Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

“Green” Hoax-Mongers Dupe Major Media (Again)

Charlatans posing as representatives of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a press release, sent out emails, and held a press conference at the Washington, D.C. National Press Club today, announcing the Chamber’s new “Free Enterprise Climate Policy” pushing for “strong climate legislation.”

One mystery is how Reuters and other news agencies could have been taken in by a statement (also posted on a fake webpage, here) peppered with such fractured logic and head-scratchers as:

The Chamber believes that if we do not help to prepare a strong climate change bill for the President, we will face a new foreclosure crisis, due once again to the shortsightedness of a few, and their quest for immediate lamb at the expense of long-term wool.

Presumably it’s because the media—and teachers, students, and the general public—have been trained to accept without question endlessly repeated but unsubstantiated proclamations, such as:

Climatologists tell us that if we don’t enact dramatic reductions in carbon emissions today, within 5 years we could begin facing the propagating feedback loops of runaway climate change. That would mean a disruption of food and water supplies worldwide, with the result of mass migrations, famines, and death on a scale never witnessed before.

The release fails, however, to disclose the predicted disruptions to a continuation of current historically high life expectancy rates and global food production that enacting Al Gore-enriching “cap and trade” legislation and the China-enriching Copenhagen treaty would result in.

Instead of facts that might actually feed informed decision-making—including temperature data from the government’s own National Space Science and Technology Center showing that global temperatures peaked with 1998’s el Nino and have been falling ever since; the squelched internal EPA report skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government; and evidence that polar bear populations are rising—anti-human “environmentalists” can only resort to ever-more bold campaigns of disinformation and outright lies to further their one-world-government, Copenhagen treaty agenda.

As the historical record shows, the Malthusian activists’ solution—more control of the world’s resources by governments—has resulted in far greater environmental degradation than the “business” interests they villify. Alternatively, when individuals have been free, they have, time and again, devised innovative solutions that no central planner could ever imagine.

Yet lies continue to sell, and facts continue to be buried and apparently largely unread in musty tomes as the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, such as this easily-accessible and readable article, “Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide” —a virtual goldmine of data, detailing everything from the correlation between solar activity and global temperatures, to actual data on severe storms in the 20th century, sea levels, and CO2 levels, to analyses of the IPCC computer models underlying the hypothesis of anthropomorphic global warming, to the increase in U.S. forests in the past 50 years, the relative costs and benefits of alternative energy forms, and much more. As the scientist authors point out:

Across the globe, billions of people in poorer nations are struggling to improve their lives. These people need abundant low-cost energy, which is the currency of technological progress.

In newly developing countries, that energy must come largely from the less technologically complicated hydrocarbon sources. It is a moral imperative that this energy be available. Otherwise, the efforts of these peoples will be in vain, and they will slip backwards into lives of poverty, suffering, and early death.

Energy is the foundation of wealth. Inexpensive energy allows people to do wonderful things. For example, there is concern that it may become difficult to grow sufficient food on the available land. …

Energy provides … an even better food insurance plan. Energy-intensive hydroponic greenhouses are 2,000 times more productive per unit land area than are modern American farming methods. Therefore, if energy is abundant and inexpensive, there is no practical limit to world food production.

Fresh water is also believed to be in short supply. With plentiful inexpensive energy, sea water desalination can provide essentially unlimited supplies of fresh water.

During the past 200 years, human ingenuity in the use of energy has produced many technological miracles. These advances have markedly increased the quality, quantity, and length of human life. …

Were this bright future to be prevented by world energy rationing, the result would be tragic indeed. In addition to human loss, the Earth’s environment would be a major victim of such a mistake.

The Copenhagen treaty—which today’s merry pranksters hope to foist upon their duped audience—would directly result in such world energy rationing, making victims of the environment, and especially the world’s poor. So why, if the Truth will set us free, are we so eager to instead be enslaved by lies?

Source: The Beacon


Bookmark and Share

Friday, July 3, 2009

kenny's sideshow: Energy Problems...Government Solutions

Eliminating government is the most obvious first step towards energy independence. Let's start with the Department of Defense.

http://i676.photobucket.com/albums/vv126/kennyrk2/samonsteroids.jpg?t=1246576528
Sam needs his steroids taken away before he kills us all.


The fraud of foreign wars and the 'war on terror' contribute heavily to U.S. energy consumption. Bringing our troops home from the 761 military bases scattered all over the world would go a long way toward energy independence. Using a downsized military at home for defensive purposes only, eliminating the corruption of the military/industrial complex and getting rid of Israel's stranglehold over military policies would be a good start.

The Department of Defense is the world’s largest buyer of oil and the nation’s largest single user of energy. In 2006, DoD purchased 110 million barrels of petroleum, costing $13.6 billion. {source}


The Department of Defense uses 4.6 billion gallons of fuel annually, or an average of 12.6 million gallons of fuel per day. A large Army division may use about 6,000 gallons per day. According to the 2005 CIA World Factbook, the DoD would rank 34th in the world in average daily oil use, coming in just behind Iraq and just ahead of Sweden.

In FY 2006, the DoD used almost 30,000 gigawatt hours (GWH) of electricity, at a cost of almost $2.2 billion. The DoD's electricity use would supply enough electricity to power more than 2.6 million average American homes. In electricity consumption, the DOD would rank 58th in the world, using slightly less than Denmark and slightly more than Syria (CIA World Factbook, 2006).

The DoD uses 93 percent of all US government fuel consumption (Air Force: 52%; Navy: 33%; Army: 7%. Other DoD: 1%) {source}
Since these numbers come from government sources, you can bet they are underestimated.

War and military policy for the profit and power of a few psychopaths is not energy efficient.
A large number of poor people also die in vain.


How about FEMA, The Department of Education, EPA, the IRS? And that's just a few of the big ones. No need to stop there. Shutter their doors. No carbon footprint and hot air from these frauds and the world is closer to being 'saved.' This is not to say that there is no need for the rule of law. We have laws already to take down the various criminals in all of their endeavors. They're just not being used.

The billions not spent on these government entities, if they were made obsolete and dismantled and the money not stolen from taxpayers, would certainly stimulate the economy in the long run.

Without war as the first step, we can then move on to all of the other problems we have because of corruption; the federal reserve, bankers, Wall Street, health care, sustainable agriculture, "the war on drugs," U.S. manufacturing, globalism, the welfare state, etc. etc.

Or maybe I have it a little out of order. Perhaps we should start with the global bankers and the Federal Reserve. After all, historically they have the most to gain from war.

I can visualize a 'green' world in our future but only without the thieves that deceive us.


Oh well, just another one of those "I had a dream" moments. We all know that any move pushing too far in the direction of smaller honest government would result in the deaths of many Americans on our own soil, again, blamed on 'foreigners' that want to destroy us and getting that old 'kill 'em all and let God sort it out' American patriotism back in line. Would the majority be fooled again?

http://www.hermes-press.com/false-flag3.jpg

Dreams without action don't come true. How do we stop this madness?

Thanks To Kenny's Sideshow Where We Found This Post
kenny's sideshow: Energy Problems...Government Solutions