cavanami Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Big Oil Behind Copenhagen Climate Scam http://www.infowars.com/big-oil-behind-copenhagen-climate-scam/ The big irony behind top globalists descending on Copenhagen in luxury private jets and stretch limos is not just the fact that their own behavior completely contradicts their self-righteous hyperbole about CO2 emissions, but that their propaganda is vehemently supported by the very same big oil interests they accuse climate skeptics of pandering to. Probably one of the most flagrant examples of climate cronyism to emerge from the climategate scandal were emails in which CRU scientists, the body that provides much of the foundational global warming data for the UN IPCC, discuss how they conducted meetings with Shell Oil in order to enlist them as a “strategic partner†while getting them to bankroll pro-man made global warming research. The emails reveal that the CRU was also trying to get money from oil giants British Petroleum and Exxon-Mobil, under its former identity as Esso. “Now who is the shill for Big Oil again?†asks Anthony Watts. “Next time somebody brings up that ridiculous argument about skeptics, show them this.â€Â... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Obama to Use EPA to Declare CO2 a Dangerous Pollutant http://www.infowars.com/obama-to-use-epa-to-declare-co2-a-dangerous-pollutant/ Obama and crew will not wait for the outcome of Copenhagen or the passage of the Waxman-Markey climate bill, predicted for 2010 at the earliest. Obama will declare carbon dioxide a dangerous pollutant this week... “CO2 is not a pollutant. In simple terms, CO2 is plant food,†notes John R. Christy, professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Alabama. “The green world we see around us would disappear if not for atmospheric CO2... In fact, as S. Fred Singer, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia has noted, an increase in C02 would raise GNP and therefore average income... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Powerful Documentary Trounces Man-Made Warming Hoax Climate change is natural and has been happening since the Earth began http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/090307warminghoax.htm An astounding documentary that was broadcast in the UK last night completely trounced the man-made explanation for global warming, not with emotionally-laden propaganda or by attacking the messenger as its adherants resort to, but by presenting carefully considered and rational science. The Great Global Warming Swindle brought together a plethora of scientists, professors, climatologists and weather experts to expose the myths about climate change that have been promulgated in order to hoodwink the world into accepting the man-made theory of global warming. Watch the video in full below... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pasathai1 Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 IMHO, if politicians ( namely Al gore) were not promoting it, it would be easier to believe , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorwolf Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 doesn't matter whether global warming is real or not. what's clear is that mankind cannot go on living like this. if we're not already at "peak oil" we're near it and need to find alternatives. as more people enter the middle classes, pressure on all types of goods increases: witness last year's spike in food prices. it's been said often before: if every global citizen were an american, we'd need at least three other planets earth to supply us... what does the "global warming is a hoax" set suggest? that we just go on burning fossil fuels and that more oil/coal will just appear? that spewing endless amounts of toxins into the air is actually a great idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 >doesn't matter whether global warming is real or not. Quite true...the bigger picture needs to be addressed but will big oil allow it? me says no. All over the USA, cameras are being installed to record auto license plate numbers so as to implement the "carbon tax". Drive your car, pay a tax! Is this a good idea? is this fair? why not fix the problem, dependence on fossil fuels rather then spend billions of $ on these work arounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Huge problems with pollution are yet to come, China and India are going to scoff at any attempt to reign in their rampant industrialisation. Their argument is going to be "The West got rich by doing whatever they wanted, without restrictions, now they're telling us we can't". And who can blame them? If global warming is a hoax, but that's what it takes to make polluters clean up their act, then it's fine by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Per the released Copenhagen draft of the meeting: 1. hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations. 2. people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals. 3. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol. 4. Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes. Read the full draft here: http://www.infowars.com/draft-copenhagen-climate-change-agreement-the-danish-text/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Ban the internal combustion engine and let the scientists work it out. Meanwhile, get a horse ... or buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carew66 Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Strange but strangely appropriate that the thread title talks of 'belief' in global warming. Belief? When did science require 'belief'? And there's me thinking that evidence was the bedrock of science. But no, wait a minute - isn't the charge levelled at sceptics that they are 'Deniers'? What? Like holocaust deniers? And 'Flat-earthers'. Whatever next - Inquisitions? It's a pseudo-religion for many people and despite - no, because of - the UEA email scandal and the nine (proven) untruths in the Al Gore vehicle 'An Inconvenient Truth' the whole thing requires that 'belief'. There's some gerbil on the BBC calling himself 'Ethical Man'. Guess what his schtick is? Yep - he runs around and reports on 'green' issues and therefore he is 'ethical' - so there's that moral component there; one who chooses not to 'believe' must therefore be 'unethical'. Hallelujah, Praise the Fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.