3
POPSBritain's Lord Monckton Warns About Dangers of Climate Change Treaty - Video 10/30/09
Bolton thinks the treaty is dangerous, but is not prepared to go as far as Monckton yet. But he said it does have the potential to do great damage. Even if Obama signs it, it would require a two-thirds vote of the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty and make us bound to the terms. Fascinating discussion. The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam By John Coleman January 28, 2009 (Revised and edited February 11, 2009) Back in the 1960s, this global warming research came to the attention of a Canadian born United Nation's bureaucrat named Maurice Strong. He was looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm, Sweden in 1970. From this he developed a committee of scientists, environmentalists and political operatives from the UN to continue a series of meetings. Strong developed the concept that the UN could demand payments from the advanced nations for the climatic
6
POPSWho Is And Isn't Qualified To Speak On Global Warming? This is different than the Times’ (and others’) treatment of and lack of interest in the academic training of the individual regularly cited without such “just an economist” commentary as a leading and essentially unimpeachable authority, the economist and former railway engineer Rajendra Pachauri. The Times has even hailed Pachauri in the past as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s chief “climatologist”. Climatology is a specialty field if ever there was one but a qualification which Pachauri, for all of his other virtues toiling for years in the UN vineyards, attained by virtue of being appointed to head the IPCC. This is unfairly disparate treatment. Read more http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/25/who-is-and-isnt-qualified-to-speak-on-global-warming/#more-8630
0
POPSKlimabetrug: Keine Klimaerwärmung, sondern Abkühlung!
Genau das Gegenteil ist eingetreten, was uns die UNO, die Politiker, die Umweltschützer, die Wissenschaftler, die Medien und überhaupt alle Angstmacher mit ihrer Propaganda schon seit Jahrzehnten erzählen. Auch der Demagoge Al Gore mit seinem Film “Eine bequeme Lüge ” ist entlarvt. Alle Vorhersagen sind komplett falsch. Die Natur hat einen Strich durch die Rechnung gemacht. Professor Latif hat vor der UNO-Klimakonferenz in Genf, dem jährlichen Treffen des sogenannten „wissenschaftlichen Konsens “ bestehend aus 1’500 führende Klimaforscher über die menschliche Ursache der Klimaerwärmung gesagt, die Erde hat sich in den letzten 10 Jahren nicht erwärmt und wir werden wahrscheinlich für die nächsten „zehn bis zwanzig Jahre eine Temperaturabkühlung erleben. “ Das ist eine sensationelle Kehrtwende. Die sogenannten Qualitätsmedien verschweigen das der Bevölkerung. In wessen Auftrag tun sie das? Wer bezahlt, wer schmiert die Qualitätsmedien? Die Medien
0
POPSClimate trouble may be bubbling up in far north By CHARLES J. HANLEY (AP) – 13 hours ago I think the chilling comment is "They said up to 10 percent of the undersea permafrost area had melted, and it was "highly possible" that this would open the way to abrupt release of an estimated 50 billion tons of methane".
5
POPSThin green line is bad science "On Tuesday, Inhofe issued a statement from Capitol Hill that noted how scientists with independent views don't get on too well with the IPCC. Witness Chris Landsea of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who resigned from the IPCC this year because He believed an IPCC top hurricane scientist wrongly linked severe hurricanes to global warming; as a result, He wrote, "the IPCC process has been subverted and compromised, its neutrality lost." "
9
POPSWe Can't Afford to Ignore Global Warming Idiots
You will never see science from the global warming idiots. The scientists, almost all of them, know it is a bunch of bunk. The select few are the ones selected to present an IPCC media report, which is one of the most dishonest reports in history. By the way, Masbury, the selct few includes the IPCC, who say in their report: IPCC, 2001, pg 94, which has never been amended or retracted. paraphrase: There has been no detected human signature on recent warming trends..( this was 2001 before the cooling trend had come into focus);;the recent warming could be natural.. There has never been a mechanism that supports a human signature in climate change. Recent studies, some recently posted here, continue to support that the models are fantasy. There has been NO cooling on other solar system bodies, yet there is recent warming detected on many of them. The fact is that if you believe in anthropogenic global warming you are not intelligent and open minded. You are simply a b
3
POPSGore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About 'Global Governance' In December 2007, the UN climate conference in Bali, urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.” “Finally someone will pay for these costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, said at the 2007 UN conference after a panel titled “A Global CO2 Tax.” Schwank noted that wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.” The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.” The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.
2
POPSLuetkemeyer Bill Would Save Taxpayers $12.5 Million, Denies Funding for UN's Junk Science Luetkemeyer’s legislation would prohibit U.S. contributions to the IPCC, which is nothing more than a group of U.N. bureaucrats that supports man-made claims on global warming that many scientists disagree with. More than 700 international scientists signed on to the U.S. Senate Minority Report expressing their concerns about man-made claims on global warming promoted by the UN IPCC. The dissenting scientists are more than 13 times the number of UN scientists, 52, who authored a report claiming that human emissions of carbon dioxide are responsible for dangerous and unprecedented warming. The dissenting scientists are from all over the world, including Japan, Italy, UK, Czech Republic, Canada, the Netherlands and the U.S. that are affiliated with institutions including, NASA, U.S. Navy, U.S. Defense Department, Energy Department, U.S. Air Force and the EPA.
2
POPS"Obama's EPA Ignores Inconvenient Truths" "You are a pollutant, and Obama is paving the way for the international carbon tax, an excuse regulated by the global EPA, also called the UN, to remand American wealth back to the world, from which Obama believes it was unfairly taken. 'Global warming' conveniently became 'global climate change' and so in short order Obama’s 'hope and change' will become 'change without hope.'”
6
POPS Carbongate Little evidence? Outdated U.N. research? No reason to rush? This is not what the Obama administration and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were telling us when they were rushing to force a Friday vote on Waxman-Markey. We were given the impression that unless we passed this cap-and-tax fiasco, polar bears would be extinct by the Fourth of July. "A new 2009 paper by Scafetta and West," the report says, "suggests that the IPCC used faulty solar data in dismissing the direct effect of solar variability on global temperatures. Their report suggests that solar variability could account for up to 68% of the increase in Earth's global temperatures." The report was the product of Alan Carlin, senior operations research analyst at the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE). He's been with the EPA for 38 years but now has been taken off all climate-related work. Thomas Fuller, environmental policy blogger with the San Francisco Examiner, wrote Thursday in a story developed
9
POPS IPCC Global Warming Hoaxers Wrote Cap and Trade! energy-intensive companies, including pulp and paper, steel, aluminum, glass and cement. That includes a 15 percent distribution of free allowances to the trade-vulnerable industries, as well as a clause that allows the president by 2025 to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive goods imported into the United States.” 4.) Pollution that is causing greenhouse gas warming on our planet. 700 scientists, including some current and former UN IPCC scientists, tend to disagree. So not only will our energy costs exorbitantly higher per year, but now everything we import will be more expensive too. "I don't know the details. I don't claim to know everything that's in this bill. We left it very heavily with the scientists." . . . Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) The "scientists", global warming hoaxers wrote cap and trade! Waxman doesn't know what's in it. It's a badge of honor. Don't bother me with these things!
6
POPS Democrat Deniers? . . . I Don't Think The Votes Are There! House Democratic leaders appeared to still be short of the votes needed to pass climate-change legislation out of a key subcommittee, but a spokeswoman for one of the lawmakers leading the talks said negotiations were continuing. Several moderate Democrats on the House Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment said Thursday that fundamental issues such as how to soften the impact of the legislation on constituents and industries in their regions are still unresolved and that the panel might not be ready to vote on the measure by next week as Democratic leaders have called for. The qualms expressed over legislation sponsored by House Energy and Commerce Waxman (D., Calif.), and Edward Markey (D., Mass.) along with possible Republican obstruction, point to the difficulty Democrats are having in finding consensus on climate and energy issues. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/30/waxman-markey-still-searching-for-votes/
14
POPSAl Gore Sued By 30,000 Scientists For Fraud "Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function," says Haass. "Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves..."
11
POPS Let Them Eat Dirt from the report. But the mainstream media did not report these conflicts and instead piled on the "global warming" and "carbon offset" bandwagons. The carbon offset market quickly exploded. In fact, $92 billion worth of offsets were estimated to change hands in 2008. But wanton profiteering appears to be the sole rationale for "carbon trading". Put simply, a wide range of respected scientists, environmentalists, researchers, agriculturalists, and activists believe that carbon offsets are a "scam", "fantasy", "fiction", "nonsense", "fraudulent" and worse. And they've been saying so since 2000, though to read the newspaper you wouldn't know it. The World Rainforest Movement, for example, investigated these bizarre financial ties and concluded that the IPCC report must "...be shelved due to their clear conflict of interest and a new report instigated which will be free of the taint of intellectual corruption."
2
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update