlds are heating up and one guy thinks Humans are responsible for 3%, and that CO2 emissions is a crock of shit...
A couple points,
the organisms (ie TRees) that absorb CO2 have been steadily destroyed over the last century eg) India has removed 2/3 of its forest and indonesia 100%... No exact figures are available to me but it is a safe bet that there way less CO2 absorbing organisms now than 100 years ago.
Now humans since 1900, have trippled. (source)
Now it isnt just CO2 that causes these problems, you have other human based "stuff" in the atmosphere that assists in this process.
We (the world) are using petroleum based fuels at an all time high... The US alone uses 140 billion gallons a year.. If you'd like I can calculate the the CO, S0x, NOx, etc, emissions that didnt exist a hundred years ago
And what i know is that total CO2 emission are up 25% since 1900.
Currently predictions are:
At a permanent temp rise of 3 degrees, the effects are irreversible.
At a permanent temp rise of 6 degrees, we die.
The earth is currently rising at a rate of .4 percent a year...
After the passing of the Montreal protocol, and the vast reduction of CFCs that whole in the Ozone, has reduced dramatically and has almost become a non-factor.
This isnt just about an increase in tempature... Its the change in the weather/ environmental patterns which result in the relocation or death of species.
In 1973 there were 109 endangered species, there are now 1400.. not all are because of hunting or urban development. Now humans can survive all over, but what the bugs or shit that fish eat, or the grasses that feed the cattle?
Im not saying buy an electric car that gets power from the sun.. But IF you dont think humans effect climate tempature, thats just ignorance or denial.
understand crude oil and coal, is 1) the main source of bad shit gettin into the air and 2) is finite,
And China, India, and other countries that are developing are using more and more fuel.. prices will only continue to go up...the US is in a recession, and fuel prices are still going up..this is the first time in history that this has happened.
Maybe learning to capture the current emissions (which is under development), and finding another renewable source of energy could be the way to go (again under development)....
Based on the current growth rate and consumption of oil based fuels we are not sustainable. PERIOD. Im not saying the world is coming to an end topmorrow, but conditions will have to change, or we will be coming to an end.
And lets say your guy is right, CO2 emissions from humans are not the problem, and all those guys with PHDs from harvard and yale are just dead wrong, world temp is still increasing, and to think we are too small or incapable to control it is an insult to the race.
finally, after all my babble.. if we dont change on our own, the economy will change it for us.. Mass transit is at an all time high in our cities, and we haven't hit 4 dollars a gallon. I still use my ski this summer, but when it hits about 8 dpg.. IM out, but the point is everyone will have their price. And what would you rather have, a gov tax forcing change or economic cycles of recession (or worse) and trial and error controlled by companies who have special interests. Of course, that saying the gov isnt corrupt.
03-12-2008, 08:32 AM #3
Oh, and where the FU** are my stickers.......Just kidding, lol...
03-12-2008, 08:52 AM #4
If it were up to Al Gore and the liberal environmentalist, we would be traveling by horse & buggy, or bicycles. Before long they will want monitors hooked to our asses to monitor how much warm polluting gas we are emitting with each fart. Fuck em.
03-12-2008, 08:54 AM #5
03-12-2008, 08:55 AM #6
03-12-2008, 08:56 AM #7
The rules do not apply to him. He is above everything he wants us to abide by.
03-12-2008, 09:58 AM #8
Re: 'if we don't change on our own, the economy will change it for us'
The cycle of life as taught in school should also stipulate facts that the gov being of parasitic nature will live with each of us until death do us part (or sometime thereafter the paper work has been finalized).
I believe the real science, not the propaganda. It just seems to be the most recent 'convenience' to the boorish attitude of the almighty beholders.
Main stream media is under corporate siege and the news we get from the 'corporations' is for profit.
WTC 7 came down as a result of???? demolition and none other.
They didn't find any real evidence that an aircraft hit the Pentagon let alone some leftovers to prove it, and the photographed images are an inconvenient truth on that behalf.
So why trust anything in the hands of the elitists.
Water and electric as fuel has been here, somewhere, stashed. I don't feel that the navigating public should be taxed as a result of corruption at the patent office and up. It's an ugly can of worms, a very slippery slope.
I just saw a documentary last week where General Motors I believe was forced to destroy a fleet of electric cars, because????
Oh, and lets not talk about the rockets blasting in and out of the atmosphere, earth's embrio, with a blow torch.
Or, H.A.A.R.P. which is located in Alaska. (ionospheric heater)
I don't buy it. Never will unless it comes from unbiased sources. That means I still have to rely on the internet for the real news and facts.
03-12-2008, 01:06 PM #9
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Rotterdam,NY & Moneta, VA
more "bad things" get in the atmosphere from mother nature then us.
i love when al gore shows the chart of co2 levels and earth temperatures and you see how over the years earths temperatures follows co2 very closely all the way to about present day.then you see co2 go through the roof but earths temps only go up slightly. i had a professor is school use this analogy.
" most people buy ice cream in the summer most. most crime happens in the summer. does that mean ice cream causes crime?"
my personally belief about global temperatures is that nature has more impact then we do. do we have some impact yes. does nature yes. i believe how every the biggest impact of are planets temperatures are from the sun. if you look at the the late 90's early 00's we had an increase in activity in sun spots. then they died of. it was believed that it was the sun doing usual cyclical events. how ever the sun spots have not picked up again and some scientists believe that this could be following a similar event to that happened long ago called the little ice age.
by the way im all for alternative fuel cars. i cant wait for them to come out im personally watching the chevy volt very closely because im very interested(likely going to get one) in it
03-12-2008, 01:53 PM #10
never saw al gores movie...
You see in your travels where nature is taking over.... where the heck is that? And can you provide any support that this comes even close to outweighing human growth and expansion? Im curious, cause its the first I have ever heard of it..
Just read something by Craig Ventor.... 6.5 billion people now, by 2050 there will be 9 billion... he went on to discuss the possibility or replacing petro based fuels completely, via making his own bacteria. (and ethanol aint it) where CO2 is and will be the limiting factor due to the bacterias consumption of it.
The info i've posted comes from my MS class (and previous work experience) which came from orgs such as WHO, EPA, etc... if its bad then there a whole lot of people wasting good money on MS degrees and the gov has some wrong people in high positions (but we already knew that).
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By GDM in forum Kawasaki PWC Performance (4-stroke)Replies: 27Last Post: 02-07-2008, 01:11 AM
By beerdart in forum Open DiscussionReplies: 4Last Post: 04-29-2007, 09:40 AM
By BertInTexas in forum Open DiscussionReplies: 5Last Post: 04-08-2007, 08:59 AM
By jack in forum Sea Doo Open DiscussionReplies: 3Last Post: 02-02-2006, 04:08 PM
By elebouef in forum Yamaha Open DiscussionReplies: 1Last Post: 12-12-2005, 02:25 PM