Posted on 01/27/2007 10:21:13 AM PST by paltz
THE MOVIE "An Inconvenient Truth," with which the indoctrinating centers in the Tri-Valley are propagandizing our children, comes across like this: We only have 10 years to return to a medieval lifestyle, to figure out how to get the sun to radiate more than 1.4 kW per square meter without melting the icecaps or to invent other "alternative" (what a ridiculous name) non-nuclear energy sources.
The Al Gore (or should I say Goebbels?) propaganda machine seeks to limit each person to 1 ton of carbon per year. The proposal is to create a system of carbon allowances that will be the rationing cards of the future.
The government would dole out what bureaucrats think we should have.
Kyoto targets, however, will not be met. Two facts about the futility of controlling emissions:
1) Uncontrolled fires in China's abandoned coal mines release as much carbon dioxide as the entire nation of Japan does from useful fuel consumption.
2) The oceans and land outgas 210 billion tons per year compared to 3 billion tons per year from human activity.
Ian Murray, a critic of Gore's "work," recently detailed 25 truths that Gore conveniently leaves out of the companion book to his video because they are inconvenient to his argument.
A few examples: The relationship between temperature and carbon dioxide is not linear; therefore the graph on pages 66-67 is seriously misleading.
The Peruvian glacier pictured on Page 53 probably disappeared during a climate change a few thousand years ago.
The only way to turn off the Gulf Stream is to turn off the wind system, stop the rotation of the Earth, or both.
Gore fails to mention that introducing coal-fired electrical power generation in Africa and South America would reduce the 30 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning wood to cook substantially and save more than 1.6 million lives per year.
Perhaps the biggest lie of all is the assertion that a consensus exists on human-attributed catastrophic global warming when scientific agreement only exists on a narrower range of issues such as the increase in temperature between 1919 and 1940.
From irregular sequences such as climate observations almost any trend one desires can be obtained purely by choosing the starting point and the right ending point and turning the extrapolation crank.
The climate charlatans play up this process to the hilt. Global warmers select whichever data tend to support their preconceived notions. They never go back to 1855 or try to explain decreases instead of increases in temperature. And they keep their data and algorithms close to their chest lest someone check them and expose the fallacy of their arguments.
Stephen McIntyre, a minerals consultant, recently demonstrated that the global warmers' favorite graph is wrong. Their reconstruction of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years shows slight oscillations until a sharp upward swing (the "blade" of the hockey stick) in recent years. McIntyre showed that the method used by climatologist Michael Mann and colleagues generates hockey sticks even from random data. Global warming guru Mann then published a partial correction but he refuses to release his computer algorithm for further checking. Diehards such as Mann et al. continue to defend the climate icon. Others, however, are beginning to downplay the hockey stick graph.
Consider what you get from 1 ton of carbon: You could heat your house with a small electric stove (1 kilowatt) for six hours a day for 10 months of a year. Nothing would be left for cooking, lighting, hot water, refrigeration, vacuuming or washing. No travel would be possible except on foot or on bicycle. A 1-ton footprint would actually return you to a lifestyle that existed before our lifetime.
Answering your propagandized children (for the time being they are not yet recruited to report you to the thought police, but watch out anyway): Giving in to the global warming lobby when so much evidence indicates that it is a gigantic paper tiger is irresponsible, unscientific, immature and selfish.
Our children and grandchildren will ask us whether we believed the great hoax of global warming and I, for one, don't want to be telling them that I kept a chart of my carbon footprint. I love to take my SUV to Tahoe, ski at night on well-lit slopes, fly airplanes and do all the power-intensive activities within my reach.
I recommend you keep doing the same or whatever else you enjoy. Have no fear. The Earth is a big place and your enjoyment of life will not hurt it in the least.
Bevc received a doctorate in electrical engineering from UC Berkeley. He was a postdoctoral fellow of the National Academy of Sciences and Air Force Office of Scientific Research at Oxford University in England, conducted scientific research for the Department of Defense and the aerospace industry, and held senior staff positions at the California Public Utilities Commission. He is a resident of Danville.
Bumpety bump.
Maybe it's just a cool cat.
It's not Gloabl, but Universal warming, with the news that Mars & Pluto are warming, too. Clearly my SUV has nothing to do with other planets warming.
lmao
It really is just another scheme of the libs in "science" and academia to milk grant money out of the taxpayer....right out of their play book.
i donno, maybe the emmision got sucked into the black hole in mr gores head and popped out on those planets
Great article.Rhetorical question:Does Al Gore really believe this "global warming" bull@hit?I assume he's basically using this as an attempt to remain relevant. When i hear other(supposedly intelligent)people beating the global warming drum i have to ask myself are they in on the con or just usefull idiots.
Sometime droll stuff like that comes out of my head after about a case of beer the day before.
;-)
The government would dole out what bureaucrats think we should have.
If this were all that there is to it, there would be no panic or even controversy. The absurdity of the proposal alone would condemn it to ridicule and oblivion.
The part no one seems to talk about (except in world summits and workshops by the parasites) is "carbon credits". THe average person is not even aware of this, and is woefully unequiped to understand it even if he were eager to grasp the concept.
As I understand it, carbon credits are a device to obfuscate. Its relation to actual CO2 is theoretical and abstract, which makes it a handy tool for the monumental scam. For example, if a gigawatt of electricity is used by the technologically advanced countries by means of hydroelectic generation, it is converted to the equivalent amount of coal required, and the perpetrator is assigned that much "carbon use" - bad. Presumably, that would be true of solar-generated power too.
Here's where it gets byzantine. The producers of the world (rich) use way too much "carbon credits" compared to the useless non-producing (poor) countries. There is a fundamental unfairness in some minds about this. So, to set things right, the producer (rich) countries will be obligated to pay the poorer countries for the carbon credits that they are entitled to, based on population, that they don't actually use.
Bottom line, Kyoto is a huge wealth transfer proposal based on arbitrary definitions and a phony construct of the real world.
If Kyoto prevails, and 100% of the US energy is produced without burning a single gram of anything, the US would still be penalized trillions of dollars for exceeding the "carbon equivalent" some NGO parasites have determined is "fair"
How can such a monumental scam possibly succeed?
" How can such a monumental scam possibly succeed? "
It is succeeding -- given President Bush's capitulation in his SOTU speech, it may have already succeeded...
And the lemmings will tear to pieces anyone wanting to turn them away from the cliff....
Hope you have some skills at subsistence farming -- we're all gonna need 'em........
But are you prepared to prove it?
You've pretty much nailed it on the head. Global Warming® is just a massive wealth-distribution scam. Judging by the rhetoric (those that question Global Warming® are "flat-earthers", etc.), I don't know if they're ratcheting it up because they're winning the argument and are going for the kill, or they're losing badly and this is their last gasp. There are certain indicators that they're winning (e.g., states like California passing ridiculous Global Warming® laws).
The US should do what the Euroweenie countries did - sign the Kyoto Treaty and then just ignore it.
The burden of proof is on the freaks who claim it is the cause of interstellar warming.
Let the jerks who believe this.....set the standard and change THEIR lifestyles --- FIRST..
Semper Fi
I suggest they immediately move into an 600 square food concrete foot structure. With a little help from solar panels on the roof, a pit toilet, recycling, and composting the happy couple they might be able to stay within their carbon budget.
And of course, they will have to avoid all traveling methods using fossil fuel.
And I'm looking forward them simplifying their wardrobes. After all hemp clothes and sandals make such a nice fashion statement. And certainly Tipper and Al don't want to waste out precious water resources by changing clothes every day or week.
I wonder how many "carbon allowances" Al Gore uses up to maintain his 4,000 sq. ft. house in Virginia, a 10,000 sq. ft. mansion in Tenessee, and fly around the world in a private jet.
I tend to agree with the overall premise of this article, but a couple of things don't fit. Assume the "Al Gore propaganda machine" limit of 1-ton per person is true and it gets its way. (That limit) X (6 billion people) = 6 billion tons; twice the amount that the author says is emitted now.
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.