Anatomy a scam.
"Over time universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
If you look carefully, you will notice that rotted on the faces of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski are written for crimes against humanity. How
a pair of old prostitutes, these eminent architects of the evil of the twentieth century still sell their wares to those who have an insatiable thirst for power.
THE CLUB OF ROME
The mother of the environmental movement
moldy The couple has something else in common. Both were active members of a group of international experts of the dark side of the force called the Club of Rome. Founded in 1968 in the Rockefeller estate in Bellagio on Lake Como, counts among his brothers and sisters "Al Gore, David Rockefeller, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and Mikhail Gorbachev. None better than
Gorby may provide a short description of the agenda of the Club:
"The threat of an environmental crisis caused by 'internal disaster' will be the key that opens the doors to the New World Order."
Who did this guy come out from Lubyanka?
Their stated goal is, more precisely, the population control. The solution? Create an environmental disaster as, say, "global warming" and the fault to the most heinous villain of the planet: the man himself.
But Let's hear it from their words:
"Looking for a new enemy that we have together, we concluded that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like have done to our case ... But by highlighting them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely to confuse the symptoms with the cause. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and can only be overcome by changing attitudes and behavior of man. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself. "
would seem a good plan... If you were Darth Vader.
In 1972 the Club won the world stage with the publication of a book whose writing was commissioned a group of scientists at MIT. It was called The Limits to Growth ( Report on Limits to Growth , Better known as the Meadows Report - Italian translation of the title is a misnomer: it should have been Report on the Limits of Growth , NDT). Examining the growth of world population in relation to available resources, the report concluded that within the next 100 years the planet would have run out of resources, resulting in a catastrophic decline in population and industrial production.
As one critic, the authors examine
"... the global impact of humanity on the ecology and the results of steps taken to remedy the increasingly rapid approach of a disaster that is the ' footprint 'badly managed uncontrolled environment of the planet and humanity. "
Nevertheless, the report argued that these trends and their consequences could be changed, we had to decrease in number, do less and get less. The mark of this street rescue was the Orwellian global sustainable development .
Promoted extensively, the book exploded across the planet as Harry Potter environmentalism and reached the opinion leaders of political circles, scientific and economic. It was sold in 12 million copies in thirty languages, despite the fact that the research had the same scientific rigor of homework quarterly plagiarized a freshman biology class.
"An error does not become truth by the extent of its distribution, nor the truth becomes error because nobody sees it." - Mohandas Gandhi
The research was extremely poor and was attacked by leading scientists. Professor Julian Simon, an expert on aging and writer, said: "The Report on Limits to Growth has been accused of stupidity or fraud by almost all economists who read it or have carefully reviewed .
Yale economist Henry Wallich reviewed the book saying '... quantity of the content model is the brainchild of authors, including if they have never revealed the equation used .
This is a world based on PR and the publication of this book originated the modern environmental movement. Although birth in a blanket of lies, however, was hailed as the savior, not of humanity but the planet, he argued, was destined to become a crispy fried due to the uncontrolled emission of carbon dioxide by humanity.
The scientific fraud is his malice, but few people were able to see the underlying strategy, that the book would serve as the basis for a global public relations campaign that would hypnotized legislators, educators and countless organizations of good will and that would eventually pave the way for the greatest robbery in human history. But I'm getting too far ahead. This was the
Scam No. 1: the scientific basis of the book, which launched the environmental movement, calling for "sustainable development" and reduction of carbon dioxide by man, almost a leper for the planet , was and still is a scam, a fraud, a falsehood: an environmental quackery.
"Every violation of truth is not only a kind of suicide, the liar, but also a stab at the health of human society." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Which brings us to the second piece of the puzzle: The Scam No. 2. Who would have thought. . .
OIL
is not a fossil fuel
The immigration officer at Sheremetyevo took my passport and studied it carefully. He said nothing, he leafed through page after page, then peered at the screen of a computer for an interminable time before putting the stamp and let me continue, with a grunt, to the customs.
The KGB was still guarding the borders, the first time I went to Moscow shortly after the fall of Communism. Allow Americans to freely set foot in Mother Russia without official supervision was very irritating to the guards, but had to refrain from demonstrating.
In fact, Communism was officially dead only a few months when the troops attack of Capitalism began pouring through the gates of the former Soviet Union to exploit its opportunities. The specters of Marx, Lenin and Stalin shaking with horror in the halls of the Politburo and the entrepreneurs of the United States, Japan and Europe to try to obtain contracts for all the good of Mother Russia that was available. Banks, hotels, timber and precious metals were besieged by strange partnership between the Western capitalist pimps and left the old power of the KGB. During those early years, when Yeltsin (God rest his soul) and his vodka in office, was an uproar.
The Oklahoma land rush in the last decade the 800 was nothing compared to Moscow in 1992.
However, even then, the oil industry had remained under state control, directly or indirectly. In fact, until 2003, the former colonel-in-naked torso of the KGB and current prime minister, president of Russia soon ... once again - Vladimir Putin - smothered an attempted takeover of Yukos by Exxon, the largest company in the world.
To see why, let's go back for a moment to the early days of the Cold War, when an isolated Soviet Union instructed its best scientists to identify the true source of oil. Not certainly a task to the weekend. After considerable research, in 1956, Russian scientist Professor Vladimir Porfir'yev announced that "the crude oil and natural gas from oil have no intrinsic connection with biological matter, which originate in the vicinity of Earth's surface. They are primordial materials [that have originated with the formation of the earth] that have been erupted from great depth. "
If there are eyes out of their sockets by reading the last sentence, perhaps you should reread it.
He said that oil is not derived from anything organic, it follows, as it is said, the fossil remains of dinosaurs and / or ancient plant material. Comes from the abyssal depths earth and is created by a biochemical reaction that has undergone hydrocarbons (containing elements carbon and hydrogen) to extreme temperatures and intense pressure during the formation of the earth.
I know, it was easy to tell by Porfir'yev. But it turns out that it was more than just a theory.
fact, shortly after the Russians made this discovery, they began to drill wells and find ultra-deep oil to 10 and 13 kilometers below the earth's surface. These are stunning depth, well below the depth to which you can find organic matter, which is 6 km.
Interesting, eh?
The Russians applied their theory Abiotic and their deep-water drilling technology to the Dnieper-Donets basin, an area half a century was known as free oil. Of 60 wells drilled using the technology abiotic, 37 became commercially productive, a success rate of 62% compared to the success rate of about 10% of the perforations in the areas of productivity not found. The oil found in the basin competes with the North Slope of Alaska.
We can say that they have had a lucky day.
But it does not end there, far from it. Since the first discoveries, the major Russian oil companies, without fanfare, they have drilled over 310 ultra-deep wells that have gone into production.
The result? Recently, Russia has surpassed Saudi Arabia as the world's largest producer of oil.
Perhaps they sensed something.
Although there are written in the early days of this research, are almost all in Russian and a few have come to the West. Those who have arrived there have been laughed at.
Not anymore. With Russia's refusal to approve the deal, Exxon-Yukos (Putin did not want this technology and experts to take the road west abiotic) and access to information now available on the Internet, the voice began to spread quickly in the West. Yet, has not yet taken hold.
Why not? This is a huge thing. Oil is not a fossil fuel! And is renewable! Wow!
Here are a couple of factors.
Major oil companies have a partisan interest in spreading the idea that oil is scarce, difficult to find and therefore expensive to manufacture, which, of course, means higher revenues and profits. This is in itself an explanation, but it is not the main center of attention.
More important, in our history, is the fact that a cornerstone of the environmental movement is this: oil is a fossil fuel, a fossil fuel is scarce and where stocks are limited and declining. Moreover, its production generates carbon dioxide. So its use for virtually all productive purposes - agricultural production, building construction, transportation via cars, trucks, trains and planes, the distribution of gas and electricity, heating, cooling, communications and so on - all these things shall be reduced .
According to the thirty-year update of the book The Limits to Growth :
"A prime example of a non-renewable resource is made from fossil fuels, whose limits should be obvious, but many people, including eminent economists, deny this elementary fact. Over 80% of commercial energy use in 2000 came from non-renewable fossil fuels: oil, natural gas and coal. The underground reserves of fossil fuels are falling constantly and inexorably ...
Peak gas production will certainly within the next 50 years, oil production will peak much sooner, probably within this decade. "
Things scary. But false as the smile of a prostitute.
Oil is not a fossil fuel.
It is "renewable."
Although it has never been a fan of the Macho Putin, the Russians have demonstrated the accuracy of their theory in the only place that matters: the oil fields. The oil is not only abiotic but continues to popular fields that were known to be dry of oil as the desert wind. In fact, some scientists are convinced that the centrifugal force caused by the rotation of the planet push the abiotic oil to the surface of the planet on a continuous basis.
" There are some things the general public does not need to know and should not know. I am convinced that democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to publish what know. " - Was the Katherine Graham, owner of the Washington Post
Therefore Scam No. 2 is that oil is a fossil fuel (which is not), which is scarce and that you are consuming (which is not), which is not renewable (which is not) and that, consequently, it's a disaster (it is not) unless they drastically reduce oil consumption.
All lies, which lead us to the oldest scams: fraudulent No.3:
GLOBAL WARMING CLIMATE CHANGE
Figure harrowing a lonely polar bear who wanders in solitude somewhere in the Arctic that melts quickly became the most touching spot of the environmental movement.
The spot, however, is bogus. The bears are thriving. According to the
Wall Street Journal : "Almost everyone agrees that there are more polar bears now than when scientists began to count: estimates put the population between 20,000 and 25,000 units, increased by several times compared to 50 years ago. In Canada, home to two thirds of the bears of the world during the last two or three decades, most populations have increased. The inhabitants of the Arctic say that now they run wherever they go in the Bears' .
The "debate" on the bear pole is a stab in the heart of the foundation upon which the environmental movement: global warming.
While the appeal of the Club of Rome for a "sustainable development" content Limits development, has proved very weak in terms of scientific credibility, and the theory that oil is a fossil fuel that is rapidly depleting scarce and it is not true, the holy grail of the environmental movement is the Global Warming or Climate Change, as they renamed due to the embarrassing drop in temperatures over the past eleven years.
is the belief on which stands the movement.
The scripture is: the burning of fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide, with other "greenhouse" gases, causing global warming that will destroy the planet.
That is, the production of these gases must be "limited."
A first step is to legislate to abolish their use. Since human beings produces these gases, the true answer is population control, a declining population of the planet. Fewer people means less greenhouse gases. Less greenhouse gas means less global warming. Less global warming means that the earth is saved.
Amen.
Incidentally, all gases are greenhouse gases in the atmosphere as water vapor and carbon dioxide, which is said to contribute to the greenhouse effect.
Greenhouse Effect is the name of the phenomenon described above, where the earth's atmosphere traps the sun's rays heating up the planet. According theory, these gases in the atmosphere allow the passage of sunlight to the earth, but also absorb heat radiated from the surface of the planet.
And voila! Global warming.
seems sensible. By eliminating the CO 2 you save the world.
is an evil clearly identified with an action plan to resolve it.
A sort of Inquisition frying heretics is purified by faith.
Today's global warming heretics were burned in the media, not the stake, but the dogma is just as harsh, just as authoritarian and despotic. Scientifically proven
Al Gore is the Moses of global warming. Together with the high priests of the movement, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change United Nations (United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC), said that scientific research on global warming caused by man is "conclusive". There is nothing else to talk about: global warming is real, the cause is the CO 2 man-made, production of carbon should be limited. Point.
Al and the IPCC think the same way, which is great. Harmony in the ranks. The Oregon petition
But here's the question: 31,486 scientists have signed a document called a Petition Oregon accusing the poor to basic research of global warming, declaring simply that "... it was not shown any human contribution to climate change."
This is not a hired gang of politicians, or "activists" funded by George Soros. No sir, we are a signatory to 3667 atmospheric scientists, environmental and earth, 4,796 chemists, biologists and agronomists 2,924, 903 and 9,992 other mathematicians and computer scientists and engineers.
Of these, 9,092 have a PhD.
The petition states that there is no convincing scientific evidence that the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by humans is causing or will cause global warming.
goes on to say that there is substantial scientific evidence that shows that the atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects on the populations of plants and animals on Earth. (In one of the most spectacular touches of magic environment, Mother Nature converts carbon dioxide and sunlight into oxygen, you know, the stuff we breathe.)
the Senate Committee on Environment
In March 2009 the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has released a report of over 700 international scientists who dissent from the theory of manmade global warming. Many of those who contributed to this were members or former members of the IPCC.
Several other groups of scientists have published statements that vehemently criticize the lack of scientific credibility to support the theory that the production of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by humans contribute to global warming. Among these are the Declaration of Meteorologists on greenhouse gases, the Leipzig Declaration on Climate Change and the Heidelberg Appeal.
The IPCC falsified reports
If you read the articles on the environment you will notice that the "facts" about global warming inevitably cite the IPCC as the source.
In short, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change United Nations (IPCC) is the global leader opinion on the subject of climate change caused by man.
At least they were.
On 19 November 2009, the international media, broke one of the greatest scientific scandal in history, when it leaked the contents of hundreds of e-mail, exposing the blatant manipulation of climate data from the organization. The e-mail showed that the IPCC has distorted enormous amount of information on climate to promote the idea that global warming is the result of the increase in carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases produced by man.
It was not a bunch of college freshmen made of grass that during the examination of Geology elementary half years, he passed plagiarized responses. These beautiful types are recognized as the main "authority" on global climate change, were caught red-handed in a conspiracy to mislead the international environmental groups, governments and the general public on the current state and future of the planet's temperature.
This brief extract from the Canadian National Post pretty well tells the story.
"The email Climategate describe how a small band of climate scientists have falsified data to make it appear that the last century was dangerously hot.
The emails also describe how the band have conspired to rewrite history and science, particularly by eliminating the Medieval Warm Period, a period of 400 years which began around 1000.
Climategate The email also reveal something else: the recruitment of the most widely read source of information in the world, Wikipedia, to rewrite this history on a grand scale. "
The period of the Medieval Warm
How the refrain of a bad band in Las Vegas, the pernicious cult of climate change by the IPCC cultivated tried desperately to hide the Medieval Warm Period (Medieval Warm Period - MWP), to bury it, to make it disappear. This was the warmest period recorded in modern history, and is well known to climate scientists.
attempt a game of numbers illusionsimo worthy of Houdini, the IPCC has invented a bogus graph of temperatures in the story, and voila, the Medieval Warm Period is gone!
Ingenious.
See? Temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period were much higher than at present. Agriculture flourished and Norwegians taking advantage of the melting of ice in the seas and colonized Greenland. There is no evidence at that time the sea level has increased. None. And around the Greenland ice sheets were absent. Greenland, understand?
temperatures had risen rapidly, But where the carbon dioxide produced by humans? The oil had yet to be discovered, the factories were not built and the first Ford Model T would come several centuries later.
Then followed a mini ice age, and in 1500 the appropriations in Greenland had disappeared and the Thames in London froze up.
In none of these events was no factor "produced by man." These ebbs and flows in the global temperature was the product of the alternation of natural phenomena, as discussed in detail later.
But what about the IPCC,
"Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. On the contrary, there is evidence that the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere helps the environment. "- The Petition Oregon
The alarmists
In fact, the same mindset that is now promoting the consequences catastrophic global warming, he used only a few decades ago, the same arguments, almost word for word, to promote the pernicious consequences of temperature sag.
In 1975 Reid Bryson wrote on Global Ecology:
"The continued rapid cooling of the earth since the Second World War goes hand in hand with the overall increase in air pollution that accompanies industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and population explosion. "
Yes, my dear! CO 2 is causing global cooling.
Or consider Kenneth Watt, who in 1970 wrote sull'Earth Day:
" If the current trend continues, in 1990 the global average planetary temperature will be about four degrees colder, and by 2000 will be less than eleven degrees ... This is about double what it would be enough to bring us into an ice age. "
Well said, Ken.
There are others, but you get the idea.
These people, now as then, are alarmist. are some kind of perverse pleasure in scaring people. In this case, so scare that accepts the biggest scam of all time.
Feel how the merchants of climate chaos reviews the book of a terrorist of global warming, James Hansen, who also subtitles his book "The truth imminent climate catastrophe, and our last chance to save humanity."
"Dr. James Hansen is the Paul Revere that presages the tyranny of climate chaos." -Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
(Paul Revere, patriot of the American War of Independence, is famous for his historic ride to warn the rebels of the impending English attack. NDT)
"Hansen, with authority and a sense of urgency, urging readers to take the floor, down the streets if necessary to protect the Earth from disasters for the sake of their children and grandchildren." -Kirkus Reviews
disasters, chaos and catastrophe here cocaine media extremist global warming.
Statistics
The crack of the crisis and the catastrophe does not like to mention the fact that water vapor (not carbon dioxide) accounts for 95% of greenhouse gases. This water vapor is of natural origin 99.99% of "greenhouse gas" water vapor is a natural . Only 0.01% (one hundredth of one percent) Water vapor is produced by man.
However carbon dioxide is the designated culprit in this story. It must be really powerful, because the CO 2 amounts to only 3.6% of greenhouse gases. And here's the trick: only 3% of carbon dioxide - 3% 3.6% - is made by man. This means that 0.1% (one tenth of one percent) is CO 2 produced by man.
This, according to the messengers of doom climate, is what leads to the "climate catastrophe". International conferences are held, the government allocates billions of PR departments and environmental programs in a glut of tsunami universal dyed green.
It is as if someone had unleashed on the planet a cult planned to priests of global warming to scream about the horrors of carbon dioxide in a population that does not know or is unable to deal with the deafening madness of what they say.
In turn, the minions of the media regurgitate the chaos and disaster to millions of people. Their only aspiration is to fill the minds of the public to death, destruction, filth and depravity in the shortest possible time. But then, somewhere in their collective soul, they know ... and die of shame.
"We allow the most atrocious lies uttered by prostitutes politics and morality to pass without protest. These lies are endlessly recycled in the media business, while rooted in the public conscience as truth. "-Charles Sullivan, a writer and philosopher
Can I add an" Amen "?
The relationship to the sun I'm a Californian
. I love the sun. During spring break in college, me and my friends did some surfing on the west coast of Mexico, taking a coffee color, and returning to campus as a bronze of roasted in the sun. ... The girls swooned Okay Perhaps not fainted, but have an appointment was definitely easier.
I never came to mind, in those happy days, the sun would play a key role in an article that I later wrote about global warming. But it is so.
The fact is that the Earth has gone through natural cycles of warming and cooling throughout recorded history, cycles that have pushed the temperatures much higher than anything we are experiencing today.
What is the cause of these fluctuations in global temperature? The water vapor? No. Carbon dioxide? Eh ... sorry. Hairspray? You're kidding.
The origin of the temperature changes on earth is ... the sun.
Scientists have discovered that the sunspot activity cycle. Sunspots are regions of the surface of the sun's intense magnetic activity: the more sunspots there are, the sun is "active".
The activity of sunspots and solar radiation goes virtually hand in hand with changes in temperature on Earth. Already, the cause of global warming and cooling cycles of the sun, not CO 2 manmade.
If greenhouse gases were the cause of global warming, how is it that from 1940 to 1975, where there was a dramatic increase in the production of CO 2 , the earth has experienced a significant cooling period?
Periods of warming on Earth are the result of increased solar radiation, which prevents the formation of clouds. The formation of clouds have a cooling effect on the planet. This is further supported by the fact that other planets in our solar system seem to warm up over the same periods of time. Yet you do not drive Chevrolet on Pluto or burning coal on Mars.
This, then, is the Scam # 3: Global Warming is a huge strategic PR campaign and nothing else. It is not a phenomenon of global temperature. Sorry, Al
"The greatest evils that man has inflicted humans have occurred by people who are quite sure of something, in fact, was false. "- Bertrand Russell
So what's the problem? Why all this misleading information and this climate change hysteria?
Let me introduce you to # 4 Scam....
Biofuels
One of my friend late at night makes the rounds of restaurants and collects used vegetable oil. He uses it in his Mercedes diesel, so old that next year will benefit from Medicare, the government health services for the elderly. He has converted to use the Mercedes' vegetable oil as fuel.
Biofuels are one of the solutions to the "crisis of carbon dioxide."
Biofuels are fuels produced essentially with plants.
There are two basic types of biofuels. Ethanol, which can be used as gasoline and is made from corn, sugar cane, sugar beet, wheat and other grains, and biodiesel is produced from oil seeds, dried fruits and nuts (like walnuts and almonds) or waste oil ( as for the old Mercedes before).
It is assumed that biofuels are clean, cheap and do not emit carbon. But do not examine them too closely because the environmental consequences of their use seem to emerge from a novel by Stephen King. Deforestation
the world's tropical rainforests are destroyed as if some frantic Green Giant (in the English text Jolly Green Giant , NDT) same operating a huge lawn in the Amazon.
Biofuels are widely promoted as a solution to the production of carbon dioxide. But closer inspection reveals that damage the environment on two fronts: the first is the massive deforestation of the planet.
Tropical forests are the largest reservoirs of carbon dioxide on the planet. In other words, they capture and store carbon dioxide more efficiently than any other resource.
cutting down forests, not only will free huge amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but you eliminate the supply of carbon dioxide and an oxygen generator (again, for the benefit of those who slept through biology courses of the university, or who, like me, have never had the courage to follow them, the plants use carbon dioxide and sunlight to produce oxygen).
directives of governments and the greed of multinational corporations promoting a culture of biofuels so intense that tropical forests are vanishing from the planet at a frightening speed.
The European Union, for example, imposed by law a reduction of carbon dioxide by 20 percent by 2020. This must be achieved in part by requiring that 10 percent of vehicles go to biofuels. Financial incentives, we will examine in more detail forward, led the investment in biofuels by $ 5 billion in 1995 to $ 100 billion estimated for 2010. Everyone from George Soros to British Petroleum, Shell, are involved in this market.
As a result, large tracts of rainforest dell'Amazonia, Brazil, have been destroyed to grow soy and sugar cane. Last year, Brazil announced proudly that the plan for doubling of deforestation proceeded without delay.
A report of the Friends of the Earth revealed that between 1985 and 2000, the development of oil palm plantations in Malaysia has been responsible for 87 percent of deforestation in the country. Eighty-seven percent! In fact, now we speak of palm oil as "deforestation diesel".
In Sumatra and Borneo, 4 million hectares of forest have been lost in favor of plantations of oil palm (9.8 million acres, almost double the state of New Hampshire).
As if it were a parasite added to Mother Nature, deforestation has led to the extinction of species as a Holocaust. The forests of Malaysia and Indonesia are home to orangutans, Sumatran rhinos, tigers, gibbons, tapirs, proboscis monkeys and the hundreds of other species, many of which are seriously endangered by habitat loss.
Then there is this little problem: while biofuels produce the lowest emissions of carbon dioxide than oil, they do so by replacing the vegetation and soil, which absorb an even greater amount of carbon dioxide. In other words, the absorption of carbon dioxide that is lost razing the nature reserves to grow biofuels is much greater than the benefits obtained by using clean fuels.
The "inconvenient truth" is that the craze for biofuels is destroying nature and, incidentally, is increasing carbon dioxide on the planet, decreases.
Pollution of the oceans and dead zones
If you happen to pass by a pond and you notice a smell acrid, burning eyes or have you heard that you saw was covered with a thick layer of vegetable red, blue or green, you've probably had the misfortune of hitting a HABs, Harmful Algal Bloom (harmful algal blooms).
The term Harmful algae are all those phytoplankton species that can cause adverse environmental effects, such as discoloration of the sea surface (sea colored or red tide ), mucilage, mortality of fish and other organisms, contamination the food chain through the production of biotoxins.
In almost all cases, biofuel production is accompanied by the use of nitrogen, phosphorus, herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, etc..
Nitrogen, along with other toxic materials, seeps down into the groundwater and can reach rivers, streams and eventually the ocean. There nitrogen and to a lesser extent, pesticides create a massive "algae bloom" very toxic and abnormal, which decay rapidly into huge areas of dead algae-sucking oxygen. This is highly destructive to marine life.
The cultivation of corn is the most extensive use of fertilizers and pesticides. No surprise, then, that in the area of \u200b\u200bmaize cultivation in the U.S. there is the greatest concentration of these toxins. The result? Nitrogen and other toxins in the finite system of the Mississippi River were discharged without mercy in the Gulf of Mexico, creating a dead zone of 22,000 square kilometers (an area about the size of New Jersey). It is not just the Gulf of Mexico. The number of ocean dead zones has spread like a cancer in the world environment.
Since the fashion of biofuel in the '80s, the number of dead zones has increased by 450 percent.
But not all.
Extinction of Species
Currently there are about 405 dead zones on the planet, including the largest, of 70,000 square kilometers (larger than the state of Virginia), is located in the Baltic Sea. The extinction of species is a direct consequence of these areas. Over the past 10 years, between the bodies of 14,000 seals and dolphins were found stranded on the coasts of California and 650 gray whales were beached. In Florida, hundreds of manatees were killed and 80 percent of the coral reef in the Caribbean has been stifled. In California, 75 percent of the kelp forest rich in fish has been ruined and the problem is beginning to affect the availability of fish for human consumption.
on the planet have been identified approximately 1.7 million species of plants and animals. According to some reports, the extinction of the species moves at an average of 20,000 to 30,000 per year. Whatever the number, only last year the list of endangered species has increased by 150 percent. The single greatest reason for this is habitat destruction and pollution, most of which is the result of biofuel production.
you feel hot and sweaty all over, is not it? Oxygen depletion
not know about you, but I'm quite favorable to breathe. Gives life a certain awareness.
So the fact that the production of biofuels is consuming the oxygen of the planet is a bit 'more than a little problem.
sounds alarmist, right? Maybe even a little 'conspiracy. How could one of the most effective solutions to global warming destroying the planet's oxygen supply?
The oceans are the major reservoir of carbon dioxide (the rainforests are the most effective tank of carbon dioxide, the oceans the largest). Algae of the oceans are absorbing the bulk of CO 2 land. That's right, the sponges of the main ground for CO 2 are algae in the oceans.
Then the algae convert sunlight and CO 2 oxygen in the ocean.
From 70 to 80 percent of the world oxygen is produced by algae in the oceans. However, nitrogen, phosphates and other chemicals spilled in the oceans around the world, as a result of biofuel production, are destroying the element the same that produces the bulk of oxygen: the algae in the oceans.
Scam This is the No. 4: Biofuels do not reduce carbon dioxide destroying rainforests and consume the air we breathe. Which begs the question: are these people drunk is the brain, is simply evil o. .. there is something else at play?
And this brings us to the last piece of the puzzle and the final scam.
CARBON CREDITS
(carbon credits are each worth one ton of carbon dioxide. In an environment where the issue is given a limit of total greenhouse gas credits are sold by the issuer of its less maximum those who are not allowed within limits. - NDT)
I know that you will be shocked when I tell you that the banksters (gangster bankers) have bared their teeth in the programs on climate change as the pitbull stuffed with "ice" (methamphetamine).
In America you hear the mantra "the planet is a space that is melting furnace and ice caps, destroying the polar bears and transforming Des Moines (Iowa's capital, at the confluence of two rivers) in a seaside resort."
The solution? Pass laws that "discourage" the production of carbon dioxide by taxing their use. Ah, then turn the charge in derivatives so that Goldman Sachs and his friends can be a great Binge eating (see the chapter "The Goldman Connection" in my e-book Crisis by Design at www.behindthewizardscurtain.com .)
The people marketing this plot called "carbon credits".
The Kyoto Protocol Kyoto
the horizon dotted with many of the oldest Buddhist temples in Japan. One of these ancient shrines are built on a lake. The lake water is so pristine that the best way to distinguish the temple by his reflex is to throw a stone into the water and see which of the two images ripples.
This allegorical introduction serves to indicate that things are not always as seem, even in the land of many Buddhas.
In 1997 in Kyoto was signed an international agreement to limit emissions of greenhouse gases. Named after the host city and using a term more suited to a novel by Robert Ludlum: The Kyoto Protocol.
The Kyoto Protocol and subsequent agreements of Marrakech agreement that set limits or quotas to the maximum amount of greenhouse gas that each country can emit. In turn, every nation must allocate emission allowances to companies and other organizations, which are called operators.
Therefore, we assume that every company in every country that signed the Kyoto Protocol has a budget of "carbon credits". Companies that exceed their allocation must buy carbon credits. These can be purchased from "green" companies that have not used their allocation of carbon or can be purchased on a "bag of carbon."
Take for example a furniture factory. The plant emits 125 tons of carbon dioxide a year, but his budget is 100 t. Now the factory has cut production to align with the quota of 100 tonnes, or buy 25 credits, for example, from a company that produces biofuels combustibility "carbon neutral", an entirely different view of the madness of biocombustibilii.
As the population grows, you create new businesses and expand existing ones their production, energy use (and therefore the combustibility based on carbon emissions) will increase. The odds for the nation, however, will be lowered.
course, the more shares (the limits) are lowered, the greater the value of carbon credits.
Now you have the picture: the rules of supply and demand will prevail and the cost of carbon credits it includes the mechanism of the price increase.
Cap-and-Trade Legislation
(Cap: The maximum amount of allowances, trade: trade in carbon credits - NDT)
Moreover, while the U.S. has not signed the Kyoto Protocol and the Summit Copenhagen has proved little more than a cacophonous storm of press releases, Obama has pledged on the goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions to 17% below 2005 levels this year and to reduce them by 80% 2050.
This is precisely the mandate of the law "cap-and-trade to the U.S. House of Representatives approved in June 2009.
's right, the same circus that last year led to a deficit of U.S. $ 1.5 trillion budget passed a law to force them to use less energy, because the CO 2 cause warming overall.
Except that there is no global warming; temperatures continued to decline over the last decade, even if not, the carbon dioxide produced by man has nothing to do with any dangerous climate change: nada, zero, nothing.
Can you imagine the consequences of this type of legislation for industry and commerce?
To understand the full extent of the effects of this madness, regarded as Britain. The Secretary of State for the Environment of the United Kingdom has promised legislation that will set carbon emissions, legally binding, less than 60% in 2050. He also conducted a feasibility study to provide a "credit card" on the carbon to every citizen in a national system carbon rationing.
With this plan, each would receive an annual allocation of carbon that could be spent on products such as food, energy and travel. Individuals should swipe their card for every purchase of carbon fuel, payment of utility bill or booking a flight.
Force, review it as well. So the words do not change.
The British Parliament, which seems to be suffering from a collective mental illness, has gone so far as to grant to local bureaucrats the power to break into the house without a warrant of citizens and, among other things, see if there are no refrigerators certification of eco-friendly category.
Here we have before eyes a system that is literally going crazy.
limits of carbon and the subsequent sale of "credits" (known as trade Cap-and-Trade) solutions are created to cope with a catastrophic problem - although that does not exist - by what is obviously the better PR orchestrated campgna history.
The solution not only provides a global system of economic control through the imposition of limits for each company (and the United Kingdom for each citizen), but it will make its creators and their allies rich beyond imagination.
At a tactical level, the Cap-and-Trade does three things: it suppresses the production thereby increasing unemployment; pushing the interests of biocombustibilii (depending on the carbon credits) that are destroying the ecosystem of the earth, and if this will continue, will destroy the very air we breathe, and creates a new massive international Ponzi scheme with the greatest enjoyment of the big investment banks .
have already been orchestrated five "climate change" that have to do with the sale of carbon credits. The two major stock exchanges are the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which is the only U.S. company that claims to trade carbon credits, in Europe and the European Climate Exchange (ECX), half owned by the CCX. There
the stock market where stocks and bonds are traded, and there's a commodities market where they exchange things like gold, silver, corn, wheat and soybeans. Now comes the bag of carbon, where carbon credits are bought and sold in the form of derivatives.
E derivatives certainly have made us a great service last year, is not it?
In short, derivatives contracts are essentially any type of product bundling in a financial instrument that can be traded: bought and sold. A contract for 100 ounces of gold is a derivative because the contract is not the actual gold.
banks and other entities buy carbon credits, packaged and sold a trillion. This is already well started in Europe, where the carbon offset (or compensation claims due to neutralization of carbon emissions by "green activities") are traded since 2005.
The prediction of the carbon market is on the order of trillions in the U.S. will begin the moment when the Senate approved the bill on the cap-and-trade. This law will have to sift the House and be sent to President Obama, who has made this legislation a political key, second only to the health service.
All are organized and ready to go. The big banks have invested in carbon-friendly firms: Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Bank of America and Citigroup are among of the players. Not to be left behind, the World Bank entered the CCX and now operates a Carbon Fund for Europe helping countries to meet the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol.
Is not it amazing?
Very large companies, including major oil companies, are strong advocates of cap-and-trade legislation and are also members of these exchanges of carbon. Why should an oil company about this game?
As generators of large amounts of CO 2 , oil companies will have to purchase a large number of carbon credits. If the price of oil has shot up, they get substantial profits from oil trading. However, as hand, the price of oil goes up, as the price rises of carbon credits. You see, the more expensive oil becomes, the more people turn to cheaper energy produced from coal. Coal generates about twice as much CO 2 oil, which means that the demand for carbon credits will increase to offset emissions from coal.
In this way, the oil company wins either way. Profiting from oil is rising in the value of its portfolio of carbon credits.
You see, this is a market that can only be created if governments (or international organizations accredited) law to impose standards on emissions. In so doing, They instantly create a carbon market, given that many companies will buy carbon offsets.
If governments impose limits on carbon emissions, will come on the market. Otherwise, no.
Carbon markets in Europe have plummeted after the Copenhagen conference has failed to establish legally binding emission limits for major industrialized nations.
see how it works?
And remember, the emission standards do not increase with population growth or increasing the number of plants and factories for their production. They are subject to limits which are then further lowered. Therefore, the carbon credits continue to rise in price as supply continues to fall, pushing up demand. The escalation of profit is intrinsic, if governments impose standards.
and ready to become the first billionaire of the carbon is nothing less than ... Albert Arnold Gore
, Jr.
not hard to imagine Al Gore with the collar of a Protestant pastor.
After all, he attended Vanderbilt Divinity School as a young man, an act of "purification", as he said after his wife.
And he called greenhouse gases "... a moral question deeply unethical", which must be why it warns dall'Armageddon environment with such religious zeal:
"... unless we act boldly and quickly to deal with the root causes of global warming, our world will undergo a series of terrible disasters, including hurricanes increasing in number and most violent Katrina ...
"Today we hear and see the scary warnings of the worst potential catastrophe in the history of human civilization: a global climate crisis that is becoming deeper, and is quickly becoming more dangerous than anything we have ever faced."
What we do, Brother Al, how we solve the "worst potential catastrophe in the history of human civilization?
"Cap-and-trade, my son, cap-and-trade."
There is only one little thing that you should know about the sermon by Brother Al: if governments impose the cap-and-trade legislation that he says, the virtuosity, the Morale, Al is preparing to take the Ethics billion.
You see, pushing governments around the world to put a limit on carbon emissions, which will force companies to buy carbon credits, he is also the president and founder of a private equity company (a private company investments open to institutional investors or individuals with high consistency sheet) called Generation Investment Management (GIM), which invests in ... you guessed it ... on carbon credits.
The article by Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone outlines the structure so excellent.
"The feature of this plan, which has a special charm for speculators is that the 'cap' (the roof) on carbon will continue to be lowered by governments, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce each passing year. This means that this is a new commodity market where the main commodity to be exchanged is certain that increase in price over time. The volume of this new market will exceed a trillion dollars a year, to make a comparison , the total annual revenue Combination of all electricity suppliers in the United States are 320 billion dollars. "
A blog of the Private Sector World Bank regularly gets excited about the brother, whose partner in GIM are those high priests of Wall Street ritual: bankers Goldman Sachs in harnesses. The co-founder of the company is David Blood (literally David Blood), former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management; other former Goldman ninety include Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Assisting in the creation of his house investments of "ethics" was nothing less than to the godfather of the derivatives on Wall Street, which has fueled the global financial crisis and was the star of Rescue a trillion dollars of investment banks in 2008: former U.S. Treasury Secretary, Hammering (the hammer) Hank Paulson.
Goldman for a long time pushing the cap-and-trade legislation, having spent $ 3.5 million in lobbying on climate issues in 2008. The bank also owns 10% of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) above. The CCX is the only American company that claims to trade carbon credits and, as noted above, owns 50% of the scholarship sister in Europe, the European Climate Exchange (ECX).
The members of the Chicago Climate Exchange, as well as GIM, including Ford Motor Company, Amtrak, DuPont, Dow Corning, International Paper, Motorola and other companies first category that emit carbon dioxide. This not only gives them a "home" from which WHEREUPON offset their claims, but also the opportunity to invest in speculative loans. If the legislation passes
cap-and-trade, business and the revenue will go to the stars of the CCX and its members stand to profit greedily.
And who is the majority shareholder of the Chicago Climate Exchange?
's right, the Generation Investment Management of Brother Al
Amen, Amen, Brother Al.
People know that it is greed that flows through the veins of Goldman Sachs. I'm in a category all their own, to loot the financial markets as pirates of old times. But what about the ethics?
you think there is a conflict of interest in his relentless will warn that the worst catastrophe in human history if Congress does not legalize the restrictions on carbon, when his investment company is the largest shareholder of the only American Stock Exchange carbon and the same company only invests in opportunities resulting from carbon offset?
Do you think that Al has taken the color of her partner predators?
Another partner in Gore's GIM (silent man) is Maurice Strong, a man who many credited as the godfather of the environmental movement. Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange and is known to have - as we should call them? - Extreme environmental views.
Once Strong told a reporter the plot of a novel in which the rich countries of the world refused to sign an agreement to reduce its environmental impact. In order to save the planet, a small group of world leaders decided that the only hope for humanity was the collapse of civilization indistrializzate. The plot
Strong asserts that imaginary finds its echo in real life at the hands of extremists of the environmental movement. Paul Ehrlich, professor of population studies at Stanford, said "We must launch a massive campaign to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system in line with ecology and the realities of the situation of the world's resources' .
And Michael Oppenheimer, the Environmental Defense Fund (Fund for the Protection of the Environment), said "The only hope for the world is to ensure that there is no other nation like the United States. We can not allow other nations have the same number of cars and the amount of U.S. industrialization. We must stop these Third World countries right where they are ".
Fortunately, these are not the views of most environmentalists. Most of them are people worried when they saw the rivers become toxic because of chemical poisons, the rainforests being destroyed, species become extinct by the thousands, and are interested enough to want to do something about it.
The problem is that the information has been provided misleading and grossly misleading and seek to develop solutions to a problem that does not exist, solutions that make things infinitely worse. There ARE
critical environmental problems on this planet that, if unresolved, can cause devastating consequences. But global warming is not one of them and Loading agent which are being led by partisan interests are not only false, but just cause the problems that worry the environmentalists.
This, then, is a brief summary of the key elements Morris:
The theory of global warming of the Club of Rome and their deceptive call for "sustainable development" are based on junk science.
global anxiety about the exhaustion of fossil fuels on the planet is based on a lie. The oil shortage is a myth. Oil is not a fossil fuel and is a renewable resource.
Global warming is an invention. The planet is cooling down for over a decade, has experienced temperatures much hotter than that existed long before industrialization and carbon emissions due to human addition of carbon dioxide is what the plants use to create oxygen.
The biocombustibilii are not a solution to global environmental problems, rather they are highly destructive for life on Earth.
carbon credits are an evil scam. Financial products made possible only by taxation policies are based on a non-issue and destroy the economies of the world, enriching the great international bankers and global elite beyond imagination.
Although the real environmentalists do not have the draconian views of Michael Oppenheimer or Paul Ehrlich, if you allow the laws on the cap-and-trade to come into force, their visions of an apocalypse industry would become entirely possible.
SOLUTIONS
1. It should make every effort to immediately cancel carbon credits. This is true both on a local, national or international level. For example, there is a bill cap-and-trade with the U.S. Senate that has great importance in the program of the federal government.
Environmentalists ill-informed, or the "environmentalists" who benefit from the program of carbon credits, are pushing the legislation with the passion that comes from ignorance or blatant thirst for power and wealth.
"This system, which may seem like free market, is something only a bureaucrat can imagine. The trick is that the carbon market exists only because the imposition a roof by the government creates an artificial shortage in its ability to produce energy. "-Deborah Corey Barnes, the PoliReport , Washington, DC
The damaging effects of a similar law on the economy of the United States, or on ' economy of any nation that adopts such legislation are obvious and the law must be stopped, or repealed if it were already in force. In California, for example, has already approved a law that decreed a cut of 25 percent emissions by 2020. No one was quite "obvious" to brand the law as "extermination of the economy" status, so here I will.
2. Countries should withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol and void, together with the current agreements made in Copenhagen.
This applies similarly to all underdeveloped countries, albeit from a different perspective. The simplicity of the thing is that carbon credits are destroying economies, environments and life. But the third world countries have considerable power: if they withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol and carbon credits forbid, the carbon credit system will fail, despite the laws passed in the U.S. or EU. Requires cooperation of both developed countries to underdeveloped ones, because they have the resources to offset the carbon (rain forests, etc.).
is important that they understand that if you adhere to the system to make easy money immediately, make some money by selling credits in the short term, but when it gradually industrialized, have to buy them back, and then what will it cost? The African Union has the right to impose anything.
3. You should legislate against the production of biofuel, because as a source of vital energy is insignificant and it creates more environmental destruction of all previous conventional causes.
4. There is a need for effective action to truly protect the environment: reducing the use of harmful fertilizers and gradually replace them with harmless products (eliminating the production of biofuels would improved and more immediate).
5. Resize deforestation banning the production of biofuels, which would also lead to an immediate environmental improvement and preservation of species.
do not need a great insight to see how much control can be exercised by every government in the world on the national economy, asset or a housewife promulgating a standard for emissions of carbon dioxide. As one observer noted above, this is nothing less than complete control of energy production.
When Gorbachev, speaking for the Club of Rome, said: "The threat of an environmental crisis caused by 'internal disaster' will be the key that opens the doors to the New World Order , "the kind of New World Order that their claims were intended to coal.
Because, ultimately, global warming is nothing but a PR campaign of global governance.
We must act quickly and decisively. The Club of Rome has a great advantage and controls most of the media. We must not neglect our responsibilities, if for us the power of choice, the freedom to produce and self-determination are economic values \u200b\u200bto consider.
Store this joker in the box and let's keep it there. Civilization does not need it.
© 2010 by John Truman Wolfe. All rights reserved. Translation by NSOE.source: http://www.nsoe.info/anatomia-di-una-truffa
0 comments:
Post a Comment