Posted on 07/22/2008 7:40:04 AM PDT by RogerFGay
The Funny thing is, if you just read the BBC or AP headlines on this story, you would have thought the court ruled against channel 4.
Methane gas has increased 150% in the atmosphere since the mid 1700’s. (During the same time period, Carbon dioxide increased only 30 %.) A gram of methane gas has more than 25 times the greenhouse gas impact as a gram carbon dioxide. As many know, flatulence, “farts,” are almost entirely methane gas.
Therefore, Al Gore has developed a new program to combat this obviously increasing peril to our planet, and make a little money for himself at the same time.
Everyone will be required to wear a “fart meter,” (Cost $75, available only from Al Gore) which will record and automatically transmit to a new government agency (the Federal Automatic Recording Technology Department) the occasion of each fart and the volume thereof.
For an additional fee of $4,500, interested parties can purchase a fart capture mechanism (available only from Al Gore). This 25 pound device can be conveniently worn under the special clothing available also from Al Gore in attractive shades of brown.
When full, the interested consumer can present his fart capture device to Al Gore’s recycling center, where for a fee of $0.10 per fart, the captured farts will be recycled into the US natural gas distribution system. Al Gore also will receive a modest fee of only $0.015 per fart for the energy content of the gas.
The interested consumer will also receive “fart credits” for the number of farts he recycles. These “fart credits” can be traded to other consumers, who elected not to purchase a fart capture mechanism, through Al Gore’s Fart Trading Exchange. Al Gore will extract only a small commission of $0.01 per fart for each trade.
All Consumers will be required to be “fart neutral” by a “Cap and Trade” regulation, administered by the new Federal Automatic Recording Technology Department. Legislation is being developed as we speak, by the concerned Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and her erstwhile compatriot in the Senate, Harry Reid.
Get ahead of the mandated stampede to control this growing threat to our planet. Get you fart capture mechanism now.
Simply contact Al Gore and follow his instructions.
SITREP
Alarmists should be worried, they have grossly overplayed their hand and are being exposed for the fraud they are. More and more scientists are finally standing up to the intense pressure to push catastrophic global warming BS on to the public. Hopefully it is not too late before we do anything really stupid, like signing some binding international treaty which will be the US on the hook for trillions of dollars, all for nothing.
Beware of the Green Inquisition
The Economic Times ^ | 21 Jul, 2008 | Bjorn Lomborg
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/View_Point/Beware_of_the_Green_Inquisition/articleshow/3256615.cms
[snip]
My response:
“The rush towards [James Hansen promoted] bio-fuels has also strongly contributed to rising food prices, which have tipped another roughly 30 million people into starvation. Because of climate panic, our attempts to mitigate climate change have provoked an unmitigated disaster. We will waste hundreds of billions of dollars, worsen global warming, and dramatically increase starvation.” ~ Bjorn Lomborg
We should bring a tax-payers class-action suit against the reckless cynical opportunists responsible for hyping the anthropogenic GW hoax and causing so much mayhem here and around the world.
The main culprits have already been identified:
’UK Watchdog finds [Channel 4 - The Great Global Warming Swindle] documentary was unfair to scientists but did not mislead viewers.’
One of the scientists who filed the original complaint (Carl Wunsch) is from MIT - an important point in this mix, in light of what one of his MIT collegues (Kerry Emanuel) had to say, which I am copying and pasting below this excerpted preface:
“..Channel 4 will still claim victory because the ultimate verdict on __a separate complaint about accuracy__, which contained 131 specific points and ran to 270 pages, will find that it did not breach the regulator’s broadcasting code and did not materially mislead viewers. ..
..The IPCC, King and other scientists including __Dr Carl Wunsch, a climate expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology__, complained to the regulator over the way they were represented. ...
..After the broadcast, Wunsch said the programme was “masquerading as a science documentary when it should be regarded as a political polemic” and was “as close to pure propaganda as anything since world war two”.
[[[ My interjection: That’s pretty funny in light of the fact that Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, was determined by a UK court to be one-sided ‘extremist’ political propaganda and unfit to be shown to school children without disclaimers and equal time from ‘the other side’ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2047988/posts?page=8#8 ]]]
Wunsch claimed he had been duped into appearing and his comments had been misleadingly edited.
The Ofcom ruling is expected to find that Wunsch was misled about the tone and content of the programme, __but that his views were accurately represented within it__. ..” http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/jul/19/channel4.climatechange
Now here is Kerry Emanuel of MIT (who made these remarks months and months ago):
“.. “The evolution of the scientific debate about anthropogenic [man-caused] climate change illustrates both the value of skepticism and the pitfalls of partisanship. .. Scientists are most effective when they provide sound, impartial advice, but their reputation for impartiality is severely compromised by the shocking lack of political diversity among American academics, who suffer from the kind of group-think that develops in cloistered cultures.
“Until this profound and well documented intellectual homogeneity changes, scientists will be suspected of constituting a leftist think tank.”
“On the left, an argument emerged urging fellow scientists to deliberately exaggerate their findings so as to galvanize an apathetic public...”
“Conservatives have usually been strong supporters of nuclear power. .. Had it not been for green opposition, the United States today might derive most of its electricity from nuclear power, as does France; thus the environmentalists must accept a large measure of responsibility for today’s most critical environmental problem.” ~ Kerry Emanuel - MIT http://bostonreview.net/BR32.1/emanuel.html
*
Is Emanuel’s collegue, Carl Wunsch, one of those “scientists on the left” who was involved in deliberately “exaggerating the science”?
And from what I can determine, the Rev. Houghton may be another one of the scientists (mentioned by Kerry Emanuel above) who was involved in deliberately misleading / manipulating people. He even admits it:
The Reverend Sir John Houghton, former head of the UK Meteorological Office, Publisher of Al Gore’s book on GW and Former Co-Chair of the IPCC said:
“Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen.”
He then proceeds to do just that:
” .. human induced global warming is a weapon of mass destruction at least as dangerous as chemical, nuclear or biological weapons that kills more people than terrorism.”
~ John Houghton Monday July 28, 2003 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93466,00.html
*
James Hansen of NASA is another:
Hansen has long employed stagecraft http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDk2YjVlYTYzZjZkNTRhZWU2NGNkNzcwYTMzMmFlNGQ = for political gain. On June 23, 1988, he delivered his testimony in an unusually toasty hearing room.
Why was it so warm?
As then-Sen. Tim Wirth (D., Colo.), told ABC’s Frontline: “We went in the night before and opened all the windows, I will admit, right, so that the air conditioning wasn’t working inside the room . . . it was really hot.” June 27, 2008, 7:00 a.m. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjQ2YTllODZiOTA0N2E2MTIzODQwNjUzMjQwYjI2MDI =
*
More first-hand admissions:
“We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” ~ Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory) (in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)
*
[Therefore] “I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound. As the IPCC leadership has seen no wrong in Dr. Trenberth’s actions and have retained him as a Lead Author for the AR4, I have decided to no longer participate in the IPCC AR4.” ~ Sincerely, Chris Landsea
Expert leaves IPCC 17 January, 2005, Resignation letter http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/science_policy_general/000318chris_landsea_leaves.html
*
“The climate modelers have been cheating for so long it’s almost become respectable” (Richard Kerr, discussing adjustments in climate models, Science 1997)
*
Personally, I think that these men (along with others like Al Gore), bear a large responsibility for the suffering and nightmares they have inflicted on adults and children around the world.
Here is merely the latest fallout, among the many examples I’ve read about, from such reckless behavior:
Climate Change Delusion Driving Boy to Kill Himself http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23992448-5007146,00.html
Hopefully more mature, cooler heads will prevail so that this madness may end.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2047988/posts?page=9#9
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2048577/posts?page=13#13
Careful: when you tongue is in your cheek, it’s easy to bite your tongue! I wouldn’t be at ALL surprised if within 10 years, all cattle have to be outfitted with a methane-recovery unit.
read
Exactly. That’s what I thought from the headlines and I was disappointed and dispirited because of it.
Termites are likely the leading source of methane. It’s just really hard to make THAT dramatic. Especially when compared to walking behind a cow that’s eaten wet/spoiled hay in the winter barn. Ouch!
No matter what this guy or these others say, in spite of how qualified he and others may be, clean, renewable alternative energy sources are the way to go. They replace what’s running out, getting very expensive, and putting a huge damper right now on the world economy. And they’re cleaner: lower particulates and lower CO2.
It’s a Pascalian wager. Unfortunately for this casino, what happens in Vegas doesn’t stay in Vegas.
Aren’t you glad there can be a free flow of information and open debate so that the pros and cons of these differing ideas can be explained and debated? “Clean renewable energy” - I love Star Trek and look forward to the day. But what are we talking about in today’s world?
BTTT!
Oh wait. Star trek’s fuel was not “renewable.” Science fiction often precedes fact. Is there any example in science fiction yet, of a strong and healthy future society that runs on renewable energy?
Yep. Here is a google of the words "channel 4" and "Great Global Warming Swindle". Only the Independent's Mary Dejevsky's link states that Channel 4 actually won on the major issue. Thanks, for the article.
|
LOL! The alarmist campaign was ready for damage control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
