Europe Rejects Global-Warming,
But Many Americans Believe Gore
And Liberal Media Totally Refuses
Climate-Gate Story Coverage
Oh what a difference the Atlantic Ocean makes . . . roughly two years after Al Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize for his “documentary” pseudo-pscience-FICTION work “An Inconvenient Truth” (the film also won an Oscar from the Hollywood crowd), European newspapers and television became awash in the revelations of the Climate-Gate Scandal (see link #1 above). Very quickly the embarrassing frauds and cover-ups and phony pscience pshenanigans drove Europe, which had been far more gung-ho about man-caused global warming than America, into a solidly sensibly refusal to honor environmental extremism in any way, shape or form.
Today Europeans call environmental extremists and ecotage advocates “mean-greenies” and “watermelons” (green on the outside but pink or even RED on the inside . . . meaning they are mere pretenders at environmentalism who use the contrived global warming scenario in hopes of instituting greater socialistic and even communistic-type totalitarian regimes); and carbon-trading or cap-and-trade schemes there are all but dead. Of course, Global-Warming is still a big argument on this side of the Atlantic where the liberal-mainstream media considers the East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit’s (CRU) scandalous behavior a non-story and continues to support Al Gore’s lies. The second and third link above gives the details of how CRU deliberately omitted data from the warmest 350 years in recent history (a time when Greenland was indeed Green; when the Vikings could settle there and even push on to explore North America: a time called the Medieval Warm Period.
When you eliminate records of the warmest 350 years in a 2,500 year study you’re definitely going to get an average temperature for the earth that is much cooler than the real honest average. That’s the kind of people that are pushing the global-warming agenda . . . corrupt politicians and corrupt scientists.
For Al Gore and about 60 of his well-known progressive**cronies (including but definitely NOT limited to Franklin Raines, Hillary and Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Joel Rogers, Richard Sandor, John Ayers, George Soros, Valerie Jarret, the head men at Goldman-Sachs, etc., etc. ad nauseum all up to their eye-teeth involved in CCX, the Chicago Climate eXchange) the Climate-Gate scandal was a monstrous personal financial disaster that prevented them from pocketing hundreds of Billion$$$ and even TRillion$$$. With all their influence in Europe gone seemingly overnight, the difficulties caused by the 2009 U.S. Senate’s refusal to ratify a Cap and Trade bill, earlier passed in Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives by five votes, brought about the elimination of CCX entirely – almost ten years work and scheming down the drain.
Nevertheless multi-billionaire currency-manipulator George Soros (“The man who broke the Bank of England”) and his toady Barack Obama soldier on striving for greater federal government control of our natural resources. How? By seeking to use presidential-regulatory fiat via the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to eliminate the entire coal industry and virtually handcuff the petroleum industry in America. If you’ll examine the last two links above, you’ll hear Barack Obama’s interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in which he promised to bankrupt the coal industry and that his policies “will necessarily cause the price of electricity to sky-rocket.” The Chronicle did NOT publish this story and the mainstream-lamestream media has sat on it unwilling to tell Americans the truth for over three years now. The EPA, then, is Barack Obama’s tool for carrying out those two stupid and evil promises. Right now the coal industry which provides the power that gives us 49% of our electricity is under fire from the EPA and some American coal mines and some American coal-fired power plants are already being forced toward bankruptcy. Not only Millions of jobs, but also Billions of dollar$$$ in increased electrical bills are at stake.
Al Gore came within a whisker of becoming the world’s first “green Billionaire,” with a B, despite having a personal ‘carbon-footprint’^^ the size of Las Vegas: including three huge mansions (the last one in California cost over $8 Million) and two private jets. Barack Obama, however as he revealed in his first autobiography Dreams from My Father is a communist son of a communist father who, in his only known published writing, shows a heavy interest in 100% taxation, government seizing land and business, and government controlling all aspects of the economy.
Barack Obama is driven toward higher goals than mere money and mere power. Barack Obama believes in the necessity, efficacy and benefit of Totalitarian Communism just as his father did. He is a “watermelon” . . . pretending interest in green activity on the outside to further socialistic and communistic aims that lie deep within his heart. Our liberal media is now committed to advancing Obama’s re-election campaign as they did his original election . . . and to advancing the progressive agenda no matter what the cost to America and to her people. Americans are being denied the information necessary to make intelligent decisions by the media which thinks they, like Obama, know more about what’s good for us, than we ourselves do. Inform your friends and neighbors and every intelligent voter you can find, this “movement” for global-warming is a red herring for total government control. But, first, do NOT trust me. Do not trust the greenies, read the links above, get all the information you can find and make an informed evaluation of where exactly the truth in this matter lies.##
Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery,
** Progressivism is the doctrine that we must “progress” beyond the “ill-conceived and outdated U.S. Constitution” if we are to ever make “progress” toward an earthly Utopia.
^^ Of course carbon dioxide is vital to life on this planet including creating our oxygen and even is crucial for the production of rain. When CO2 is low, droughts ensue.
## Rajjpuut recently wrote a blog on the 13 most dangerous items ever published
the part of that article which might shock you is that counting down from #13 to #1, the single most dangerous thing ever published in Rajjpuut’s not-so-humble opinion was:
The book: Silent Spring by Rachel Carson
Whatever was said about global warming pseudo-pscientific pshenanigans is true in spades about environmental “research” into products that keep humanity safe . . . such as DDT.
While the verdict is still out on whether Cap and Trade legislation or regulatory edict will take hold and cripple America’s economy, Ms. Carson has quietly passed Jack the Ripper, Ted Bundy, the Cuban combo of Castro and Che Guevara, Pol Pot, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao to move onto the throne as the all-time #1 mass murderer. She did it with her little science-FICTION book masquerading as real science: Silent Spring. Despite documenting no actual science, Ms. Carson was able to practically create the extremist wing of the environmental movement single-handedly; and to influence the American government and the United Nations to institute a worldwide ban on DDT, the most effective and most harmless insecticide ever created.
By 1972, deaths from just one tropical mosquito-borne disease, malaria, had dropped to 41,400 worldwide. Now and for virtually every single one of the 38 years since the DDT ban took effect malaria deaths stand at roughly 2.1 million yearly, not to mention the even greater number of surviving millions who will now spend every third day of their life suffering the ravages of malaria’s fever. All told, considering all the nine deadly tropical diseases dramatically reduced using DDT which are now running rampant, Ms. Carson has killed about 98 million people.
Rajjpuut has been told about a showman who purportedly would drink DDT as tea and also use it as salad dressing. The safety of the substance is seen in the fact that it was sprayed directly upon U.S. servicemen in World War II; and upon their clothing and tents; and that today many African nations are starting to avoid the DDT ban and use DDT again – their favorite way? They spray their huts inside and out three times yearly.
Despite Ms. Carson’s undocumented claims of testing, no human has ever been proved to have developed cancer from DDT exposure; no animals with fewer than six legs has ever been shown to have been harmed by DDT; and DDT has never been shown to actually make birds’ eggshells thinner: QED. But lack of DDT, definitely kills 2.1 million people a year. As Hippocrates said, “First do NO HARM.”
Speaking of harm . . . although the Climate-Gate scandal wasn’t uncovered in Europe until early November, 2009, in March of 2009 the British Parliament published its results into an investigation of the East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) and man-caused global-warming. The progressives in control of Parliament at that time did their best to hide the real meat of the investigation. In volume two of the report, there is a memorandum submitted as evidence from Lord Lawson of Blaby, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which was in response to four very significant questions from the investigating committee. This memo confirms the claims by many global warming skeptics that the scientists at CRU were trying to hide data and silence the skeptics. The questions asked by the investigative committee are as follows:
(i) Have the CRU scientists been manipulating the raw surface temperature data in a way that is less than wholly objective and dispassionate?
(ii) Have they refused dissenting scientists and/or other outsiders with a bona fide interest in global warming access to the raw data, contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
(iii) Have they been improperly seeking to avoid answering Freedom of information Act requests?
(iv) Have they actively sought to prevent papers by dissenting scientists, statisticians, or other informed commentators from being peer-reviewed and/or published, again contrary to the proper canons of scientific research and to the demands of scientific integrity?
Lord Lawson's response to these questions is damning:
“We believe that there is compelling evidence both independent of the leaked email exchanges and arising from those emails to suggest that the answers to (ii), (iii) and (iv) above are clearly 'yes'.”
However, Lord Lawson chooses his words more carefully in answering the smoking-gun question at the top of the list: “Moreover, we are disturbed by the CRU scientists' treatment of the so-called divergence problem. That is the fact that, for that period of time where both a proxy global temperature series and a recorded global temperature series are available, the two series markedly diverge. This clearly suggests either that the proxy series is unreliable or that the recorded series is unreliable (or possibly both: the point is that they cannot both be true). The CRU scientists' attempt to hide the problem by concealing the divergence demonstrates, we believe, a lack of integrity.”
If this study had been taken seriously in Europe there’s a good chance that Climate-Gate would have happened many, many months earlier. If it and the Climate-Gate scandal had been reported here (as well as Barack Obama’s, Al Gore’s and George Soros’ conflict of interest with regard to CCX) in America, there’s a good chance that our economy would now be humming again as Congress responded to the American people’s awareness and disgust with Washington corruption on energy and the environment. As American Thinker tells us, “Integrity is at the very heart of the Man-Caused GW debate -- not just the integrity of the discredited scientists involved, but also the integrity of the data used by the CRU. For many years, the global warming skeptics have been citing that the differing data sets are not in agreement and have asked the simple question "why?" Their assertion has always been that until a scientific explanation for the differences is found, there can be no definitive conclusion concerning M-CGW. This question was always avoided by the now-discredited Dr. Jones, who headed up the CRU. But finally, some light has been shed onto the question of integrity of the data.”
By the way, in the United States the cost of carbon-trading tax legislation would reach $10 Trillion yearly or 40% of the economy without producing a good or service. Since the entire real economy is worth only $15 Trillion that means that costs of all other goods and services would rise 67% with the profits going to Gore and his cronies ($10 TR/$15 TR = 67%). Nevertheless Gore and his buddy George Soros are still pushing global warming and carbon trading via the United Nations and Soros’ lackey Barack Obama has pledged to comply with whatever programs the U.N. comes up with.