ARE YOU SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER? CO2 IS YOUR FRIEND - PART IV

"Bing Cherries"
Painting by Cheryl A. Pass

Why is our government spending money on studies of carbon emissions? Carbon, Oh Carbon, Where art thou? Carbon, oh elixir of life, do not foresake us now!

A week or so ago I wrote an article on the study of bovine emissions, paid for by our generous tax dollars, with the goal of making us feel very guilty for producing meat and dairy sources. Poor Elsie...she just can't get a break. And Elmer, he just keeps chewing his cud, dreaming of green pastures.

Today, At Anthony Watts page, I found yet another government study on carbon emissions, this time targeting the evils of fruits, vegetables, and grains. It just doesn't stop. Seems we are paying the DOE to find out how much the production of fruits and vegetables results in carbon emissions across these United States.

As Anthony describes the study: "From DOE/Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, probably the biggest load of crap I’ve seen in quite some time. I realize that’s harsh, and I don’t think I’ve ever used that sentence to describe a scientific study, but there’s really no other way to say it when we have massive imports of fruits and vegetables from other countries, and they are worried about carbon in crops crossing state lines and regions in the USA. But the sad part is, this sort of “science” is so bloody obvious a fifth grader could tell you that “Their calculations showed that the most agriculturally active regions, shown in blue, are carbon sinks while the regions with larger populations, shown in red, are carbon sources.” (Go to Anthony's page to see the chart.)

Nevertheless, a cited newspaper article at Anthony's website states thus: "Carbon is the basis of life on Earth, including plants. During photosynthesis, plants take in carbon dioxide and convert it into carbon-based sugars needed to grow and live. When a plant dies, it decomposes and releases carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere. After eating plants, animals and humans release the plants’ carbon as either carbon dioxide while breathing or as methane during digestion." Duh!

The study concludes that the measures of carbon releases were compensated by carbon sinks. In other words, what goes out also goes in. And if you graduated from the fifth grade, you learned the miracle of photosynthesis and that our planet deals with carbon quite nicely, thank you very much.

I'm sure the mapping and technology done in this taxpayer funded study was very scientific and important to us. Don't you think so? I mean, how are you going to tax the skin off of Americans if you don't make them pay for the studies to justify it? First you skin them with the study funding, and then you skin them with the carbon taxes on fruits, vegetables, and grains. Right?

The author of the study, some genius named Tristam West, opines: “These calculations substantially improve what we know about the movement of carbon in agriculture,” West said. “Reliable, comprehensive data like this can better inform policies aimed at managing carbon dioxide emissions.” This research was funded by NASA through the North American Carbon Program.

The study was done in coordination with lots of other government agencies. Isn't that nice? And what do you suppose Mr. West means by, "managing carbon dioxide emissions?" ( We eat, therefore we must be punished.)

I guess Mr. West and our agencies have never graduated from the fifth grade....But we did and we don't want to be taxed on our carbon emissions, now do we?? Yes, readers. We are smarter than fifth graders.

Read the whole story at WattsUpWithThat

CO2 IS OUR FRIEND, PART IV

Burning fossil fuels brought us from the depths of hard labor and short lives into the most productive and healthy eras of world history. Amazingly, some people who have benefited most from the rise of technology and civilization have decided that fossil fuels are a bad thing. Those some people don't like it that western civilization evolved into a thriving world economy that has fed, clothed, and sheltered more people than all of pre-industrial civilization time which elapsed. These some people are the supposed environmentalists who have driven the argument that civilization is killing the planet.

But the environmentalists could not destroy modern civilization on their own with just their unsupported theories. Presto ! Enter the political global socialist / Marxist who likes power and wishes to control populations of people and / or depopulate the earth in order to control fewer people. It's much easier to control 1 billion people than 6 billion people. And with only 1 billion people there are fewer people to share the resources of the planet. And Presto! again...Enter the faux scientists who live off government grants who skew information to suit the new government goals of reducing life styles, and ultimately reducing population.

Whether or not you believe depopulation is the expressed goal of global environmentalist Marxists, the outcome of their policies will result in lower quality of life, shorter life spans, and eventually depopulation. Policies equal intentions when you can read their goals as they have written them in several documented plans.

"As bizarre as all this seems, one only has to go to the records of the United Nations to confirm that indeed there is this super plan for humanity to be reduced to a hunter-gatherer type of society much like that of our prehistoric ancestors." Cite

So intent is proven. And the lies are exposed. CO2 is not dangerous. And Sustainable means the government is kicking people off their lands. The question is, are you going to go to your local government and tell them you will not allow them to continue the process of eco-marxism in your area? Are you going to go to elected officials at all levels of government and tell them? And if they don't stop the process of eco-marxism, are you going to find candidates who will stop this madness?

Maybe you think there are too many people in the world. Maybe you think these policies won't affect you, but will just affect those "other" people. Ask yourself that when you try to buy an incandescent light bulb, find RFID chips on your recycling bin, or buy gasoline for your car. Ask yourself that when your heating bill "necessarily skyrockets." Ask yourself that when you go to the grocery and find half the food is imported and twice as expensive as last year. Ask yourself that when your commute keeps getting more congested and you don't know why. Ask yourself that when you open the newspaper and find that half the country is not paying taxes. Ask yourself that when the housing market goes bust for a second time and the value of your property plummets into the tank again.

Ask yourself that the next time you exhale CO2. Ask yourself who is in charge of these policies and why are they doing it?

HAT TIP to AL FIN

THE SMARTEST MAN ON THE PLANET - BILL GATES??

Bill Gates is shooting for ZERO CO2.

Well then, I guess, if we are shooting for zero CO2 production, some people better stop breathing. Hmmmmm... I wonder who Mr. Gates would like to eliminate? Mr. Philanthropist Gates is so kind and benevolent, I wonder just what vaccines and health care Mr. Gates is proposing. Don't you?

So, for all of you who think CO2 is some huge problem for the planet, here are some facts from some real science sites:

Wattsupwiththat.com Death Wishes
"The only way CO2 warming could be dangerous is if it were dramatically amplified by water vapor feedback effects, in which case our climate would be radically unstable and sneezing would be dangerous. In other words, the only way CO2 is dangerous is if EVERYTHING is dangerous, and there is no evidence for such instability."

Climate Nutshell
"The anthropogenic CO2 based theory is based strictly on computer models – the empirical data do not support it."
"Global warming alarmism has taken over. As Richard Lindzen (Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT) said [Ref.32]: “It isn't just that the alarmists are trumpeting model results that we know must be wrong. It is that they are trumpeting catastrophes that couldn't happen even if the models were right”

Just go here and read, read, read!!
For heaven's sake, READ SOME MORE!!
KEEP READING if you are still breathing
NO, YOU ARE NOT DONE READING YET

So, why is Bill Gates, who presumably is a very smart man, out there telling an audience that CO2 must be brought to zero?? Exactly what do you think Mr. Gates is up to? What would motivate a billionaire philanthropist to propagate stupidity and/or lies to the masses? Do you suppose he regrets his business of spreading intelligence through the internet? I mean, if people can access the internet and find out that CO2 is not a harmful greenhouse gas, maybe he is using his bully pulpit for some other goal? Maybe spreading access to intelligence is coming back to bite him? Maybe he doesn't need a billion more customers because he is already richer than God. Maybe Mr. Gates has a sinister streak that isn't part of his usual public relations personna? Maybe??

Beware of moguls bearing gifts. Magi, maybe O.K. Moguls, not so much.

Hat tip to Anthony Watts!
And to Climate Depot and Junk Science!! And Climate Nutshell!!!

CONTRIVED GUILT OVER CO2 - THE HITS JUST KEEP COMING

A news release came across my desk this morning making my blood boil yet again.  It reads:

ALERT: It looks like the climate bill debate has already been decided by Washington and voters didn't even have a chance to say "NO!" A staggering $65 billion dollars has been transferred from the private sector to fund the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI.) RGGI is government created entity that is choking companies in the northeast with huge tax increases in the name of the environment. Our tax dollars are funding this secret climate initiative. Soon RGGI will expand to every state and stick you with astronomical energy prices.

If blood boiling is contributing to Anthropogenic Global Warming, I'm guilty as charged.  But AGW does not exist and CO2 is a necessary gas for life.  We are a carbon based planet.  It's a good thing.  Yet, once again we are looking at regulations on the false assertion that man-made  CO2 emissions are wrecking the planet. Years of indoctrinating the public into false guilt over a lie created to benefit more government agencies and bureaucrats is a scourge on America's economic health.    

Like most of you, I have never heard of RGGI.  So I went looking.  I don't know how "secret" it is, since it is right here on the web for all to see.  But, the salaries of the board of RGGI are not public information.  The operating expenses are not public information.  It is a major carbon trading organization set up to regulate energy sources and usage in the northeastern and middle Atlantic states.  The revelation for me is that it exists. Did you know this quasi government entity has been set up to regulate energy sources and usage?   

It is set up as a non-profit carbon (CO2) trading auction house.  A board of directors will be deciding how it is run and who gets what money.  Government grants are in play.  Compliance in the 10 Northeastern and middle Atlantic states is MANDATORY, since they are named as "signatories." Who signed them up?  The governors?  The legislatures?  The feds have just handed over 65 billion of our tax dollars to RGGI.  That's billion with a B.

Supposedly this RGGI implementation is a prelude to Cap and Trade legislation.  According to Ameri-pac, the source of the news release, "The only impact RGGI has made so far is they have raised energy prices and created a slush fund for each member state. What exactly that money is being used for is unclear. Each state is capped on their carbon emissions and taxed if they use them up. RGGI added a 0.9% increase in energy prices in New England."

I haven't yet figured out how a non-profit is able to set up MANDATORY regulations.  This non-profit organization has not been voted into existence by the public.  The RGGI site says, "The Signatory States are collectively developing a draft Model Rule to serve as the framework for the creation of necessary statutory and/or regulatory authority to establish the Program."  In other words, states signing onto this non-profit are in the process of creating legislation to comply with this carbon auction house.  

How long before North Carolina is drawn into another regional RGGI?  Did taxpayers in North Carolina vote to hand over their money to RGGI?  Did our representatives in D.C. vote to do this?  The wholesale joke here is supposedly this might allow some kind of avoidance of the Federal Cap and Trade legislation.  The thinking here is that instead of Federal Cap and Trade, the same will be accomplished in regions.  More likely,  RGGI is laying the groundwork for the Federal Cap and Trade legislation.  Either way, compliance is MANDATORY.

From the RGGI site comes this revelation:  "Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe expressed support yesterday for making electric utilities pay fees for releasing carbon dioxide, giving Senate Democrats a critical Republican supporter in their stalled pursuit of climate legislation. Snowe is highlighting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a 10-state program capping emissions from 233 power plants from Maine to Maryland, as a "template" that could be adopted at the national level..."

So who do you think is going to ultimately pay those fees for releasing carbon dioxide?  The consumer is.  Not only will the consumer pay taxes to pay the Feds for offsetting grants, and pay for implementation of the mandatory regulations, but will be faced with higher utility bills.  And for what?  A problem that doesn't exist.  A lie.  

Liars who benefit from lies will do anything to justify their motives and support their lies with more lies.  Control freaks will do anything to get power and money.  Setting up endless government bureaucracies, non-profits using government money, hiring endless amounts of more government reliant employees, all of it based on lies and misplaced guilt over something that does not exist.  Nice work if you can get it, comes to mind.

The methods of the left have worked in the past, so they just keep it up.  Mass guilt created over elderly retirements became Social Security.  Mass guilt created over elderly medical needs became Medicare.  Mass guilt created over racial problems became Affirmative Action.  All of those guilt ridden programs were based on collective guilt, not individual responsibilities.  And all of this guilt adds up to a lot of money for socialist programs.  Well, they got away with it before, so they are going to get away with it again.  Mass guilt, in this case based on nonsense, is capitalized on by socialists.  Who says socialists aren't capitalists?  They sure know how to capitalize on lies and creating mass guilt.  It's their stock and trade. 

CO2 IS NOT A POllUTANT

Before you allow this lie, that CO2 is an environmental pollutant, to go any further in our lives, our classrooms, our society, our government, please watch this video. Copy it and send it to everyone you know. Educate your neighbors and friends and children.

Before you let anyone place a "Smart Meter" on your house.
Before you get sucked into the "Smart Growth" agenda.
Before you do one more thing today...send this to everyone.

Retrieved from a GREAT SITE called WATTSUPWITHTHAT Go there..you will learn a lot!!!

CO2 IS YOUR FRIEND - Part 2

Original painting by Cheryl A. Pass


Even after the exposure of emails proving corrupted data and manipulation of findings in the IPCC reports on Climate Change / Global Warming, there are still those who cannot give up the dangerous folly of the environmental alarmism. As I have stated in previous posts, the game is extortion and fraud, not real, factual science. Just to satisfy my chilly January soul, I thought I would remind my cyberspace friends that there is some honest scientific reporting out there. I'm publishing the conclusions of an article cited below so that you may put your worried mind at ease and know we are in a better world than you might have thought.....that is if you've had to suffer through the "sky is falling" lies we've been force fed for the past several years. Read and enjoy!!!

Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide ARTHUR B. ROBINSON, NOAH E. ROBINSON, AND WILLIE SOON Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, 2251 Dick George Road, Cave Junction, Oregon 97523 [artr@oism.org]
CONCLUSIONS:
There are no experimental data to support the hypothesis that in - creases in human hydrocarbon use or in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other green house gases are causing or can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperatures, weather, or landscape. There is no reason to limit human production of CO2, CH4, and other minor green house gases as has been proposed (82,83,97,123). We also need not worry about environmental calamities even if the current natural warming trend continues. The Earth has been much warmer during the past 3,000 years without catastrophic effects. Warmer weather extends growing seasons and generally improves the habitability of colder regions. As coal, oil, and natural gas are used to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe, more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere. This will help to maintain and improve the health, longevity, prosperity, and productivity of all people.

The United States and other countries need to produce more energy, not less. The most practical, economical, and environmentally sound methods available are hydrocarbon and nuclear technologies. Human use of coal, oil, and natural gas has not harmfully warmed the Earth, and the extrapolation of current trends shows that it will not do so in the foreseeable future. The CO2 produced does, however, accelerate the growth rates of plants and also permits plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon plants, also flourishes, and the diversity of plant and animal life is increased.

Human activities are producing part of the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of this CO2 increase. Our children will therefore enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life than that with which we now are blessed.