Japan, Spain, and Italy face as much as $33 billion in fines for having failed to meet their agreement to reduce so-called “greenhouse gas” emissions.
The United Nations conference in Bali, attended by some 15,000 participants and observers, is likely to make future generations conclude that ours was deranged to be discussing how humans could have any affect whatever on the climate. They will, in retrospect, agree that the global warming theory was a lie whose agenda was to retard anything that might extend and enhance life on earth.
The Protocol is based entirely on a lie that predicts dramatic and imminent global warming. Global warmers insist that carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced, but carbon dioxide does not cause climate change. Climatologists will tell you that any rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does not precede, but follows warming cycles.
The science is well known, but hucksters like the odious Al Gore and those behind the original Kyoto Protocol, with the media as accessories, have created a climate of crisis.
It’s a very good thing that our Senate voted unanimously in 1997 against binding America to the United Nations Kyoto Protocol on Climate Control and that both the Clinton and Bush Administrations refused to act on the proposed limits. The reason for the Senate resolution was to avoid “serious harm to the economy of the United States.”
A November 30 Bloomberg News article by Kristian Rix and Mathew Carr reported that Japan, Spain, and Italy face as much as $33 billion in fines as the result of having failed to meet their agreement to reduce so-called “greenhouse gas” emissions. These three nations are deemed the “worst performers among 36 nations that agreed to curb carbon dioxide gases that cause climate change.”
Among the nations exempt from the Kyoto Protocol are China and India, which represent a combined two of the six billion people on planet Earth. The idea that limits on carbon dioxide emissions could be achieved without their participation is idiotic.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) plays a minor role in determining the Earth’s climate but at the same time plays an essential role in the maintenance of all of the Earth’s vegetation, whether it takes the form of crops, jungles, forests, or just someone’s front lawn. Without CO2 all animal life, including our own, dies because of its dependence on food crops.
The Earth’s atmosphere is composed of 78% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.038% carbon dioxide, and trace amounts of other gases, including water vapor. We call this “air” and humans depend on the oxygen content for life. At the same time all six billion of us individually exhale about two pounds of carbon dioxide every day. By contrast, Nature emits about 30 times more CO2 than humans. The oceans of the world absorb and release CO2 all the time. This is Nature’s balance that maintains all life, animal and vegetable, on earth.
Consider now how many schools, hospitals, bridges, roads, and other benefits to their citizens that $33 billion represents to Japan, Spain, and Italy. Such fines will be transferred to the coffers of the United Nations for having failed to curb CO2 emissions that are actually a benefit to the Earth!
An entirely bogus system of “carbon credits” has been created to transfer huge amounts of money from industrialized nations accused of producing too much CO2 to those nations that, for lack of development — failed economies — will garner funding as they “sell” their excess credits. The same system would allow various industries to sell the same worthless credits to those — primarily producers and users of energy — deemed to be major CO2 “polluters.”
Even though the U.S. Supreme Court has fallen prey to the lie that CO2 represents a form of “pollution” and should be regulated, the known science renders this decision an egregious juridical error
The Earth, over billions of years, has gone through cycles of warming and cooling that are well established. It has gone through periods when the CO2 content in the atmosphere was far higher than today. The latest cooling period is called the mini-ice age and lasted from around 1300 to 1850. The Earth has been warming naturally since then.
There is no dramatic warming occurring. Predictions of this are based on totally flawed computer models, none of which can begin to approximate the sheer chaos and complexity of the Earth’s weather system.
These computer models, put forth by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control, have been repeatedly revealed to be inaccurate to the point of deliberate deception. The constant assertion that there is a “consensus” among scientists that global warming is caused by humans is yet another part of the lie.
As the anti-capitalist forces meet in Bali, the rest of us must demand that we shall not be penalized and threatened by limits imposed on industries and agriculture around the world.
The people of the world must not submit to a lie of global warming that is intended to deprive them of the future benefits that energy use, improved transportation, technological innovations, and the expanded production of food portends.
ACaruba@aol.com
http://www.anxietycenter.com/
Read more articles by Alan Caruba
Conservatives need to stop arguing this issue and start arguing the REAL issue. "The issue is not the issue — the revolution is the issue."
Caruba barely touches on the real issue in his last two short paragraphs.
Comment by sedonaman | December 11, 2007
For all who believes that these 3 nations will pay up the $33 billion please stand up. This topic really makes my head hurt to think someone could actually buy into this trash.
Comment by hvance | December 11, 2007
Saturday, there was a cartoon on one of the major networks where the "bad guys" were those responsible for global warming and the "evil" scientists were those that denied its reality as man-caused.
Monday, I was in a Rite Aid store to buy some Christmas cards. What should assualt my eyes but a Christmas card dealing with global warming. George Bush and Condi Rice had been altered in photoshop to have bald, sunburned heads with wisps of smoke coming off the top.
Yesterday, it was an internal newsletter from my employer blathering again about "carbon footprints" and our "committment" to reduce them. (I have no problem with saving energy…I have a problem with the premise of why we should save energy.)
And then we wonder why so many people who have never taken the time to actually research the matter for themselves are "sure" that global warming is caused by man rather than part of some naturally occurring cycle. What do we expect when this dubious message is screamed from every corner as though it were fact?
Comment by Steve Sabin | December 12, 2007
From Mark Steyn
At the recent climate jamboree in Bali, the Rev. Al Gore told the assembled faithful: "My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here." Really? The American Thinker's Web site ran the numbers. In the seven years between the signing of Kyoto in 1997 and 2004, here's what happened:
•Emissions worldwide increased 18.0 percent;
•Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1 percent;
•Emissions from nonsigners increased 10.0 percent; and
•Emissions from the United States increased 6.6 percent.
It's hard not to conclude a form of mental illness has gripped the world's elites.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | December 17, 2007
Phil,
Apparently you missed the memo that explained it's all about perception, not reality. What one actually does to reduce emissions isn't nearly as important as having the right bumper sticker, or making sure those emissions don't come out your Toyota Primus's tailpipe and instead go up that coal plant's smokestack and out that mining truck's tailpipe 500 miles away when you plug your car in at night.
I'm wondering how all those delegates got to Bali. Might it have involved jet aircraft - perhaps even private jet aircraft?
It brings to mind the phrase, "let them eat cake."
Comment by Steve Sabin | December 18, 2007
Phil,
One thing to bear in mind about Steyn's statistics: It will predictably be our fault. The emissions outside the US are no-doubt because China and Mexico and Eastern Europe require more power to manufacture the stuff our imperialist, consumer-driven culture covets like iPods, heated seats for our SUVs, and Bratz dolls with hydrocarbon-derived hair follicles. Further, we've beamed our TV signals around the globe via satellite, exporting our culture forcibly and creating a "keep up with the Joneses" peer pressure that is impossible to resist by these gentle peoples who were at one with the earth until we came along. Were it not for us, the rest of the world would be completely content without fossil fuels or electricity.
This is why it is important to look beneath the statistics to the real story. I'm sure that it will only be a matter of time before Steyn's statistics are given suitable "context" by the Left to explain that only superficial conservatives would draw simplistic assumptions about carbon hypocrisy.
Comment by Steve Sabin | December 18, 2007
About a year ago, I stumbled across an article whose main point was that the conclusion that the globe is warming is based on a comparison of temperatures now with those over 100 years ago. The article went on to say that data over 100 years ago was not as accurate as it is today, nor is it as detailed (there weren’t nearly as many data points), and a lot of extrapolation between those less-accurate data points had to be done to cover areas not recorded then. How any scientist can support an analysis based on a comparison of data of varying degrees of accuracy and origin is beyond me, unless they do it to keep the funding coming, which is a definite possibility.
The other possibility, not exclusive of the funding, is that there is an ulterior motive at play (the real issue), and that is the proponents are Leftists/Marxists trying to drag capitalism down because Marxist communism failed. If communism can't succeed, then capitalism must fail.
In the ‘70s, they tried selling us the idea of a new ice age. When we defeat the current Marxists’ attempt to drag capitalism down, what’s next? How about global flattening? The flattening of the globe could be due mainly to man-caused changes to the roundness of the earth such as his use of giant earth-moving equipment and oil-drilling rigs that cause the collapse of the surface when oil is removed from deep within the crust. Just think of all the new studies (well-funded, of course) that could be done and conferences that could be attended that would demand the U.S. curtail its development of the land. Communist China will be exempt, of course.
Comment by sedonaman | December 18, 2007