Global Warming...fact or global conspiracy?

Originally posted by Essan

Read the IPCC Working Group 3 SPM - released last Friday:

www.ipcc.ch...

Now where's the conspiracy? The solutions for mitigation of global warming are all common sense things any half sentient species would be doing anyway. Shame humans aren't even half-sentient ...... (I believe we're currently 351st most intelligence species on the planet)

Did I miss something in section F because all I saw was tax and regulate?
They seem really happy about carbon credits and taxes but they dont mention results or how exactly money in a world government fund will save us all from the starving polar bear menace.

Theres the bit in F 24 about socialism but their arent any facts or figures just statements I suppose Im suppose to accept as fact.

Then theres this: Financial flows to developing countries through CDM projects have the potential to
reach levels of the order of several billions US$ per yearTPF

If that doesnt smack of wealth redistrobution I dont know what does. Doent giving money over to the developing countries nullify what Kyoto was trying to do in the first place? Oh wait, Kyoto didnt include developing countries. Never mind.

I guess any and all of my questions can be answered by perusing the "literature" they keep referring to.

Doesnt make me by it any more. In fact Im much more angry that a collection vague statements and a few "if/then" lines are all so many people need to get them fired up about global government.

Or are all of these people already fired up about global government and this is just a way for them to spread the disease to the rest of the population waiting to be controlled?

Which came first, GW or NWO?

Take a look at Table SPM3 (page 14) and tell me why you're so opposed to such ideas

Sure, governments are going to use this as an excuse to raise taxes (Blair has already) - but if not GW then they'd just find something else and, in any case, when you're taxed extra if you waste energy, why not save energy instead: you save money both ways then (but I guess some folk can't see that?).

The big question is: why do some people not want people reduce their energy consumption? Why do they not want us to pay less to energy companies?

Who are the real conspirators? Who stands to lose? Not me

I never said I dont want people to reduce their consumption. Why would anyone not want that? I find this is a common reaction when met with someone who isnt in favor of such things as Kyoto or buying the IPCC reports. Suddenly Im in favor of strip mining the rain forest and dumping used oil into the Great Lakes.

Im all in favor of everything in that table. The list of services and products and technologies that will bring these things about is wonderously long and no doubt profitable. I just fail to see how constant punishment and the whipping of society with looney taxes and global rule will bring these things about.

You want to see a real quick adaption of these technologies? Tell me if I buy a hybrid Ill never have to pay auto taxes again. Tell me if I install solar panels my property taxes will drop. Tell me that composting my organics will lower my city tax burden.

Offer a company developing better and cheaper solar panels or mercury free efficient lighting reduced taxes or no taxes to move to a city and offer 100's of high skilled tech and engineer jobs and develop their products.

This way the only people to gain anything are entrepeneurs and employees.

Suddenly its no longer a political issue and its all supporting a high-tech free economy.

There are plenty of ways to get these things going that dont involve taking money from the working class and putting it in the NWO's pocket.

Once again, because I am opposed to global taxation and empty promises does not mean I want to strip mine the Amazon.

At first look these carbon emissions seem a worrying and growing problem
that we need to stop, but are we really creating that much CO2 compared to Volcanoes, nature and also the sea.

I agree we should stop pollution but this eco-activism is causing LEDC to be badly affected. America and europe both have gone through industrial revolutions which have massivly helped the living quality of the population.
Unfortunatly due to the Kyoto treaty and pressure from governments giving LEDC's Carbon quotas which stops the growth of the country ensuring wages stay low, this gives rise to sweatshops and leaves the country relying on other countrys.

I do not blame those who are trying to cut down on emissions but I thick that we should worry only about what are own countrys are doing and give the LEDC's a chance

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

You want to see a real quick adaption of these technologies? Tell me if I buy a hybrid Ill never have to pay auto taxes again.

That already happens in the UK - road tax is based in part on the effiency of your car, with some models now totally exempt from road tax

Tell me if I install solar panels my property taxes will drop. Tell me that composting my organics will lower my city tax burden.

Offer a company developing better and cheaper solar panels or mercury free efficient lighting reduced taxes or no taxes to move to a city and offer 100's of high skilled tech and engineer jobs and develop their products.

This way the only people to gain anything are entrepeneurs and employees.

Suddenly its no longer a political issue and its all supporting a high-tech free economy.

Totally agree [y]

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant

Could there be forces that have recognized a genuine global disaster afoot and, recognizing it's inevitability, are seeking to gain profit from the situation? By profit, I mean to gain from this Global Warming Alarm to position themselves to survive whatever might be coming; on a personal level for the short term or ,collectively, on a national or societal level?

i just do not see the warming trend as ending up in Disaster...

this article & link reminds us that the Norsemen discovered and settled & farmed a Greenland that was a expanse of fertile warm, meadows and grazinglands. the norsemen used a temperate Greenland as a colonized territory from 1000-1300 CE, but conditions began changing the sea ice
around 1200AD according to Norse records and forced them to alter navigation routes back & forth to Europe, and to finally abandon the Greenland colony when ice, snow, glaciers replaced those green meadows!

if the world didn't flood prior to 1200AD when more than just Greenland
was ice & glacier free...why would we expect a glacierless Greenland and disappearing sea ice in that area (and elsewhere) to suddenly inundate
all the coastal regions on earth in the next 50-100 years???

standeyo.com...
Title: Father of Modern Climatology, Says Man-Made Global Warming Is 'Absurd'

...if global warming is blamed on humans
and they continually warn us to change our ways
people will see it (GW) as fixable ...!


imo, its all social engineering, and something like a modern day 'pyramid' project, which engages each nations leaders & populace in an all consuming way. Ideally, the masterminds are trying to change the conflict/war/adversary paradigm of todays world into a massive peaceful environmental consciousness paradim for tomorrows world.
~nobel, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions too

Many people are worrying mainly about the flooding caused by the melting of ice.
But what many people don't realise is that when floating ice caps melt the sea level does not rise as the volume displaced by the ice is equal to that of the water when it melts.
It would seem mother nature has already though about those affects and has a defense system already in place.

People are worrying to much about how CO2 will affect temperature, this cycle of temperature changing has gone of for millions of years and we are doing very little.

The main problems with fossil fuels and pollution are Sulpher dioxide which has created far more acid rain than there ever used to be.
Also the way that oil is used to grasp world power by many corrupt individuals. (look at my last post)
Also the fact that oil is a key item in the manufacture of plastic. And plastic is the problem with landfill which is really destroying are planet. Go look at your local forest (especially in the UK) and look how much rubbish is littered around by lazy people who cant be bothered to dispose of it properly.

These are the issues we should worry about not petty Global warming.

Originally posted by balckartgraphic
Many people are worrying mainly about the flooding caused by the melting of ice.

The melting ice from the Arctic Ice is not the immediate threat that would lead to flooding. Frankly, the biggest danger that the break-up of Arctic Ice is the threat posed to shipping. Any break-up of Arctic Ice means "rogue ice bergs" and that does threaten the environment because of possible collisions with shipping and, most specifically oil tankers. An additonal threat is the very real possibility of collisions between ice bergs and oil platforms.

Originally posted by balckartgraphicBut what many people don't realise is that when floating ice caps melt the sea level does not rise as the volume displaced by the ice is equal to that of the water when it melts.

On this point, I must disagree with you balckartigraphic. It would seem that many people seem to focus on Arctic Ice but there is a substantial amount of ice on Greenland and in Antarctica. The ice in these places is ice that is, in some cases, miles thick! And since the ice in these places is melting, that run-off is from "land based" ice and this is, indeed, adding to the ocean levels.