|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Innovation Network Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change | Views: 370 | | Dec 07, 2009 12:58 am | | Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change | # | 
Ron Sam | |
The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
was created to disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new
developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the
climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's
CO2 content. It meets this objective through weekly online
publication of its CO2 Science magazine, which contains editorials on
topics of current concern and mini-reviews of recently published
peer-reviewed scientific journal articles, books, and other educational
materials. In this endeavor, the Center attempts to separate
reality from rhetoric in the emotionally-charged debate that swirls
around the subject of carbon dioxide and global change. In
addition, to help students and teachers gain greater insight into the
biological aspects of this phenomenon, the Center maintains on-line
instructions on how to conduct CO2 enrichment and depletion experiments
in its Global Change Laboratory (located in its Education Center
section), which allow interested parties to conduct similar studies in
their own homes and classrooms.
I am thoroughly enjoying viewing the videos here and I think
after you take the time to view them you will also agree.
Copenhagen
Climate Concerns
As representatives of the nations of the
world meet in Copenhagen to attempt to restrict the use of energy
produced from coal, gas and oil in the guise of fighting global
warming, many scientists and scholars are expressing grave concerns
about what they are trying to do, as shown in the video vignettes
posted in the categorized-links below.
Background
Bureaucratic
Beginnings: The powers that be have always envisioned a
global energy regulatory system.
The
Annual Meeting of the Conference of Parties: Yearly
mega-conferences have kept nations on track to achieve the ultimate
objective.
What
happens at a COP meeting?: While the public is distracted by
an outward circus-like atmosphere, "stewards of the planet" make policy
behind closed doors.
From
Kyoto to Copenhagen: One step at a time, earth's nations are
being led to surrender their right to determine their own destinies.
The IPCC
Who
is behind the IPCC movement?: Trans-nationalist "citizens of
the planet" comprise the primary force that energizes the IPCC.
The
IPCC Assessment Report Process:
Hundreds of researchers produce a massive scientific document that
ultimately becomes a political statement by the time its summary is
produced.
The
Bias of the IPCC: The IPCC was created to promote a specific
policy; and it works in such a way as to comply with that directive.
The
IPCC and its "Correct" Conclusions: Money and political clout
determine the organization's objectives and conclusions.
The
IPCC Assessments: Statements of Faith:
In lieu of adequate facts, and actually ignoring some contrary ones, a
predetermined faith guides all aspects of the IPCC's operations.
Vulnerability
to the IPCC Message: It's difficult for the "man on the
street" to stand up to scientific intimidation.
CO2 Regulation
What
is Cap and Trade?: It is a means of transferring wealth from
"you" to "them."
Cap
and Trade: Gaming the System: The possibilities are limitless.
Gaming
the System: Private and Public Companies: They're already
lining up at the subsidy watering trough.
California:
Not the Model for Our Nation to Follow: Unless, of course, we
have an economic death wish!
What
is the regulation of CO2 all about?: It is about the taking
of power from the people and vesting it in the enlightened few.
Waxman/Markey
Amendments Reveal True Cost of CO2 regulation:
Five-dollar-a-gallon gas, doubled electric rates, and 15% unemployment
may be only the beginning of the cost of Cap and
Trade.
What
happens if the US signs a COP treaty to regulate CO2?:
Whereas other countries will have "wiggle room" to preclude strict
adherence to stated objectives, we will have none; and we will suffer
the economic consequences.
Once
enacted, how difficult is it to remove regulation policies?:
It's like trying to put the genie back in the bottle.
Is
the "cure" worse than the "disease"?: When the magnitude of
the undertaking is fully appreciated, the odds are that it is.
Bureaucratic
Accountability to No One: It's essentially already here; and
it's only going to get worse if the Copenhagen Crowd gets its way.
No
Copenhagen Agreement Without Support of LDCs: Anything less
would be an exercise in futility.
A
global enforcement mechanism at COP 15?: Let's all insure
our economic destruction!
Economics of CO2 Regulation
What
effect will CO2 regulation have on the average American?: It
will be "through the roof," and unbelievably devastating.
False
Economic Assumptions of Currently Proposed CO2 Regulation Legislation:
They make required economic sacrifices seem much less onerous than they
truly are.
CO2
Regulation = Global Economic Recession: History indicates
that the only way to significantly reduce CO2 emission is to
orchestrate a contraction of the economy.
Morality
CO2
Regulation: The Essence of Immorality: Climate alarmists turn
morality on its head by coming down on the wrong side of truth.
Taking
from the Poor of Today and Giving to the Rich of Tomorrow:
It's not only illogical; it's immoral.
The
Morality of Climate Change: One has to know all the facts to
determine the morality of an issue.
Real Reasons for Copenhagen
Wealth
Transfer: An Ulterior Motive of COP 15: Are
country-to-country transfers of wealth more important than reductions
of CO2 emissions?
The
Transfer of Wealth from Developed to Developing Countries:
It's a good means for reducing the entire world to undeveloped status.
Science
"Settled"
Science: The only parts that are settled are those the
world's climate alarmists would rather you didn't know.
The
Science is Not Settled: If you forgive our hyperbole, a
greater truth was never spoken.
Missing
Science at Copenhagen: Why is the good
news not shouted from the rooftops?
Assessing
model projections: Real-world data suggest their projections
of warming are much too high.
Could
all the models be wrong?: Of course they could, as a single
common error would seal the deal.
Did
the rise in CO2 cause the modern increase in temperature?:
There is no compelling reason to believe it did.
Is
a warm climate good?: It is not only good,
it is actually better than its opposite.
Negative
Feedbacks Dominate the Climate System: If it were not so, we
would not be here.
No
warming of the past decade?: That is correct; and it is
disturbing to the world's climate alarmists.
Climate
Change in Copenhagen: Doom and gloom pervade an international
meeting of climate alarmists earlier this year in this famed city.
Man's
Carbon Footprints on the Big Blue Marble: Are they fueling a
climate catastrophe?
Copenhagen
in a Nutshell: Great pain, but no gain.
The
Essence of Copenhagen: A setback for science.
Is
CO2 a pollutant?: By no means. In fact, it is the breath
of life.
Carbon
Dioxide: The Breath of Life: Hear the testimony and see the
results of the man who breathed life into plants.
Additional Considerations
Bias
in the Media: Claims of climatic catastrophe excite the
media; good news draws little attention.
In
Academia, Climate Hysteria Rules: To obtain tenure, junior
staff must not denigrate the dogma of the powers that be.
The
Influence of Federal Dollars: Many there are who compromise
their integrity to drink at the great money trough.
The
Orwellian Movement of Global Warming: The powers that be can
even change the past!
Intimidation
Tactics: They seem to be standard procedure for silencing
those skeptical of climate-alarmist claims.
Renewable
Energy in Place of Fossil Fuels?: Some day, perhaps, but not
yet.
Renewable
Energy Problems: The energy's not always there when it's
needed.
Policies
to Stabilize Climate are at Odds with Nature: They always
have been, and they always will be.
Skepticism
Lives:
Scientists, scholars and the general public are beginning to disavow
climate-alarmist claims of human-induced global warming and resist
their curative prescriptions.
Copenhagen
Predictions: The meeting will be called a great success, no
matter what occurs. And, of course, the struggle will go on.
|
|
Private Reply to Ron Sam | | Dec 12, 2009 12:30 pm | | re: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change | # | 
James Booth | | .
Efforts to "disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content" are worthy of praise.
A global taxation scheme based on such factual reporting does little or nothing at all to affect climate or "biological consequences"; however, it does further an ability to control what human beings do, what we produce, how we produce it, when and where, and further consolidates profits in the hands of those who currently control production and means of production, those who thus "allow" the rest of us to live only so long as we are deemed "economically viable" - aka "consumers" - rather than economically anemic *useless eaters*
One might ask why there should be an "emotionally-charged debate that swirls around the subject of carbon dioxide and 'global change' " when there is no such "debate" regarding ongoing manufacture and use of asbestos, or disposal of nuclear waste in the form of "depleted uranium" used in armaments which poison agricultural lands humans depend on for survival; there is no approved "emotionally-charged debate" about imposing fluoride (another waste product) in public drinking water systems while "factual reports and sound commentary on new developments" regarding that substance are poo-pooed; no criminal proceedings brought against "public health officials" who approve targetting vulnerable portions of populations for spraying with insecticides and other cancer-causing and debilitating chemicals; and no "emotionally-charged debate" about continuing to discharge human and industrial wastes into our oceans.
There is a great host of such concerns which need to be addressed, soberly, and without regard for profit.
Such selection is akin to grabbing an Illinois Senator or an Arkansas Governor by the scruff of the neck and standing him up amidst a billion-dollar media campaign designed to convince an less-than-informed public that *they* chose him to run for office.
There are profits to be made in each case, and in each case the "accounting" has been meticulously done well ahead of the decision to "approve" such an issue, or "candidate"
... and the ways the "issue" or the election will further chip away at the Constitution are already built in to the selections, prior to any announcements.
Helping "students and teachers gain greater insight into the biological aspects of this (or any) phenomenon" is likewise welcome.
Telling us how, and even WHAT, to think, however, is not now, nor will it ever be, acceptable.
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | |
| |
| |
