I remember being in 5th grade learning the "3 R's," Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, and thinking that if I don't I could leave a barren wasteland in my wake for my children to suffocate and burn to death in. A horrid thought, I know, and one could blame it on my overactive imagination and/or schooling, but whatever the case the media hasn't detracted that sentiment much. Now we use more complex terminology and an array of advertised Green movements that can leave any American afraid of their own SUV's.
But on the horizon is this strange voice that says the science is wrong, the politicians are wrong, and that we've all been fooled! (The Great Global Warming Swindle) Could we dare question the ordained scientist of the IPCC? With the massive amounts of US money involved (SOURCE), and the Global policies that are quickly moving in to place (SOURCE), we probably should. Let's not pull a Galileo all over again.
A British politician and policy adviser, Chistopher Monckton, spoke openly against these treaties that are in the process of being annexed, and brought to light a dirty word, "Government." In an interview, Monckton states, "The extraordinary thing about the draft treaty which I have now seen is that it goes far further than anything that was planned at any previous session. What they're now going to do is to set up a world government, and the word 'Government' actually appears in the treaty. But you heard it here first. The word 'Election, democracy, vote, or ballot' does not appear anywhere in the 200 pages of the treaty." (SOURCE) Incredible to think that we've come this far based off of now questionable science that declares the World is melting and it's all our fault. Funny to think that when the IPCC, a source Al Gore used in his Inconvenient Truth documentary, declared that meat production creates large amounts of CO2 emissions that rivals World's transportation system (SOURCE), Al Gore was questioned if he was going to go vegetarian and he said no. (SOURCE) I wonder if this soon-to-be-billionaire flies around to his many guest star appearances and interviews on a private jet? Based on IPCC's science, it doesn't sound like Gore is practicing what he's preaching.
Professor Paul Reither of IPCC & Pasteur Institute, Paris once said, "This claim that the IPCC is the World's top 1,500-2,500 scientist... you look at the bibliographies of the people and it's simply not true. There are quite a number of non-scientists." (The Great Global Warming Swindle) And now the meeting of the nations in Copenhagen are working fast to obtain massive global funding and policies for a cause that might be based on questionable science. My suggestion is that if you have an ounce of doubt pay close attention to the Global and National policies that the World is trying to set in place and if you have been reading our blog, I'm sure you're familiar with our feelings about what we think the Constitution and our Forefathers have to say about us meddling too much in International affairs. I think this is a valid concern and we should all beware...
...but still, if you can, keep on Recycling, Reducing and Reusing. I think that's just plain healthy.
-N.S.Soria
Posts
Very well written post my friend!
ReplyDeleteThe earth may not be melting but it is much dirtier today than it was 100 years ago. But managing Green Economics is a biased debate to begin with. The trash is piling up at an alarming rate in developing countries and now the world wants to gather together and create policies governing how much waste (gaseous, solid, etc.) each country is allowed to produce. Does anyone think about the fact that first world countries have had their industrial revolutions thereby greatly increasing the living standard of their citizens? On the flip side third world countries are beginning their process of modernization and it is often a messy business. Why do we (the US & Europe) get to have our free-for-all period of development no matter what the cost and now Asia and Africa are scrambling to catch up, to better their citizens and now they are slapped with restrictions and sanctions by an ambiguous "world environmental" protection agency? Aren't they entitled to there chance to strive for their society's day in the sun? Why do we get to impose these rules of how much acceptable waste you may dump or acres of forest you can clear on them? Because we came in first in the industrial development footrace?
ReplyDeleteMy hope is that no one will listen to these "governing bodies" for environmental pollution. Or if they join they will just ignore the rules. Canada does. Instead let us focus our energy as a nation on developing innovations and technology to create a cleaner society with a better standard of living. We have the minds and means to bring about the gas-less emission-less automobile or renewable energy production facilities. This is the answer. This is the future I believe. Use our strength to get us out of this mess and lead the way for developing countries, not bind us with rules and restrictions. Then we can take these "green technologies" and sell the crap out of them to China and make bank. That's the American way.
HAHA! Yesssssss! Well put, Jake! I couldn't agree with you more. Excellent.
ReplyDelete