The carbon tax scandal is just one of many schemes hatched by elitist power-mongers to shear the sheep as closely as possible using ignorance of fact and false scientific study to provide traction to their twisted plans.
Before I begin properly -- it is important to distinguish the difference between "climate shift" and "toxic atmospheric pollution." Toxic pollution, be it atmospheric or not is NOT acceptable, it directly kills life bearing habitat and even life itself. It is toxic pollution folks should be screaming about, that at least has a human control solution.
Toxic pollution is a cause worthy of pursuit and citizens should demand the end of it.
Cause of death - Science!
On the other hand, climate shift is a natural phenomena evident on all planets.
Climates shift... that is what they do, always have and always will--regardless of the puny activities of the planets infestation of humanity. The earth climate has shifted periodically and will continue to do so... post and pre-human.
Assistance and information to adapt would be a useful contribution - NOT taxation!
In any event, the climate will NOT maintain a "sweet spot" of convenience for anything or anyone, no matter how much tax you pay.
Climatic shift is a result of solar activity, the ripples of which dictate climatic conditions of its orbiting bodies. Our planet is carbon based and is especially prone to natural climate shifting as witnessed throughout the various "climate ages."
No tax in the universe will furnish a climate control knob to counteract that immutable process.
Green ‘drivel’ exposed
The godfather of global warming lowers the boom on climate change hysteria.
Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly “alarmist” about climate change.
The implications were extraordinary.
Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.
Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing.
We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshiped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.
Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it's now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.
Among his observations to the Guardian:
Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.
“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed. “I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use …
The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”
Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.
As he puts it, “so-called sustainable development … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”
Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”
Perhaps we can use this example of blatant elitist politico (attempted) greed as a lesson for future generations, your well-being is seldom reflected in the justification to extract wealth from the common citizen although it is always used as a face plate to condition minds to accept the blame and carry the can.
Remember, all current observable travesty in the matter of destruction of the environment has a common root cause, recklessly applied regressive scientific discovery, coupled with unscrupulous corporate greed, enabled by collusive governance who "approves" the deadly product, service or production method as safe and reliable.
No! I am not anti-progress!
In my book "progress" is about betterment--not degradation.
If the intent was continuous improvement to our lot, we would live in an era of ideal situation, not the complete opposite we are subjected to now. When greed borne of corruption prevails, your best interests are never considered. Let observable result be your guide. Imagine if the $rillions had been spent with good intent, rather than satisfying some individuals greed.
I believe that statement to represent sanity. It is an unconditional statement and does not allow for unmitigated risk-period!
Stay tuned...
Comments
Post a Comment