Environmentalism
There is absolutely no doubt but that the preponderant number of people who believe in
the Global Warming and Climate Change theory, and that it is man-made, do so out of an
honest belief that it is scientifically sound and that we must do all we can and at all costs
to quote - save the planet - unquote.
But there is another side to the story.
Consider the power-hungry who want to rule the world and everyone in it - own most of
the land and control the rest - dictate where and how people can live and restrict people’s
ability to travel. How on earth could they possibly accomplish that? How could they
ever get enough people to go along with it enough to implement it - until it is too late for
us to resist?
A world platform would be necessary, thus the United Nations came up with Agenda 21.
A very compelling reason would have to be found to sell it to people and enlist their
willing compliance. Thus - the fear that unless we drastically change our way of living,
the earth will be destroyed. We have been sold that rationale. Originally it was Global
Warming but since that has been highly discredited, the buzz word is now Climate
Change.
As a result, what has been threatened and already affected? Everything from light bulbs,
washing machines and automobiles to our energy supply and use, water supply and use.
septic systems, as well as our ability to buy and sell property, our ability to make changes
on our property and leave property to our heirs. The result has been edicts by the federal
EPA, state regulations, regional government influence and county comprehensive plans.
The cost in dollars is in the trillions - and the cost to our freedoms is immeasurable.
But this can all be reversed. The whole swindle is based on bogus theory.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sea Level Rise is not an issue
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stop Wind Energy Industry Subsidies
It’s certainly no secret that wind energy would barely have gotten off the ground if not for the billions of dollars in subsidies the industry has received. It’s always been about the money. Even those inside the wind industry know this. It has had 20 years of heavy subsidization, time enough for opportunistic developers to have progressed to the self-sustaining point, or admit failure. But it’s definitely time this unnecessary expenditure for taxpayers is eliminated.
To help stop the flow of taxpayer money into the pockets of just a few, it’s important to contact your Senators immediately concerning an amendment to the Surface Transportation bill, S. 1813; the Senate is expected to begin sorting through amendments to this bill on March 1.
Amendment No. 1624 to S. 1813, introduced by two Senators from Colorado, Bennet and Udall and one from Kansas, Moran, calls for the extension of the Production Tax Credit, which is also known as the Wind Energy Credit.
Here’s the text of the amendment:
SEC. __X. EXTENSION OF WIND ENERGY CREDIT.
Paragraph (1) of section 45(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``January 1, 2013'' and inserting ``January 1, 2014''.
SEC. __X. COST OFFSET FOR EXTENSION OF WIND ENERGY CREDIT, AND DEFICIT REDUCTION, RESULTING FROM DELAY IN APPLICATION OF WORLDWIDE ALLOCATION OF INTEREST.
In General.--Paragraphs (5)(D) and (6) of section 864(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each amended by striking ``December 31, 2020'' and inserting ``December 31, 2021''.
The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation says the direct cost of extending this subsidy for wind energy would be $6.8 billion from 2011 to 2015, just for new projects implemented by the end of this year, 2012. It’s time to cut the cord that is bleeding the American taxpayer for the sake of Big Wind. Forcing taxpayers and electricity consumers to line the pockets of a few needs to be eliminated.
We hear so much these days about “leveling the playing field.” Well, let’s make sure that when it comes to generating power, the playing field is indeed level, and that this unsustainable form of subsidy for wind energy is eliminated. The Europeans have already figured out that wind energy is a waste of money and have severely cut back. It’s simply not the proper role of government to be propping up a for-profit private industry.
Send your Senators and Representative an email in opposition to any further wind energy subsidies, such as the proposed Amendment No. 1624 to S. 1813.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From National Center for Policy Analysis
April 11, 2012
Healthy Polar Bear Count Confounds Doomsayers
In the debate regarding global warming and its significant impacts on the world, the population of polar bears has long been a high-profile rallying point for doomsayers. Decrying a significant decrease in the bear population over the last few decades, environmentalists have called for specific public policies that directly protect the bear population and broad laws that curb greenhouse gas emissions, says the Globe and Mail (Canada).
However, recent studies of the Nunavut region on the western shore of the Hudson Bay -- long recognized as a bellwether for how polar bears are doing elsewhere in the Arctic -- suggest strongly that the population is not as in danger as the environmental lobby has suggested.
In 2004, Environment Canada researchers concluded that the numbers in the region had dropped by 22 percent since 1984, to 935.
They followed this assertion by estimating that by 2011, the population would face a dramatic decrease to about 610.
Yet a recent Canadian government study, which involved 8,000 kilometers of aerial surveying last August along the coast and offshore islands, pegs the population at approximately 1,013.
Drikus Gissing, Nunavut's director of wildlife management, points out that this estimation, if correct, means that the polar bear population is actually managing healthy growth despite the challenges posed by environmental changes and hunting.
Canada's hunting regulations and rules are crucial in maintaining that population and protecting it from being poached to extinction. This is because polar bear pelts remain extremely valuable and in high demand in places like China and Russia.
Prices for some pelts have doubled in the past couple of years, reaching as high as $15,000.
The Nunavut hunting quota in the western Hudson Bay area fell to eight from 56 after the 2004 report from Environment Canada.
Even with such quotas, about 450 polar bears are killed annually across Nunavut.
Nevertheless, Gissing points out that there are about 25,000 polar bears across Canada's Arctic, and that this is likely the highest point the population has ever reached. This thoroughly undermines the arguments of critics who predicted the species' rapid endangerment.
Source: Paul Waldie, "Healthy polar bear count confounds doomsayers," Globe and Mail (Canada), April 5, 2012.
For text:
For more on Environment Issues:
https://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=31
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Climate Change Alarmist Recants: ‘I Made a Mistake’
British environmental expert James Lovelock now admits he was an “alarmist” regarding global warming — and says Al Gore was too.
Lovelock previously worked for NASA and became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism. In 2007 Time magazine named Lovelock one of its “Heroes of the Environment,” and he won the Geological Society of London’s Wollaston Medal in 2006 for his writings on the Gaia theory.
That year he wrote an article in a British newspaper asserting that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”
But in an interview this week with MSNBC, Lovelock said a book he is now writing will reflect his new opinion that global warming has not occurred as he had expected.
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,” he said. “We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books — mine included — because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.
“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time. [The temperature] has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising. Carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that.
“We will have global warming, but it’s been deferred a bit.”
MSNBC reported: “He pointed to Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and Tim Flannery’s ‘The Weather Makers’ as other examples of ‘alarmist’ forecasts of the future.”
Lovelock also declared in the interview that “as an independent and a loner,” he did not mind saying, “All right, I made a mistake,” adding that university or government scientists might fear that admission of such a mistake could jeopardize their funding.
In response to Lovelock’s interview, the Climate Depot website stated: “MSNBC, perhaps the most unlikely of news sources, reports on what may be seen as the official end of the manmade global warming fear movement.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Climate Change and Its Threat to Your Property Rights
The distinction between a Conservationist and an Extremist Environmentalist (EE) is:
The first takes care to use natural resources without ruining them for the next person. Good citizenship dictates that we are good stewards of our environment. Certainly, there must be sensible rules and regulations in order to protect the environment.
The EE says that mankind has no rights and suggests that any use of any natural resource causes damage to the environment.
Agenda 21 is their plan for total governmental control of property based on the false premise that disastrous climate conditions are manmade. Most of the people who support Agenda 21 are just unaware of the facts. This is certainly understandable since the EE power brokers have had decades of time and billions of dollars in order to promote their agenda.
Although the hallmark of science is consistency, the EEs who claim to base their premises on scientific findings, have been anything but consistent. In the 70s their hue and cry was that the world was going into another ice age. Later that was the dire condition became Global Warming. When that didn’t hold up to scrutiny, the battle cry became Climate Change.
How convenient. Now no matter what the weather does, EEs attribute it to man’s abuse of nature.
Consider some of the myths promoted by the EEs :
Global Warming /Climate Change is based on solid facts. Paul Watson, the co-founder of Greenpeace has said, ”The datadoes not matter, it does not matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
Temperatures are hotter today. Compared to what? Yes, they are compared to the 1970s or the ice age of c 1200 A.D.
But, is that so bad? Historically, warmer climes have always ushered in prosperity.*
The 1990s was the hottest decade on record. “On record” is a relatively short period of time and the National Academy of Sciences debunked this claim in 2006. Hundreds of weather stations - many in the colder Soviet Union’s Arctic region - went off line at the beginning of the decade skewing the numbers.*
Because of warming, glaciers are melting causing the sea level to rise. True, some glaciers are melting - but some are also advancing. Also, if that theory were true, then cooling would cause glaciers to advance, but that belies the fact that the snowcap on Mount Kilimanjaro is receding, in spite of decades of cooling temperatures in Kenya. Obviously it is other factors that are in play.*
Climate Change is the greatest threat to the world’s poor. Weather does more adversely affect poorer areas, as there are fewer resources to prevent and/or repair damage. The solution is for those countries to abandon socialism and adopt free enterprise principles raising their standard of living and giving them the resources to better deal with weather conditions.*
We shouldn’t cut down trees or vegetation. This practice has resulted in a surplus of wood creating conditions conducive to more frequent and larger forest fires and difficulty in putting out fires. The absence of barren areas is conducive to fires spreading much more easily and the creation of roadless areas makes it difficult for firefighters to reach the fires.
A rise in CO2 is scientifically proven to be the cause of Global Warming. Dr. Fred Singer, American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia, points out that CO2 is a minute part of the overall atmosphere. To illustrate this, put four pennies in a stack and compare it with a stack of pennies 50 feet tall. That is the comparison of CO2 to the overall atmosphere above the earth. Also, historically, atmospheric CO2 typically increases after warming begins not before. Dr. Singer states that temperature changes actually precede CO2 changes. That is to say, that charts that show the rise and fall of temperature and CO2 levels reveal that changes in CO2 levels actually trail the changes in temperature, not the reverse.
We must reduce CO2 emissions to have clean air. Professor Ian Plimern states that in just four days time, the recent volcanic eruption in Iceland negated every single manmade effort to reduce CO2 in the past five years. Also, there are about 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out emissions every day and when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in 1991in the Philippines, it spewed out more greenhouse gases than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.
Manmade Climate Change is causing the sea level to rise.
Dr. Charles Battig, President, Piedmont Chapter VA-Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment says that not all “sea level rise” is the same. Although sea levels do rise (it is measured by tidal gauges and more recently by satellites) the numerical values depend on where, and over what period of time, the measurements are taken. Portions of the oceans can be rising as other portions are falling. The most recent data quoted are for a global average rise of about 7 inches over the past 100 years, and there is a deceleration in the rate of rise.
Also, Dr Battig tells us that local sea level rise is the relative rise measured in a particular region, once such factors as land mass rebound and subsidence are factored in. Chesapeake Bay is an active geological region reflecting the original meteor impact and ice coverage and retreat when the last ice age resolved. The ongoing geological activity there makes it imperative that the simplistic term “sea level rise” be better qualified. The commonly used term “scenario” is the code word for computer model results. Thus we should understand that “scenario” results depend upon the validity of the model to predict accurately changes out to the year 2100. A computer model will take in whatever number you wish and crank out what your program constrains it to
do. The unqualified “sea level rise” input ranges from the historic norm of about half a foot to an arbitrary five feet. Why not ten feet, 20 feet? Pick the number you want to give the most frightening story? A distinction must be made and understood between sea level rise impacts (which are real and documented) and manmade causation (not identifiable). A discussion of sea level rise should distinguish between "global" and "local." Even though averaged global sea level rise calculated from satellite data shows a recent decline; that does not imply that Chesapeake Bay will not, or does not, have its own relative sea-level rise. Manmade global warming is not identifiable as a significant causative factor, compared to the unique geologic dynamics of the Bay.
Agenda 21 is not a global/United Nations program.
Climate Change has been used as the rationale for imposing Agenda 21/Sustainable Development and its destruction of private property, in countries throughout the world. From their own words: https://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?menu=14. Now it is to be used as one of the factors in merging Canada, the United States and Mexico into a regional government - the NAU - North American Union - that would ultimately result in the elimination of our country's borders and the death knell to our Constitution and American sovereignty. It is to be done incrementally and this year's Summit is a major step in that direction.
https://www.jbs.org/news/obama-to-host-north-american-summit-on-security-global-warming.
One of the MPPDC Commissioners stated that he hadn’t seen anyone from the United Nations coming around here telling us what to do. True, however, in a Letter to the Editor of the Gloucester Gazette-Journal, Mr. Bob Wohlfort who took umbrage with those who oppose Agenda 21 and expose it as being a United Nations agenda, stated "as an advisory member to the planning commission of Mathews County, I was a part of the process that developed Mathews County Comprehensive Plan."
And, referring to the Concerned Citizens viewpoint he stated " I have a different point of view regarding U.N. Agenda 21 and climate change" thus admitting that Agenda 21 is a United Nations project and that his pro-Agenda 21 influence was in play in the formation of the Mathews County Comprehensive Plan.
* Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism by Christopher C. Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an expert on global warming and regulations and has spoken before Senate committees and the European Parliament.
What you can do: * Become informed. https://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19468 * Keep up to date. *Give the Concerned Citizens of Middle Peninsula your email address or contact information so we can keep in contact with information and activities. *Spread the word. Inform others. *Urge your Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission to leave Agenda21/Climate Change considerations out of local plans and regulations. *Urge your Board of Supervisors to pull out of MPPDC -regional governance by the Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission - another layer of government promoting unnecessary regulations that threaten property rights. *Support state bills that protect property rights. * Urge your federal legislators to oppose all efforts to merge America into the NAU.
+++++++++++++++++++++
and
Earth Day was first celebrated on April 22 in 1970 and is now commemorated around the world as a day of celebration of and struggle for the planet. This year, Bolivian President Evo Morales will address the United Nations, calling on the global body to make 'Mother Earth Day' an official UN holiday and to acknowledge humanity's common interest in the protection of the planet and its environment.
But what makes this Earth Day especially important is that the policies of President Barack Obama represent a dramatic turn towards green policies that have the potential to reshape the economy for the better.
Blow Gaping Hole in Global Warming Alarmism”) by James Taylor for Forbes, the models are proving to be woefully inadequate when it comes to predicting real-world weather:
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
It appears that the discrepancy rests — as the article indicates — in the multiple assumptions underpinning the computer models which are just wrong. The earth’s environment is far more effective at shedding excess heat that allowed for in the “doom and gloom” scenarios generated by the United Nations. In fact, the abstract of peer-reviewed findings presented by the Spencer and William Braswell indicates how far astray the models actually are:
The sensitivity of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains the largest source of uncertainty in projections of future anthropogenic climate change. … While the satellite-based metrics for the period 2000–2010 depart substantially in the direction of lower climate sensitivity from those similarly computed from coupled climate models, we find that, with traditional methods, it is not possible to accurately quantify this discrepancy in terms of the feedbacks which determine climate sensitivity. It is concluded that atmospheric feedback diagnosis of the climate system remains an unsolved problem, due primarily to the inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in satellite radiative budget observations.
What is known for a certainty at this point is that the existing models are wrong — because they failed to accurately predict the data which have now been observed — and they are alarmist — because when globalist bureaucrats use faulty models as their justification for confiscating trillions of dollars from those who have earned them, and giving them to those who did not. The UN scheme endeavors to fundamentally alter the global economy and risks worsening the global recession by pointlessly plundering the economies of the West.
As Spencer and Braswell observe, there is a fundamental — and thus far “unsolved” — problem at the heart of the existing climate models. Asking millions of people to endure a further, and unbearable, yoke of taxation in service of a falsified model is utterly unjustifiable.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Global Warming -- from The Washington Post
“The Arctic Ocean is warming up. Icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes!
Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the Gulf Stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.”
This was reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post in the November 2, 1922 issue, 89 years ago !
and
The above report of runaway Arctic warming is from a Washington Post story published Nov. 2, 1922 and bears an uncanny resemblance to the tales of global warming splattered across the front pages of today's newspapers. It is one of many historical accounts published during the past 140 years describing climate changes and often predicting catastrophic cooling or warming.
Here are excerpts from a few of those accounts, appearing as early as 1870:
"The climate of New-York and the contiguous Atlantic seaboard has long been a study of great interest. We have just experienced a remarkable instance of its peculiarity. The Hudson River, by a singular freak of temperature, has thrown off its icy mantle and opened its waters to navigation.” – New York Times, Jan. 2, 1870
“Is our climate changing? The succession of temperate summers and open winters through several years, culminating last winter in the almost total failure of the ice crop throughout the valley of the Hudson, makes the question pertinent. The older inhabitants tell us that the winters are not as cold now as when they were young, and we have all observed a marked diminution of the average cold even in this last decade.” – New York Times, June 23, 1890
“The question is again being discussed whether recent and long-continued observations do not point to the advent of a second glacial period, when the countries now basking in the fostering warmth of a tropical sun will ultimately give way to the perennial frost and snow of the polar regions.” – New York Times, Feb. 24, 1895
Professor Gregory of Yale University stated that “another world ice-epoch is due.” He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be “wiped out.” – Chicago Tribune, Aug. 9, 1923
Headline: “America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-year Rise”– New York Times, March 27, 1933
“America is believed by Weather Bureau scientists to be on the verge of a change of climate, with a return to increasing rains and deeper snows and the colder winters of grandfather's day.” – Associated Press, Dec. 15, 1934
Warming Arctic Climate Melting Glaciers Faster, Raising Ocean Level, Scientist Says – “A mysterious warming of the climate is slowly manifesting itself in the Arctic, engendering a "serious international problem," Dr. Hans Ahlmann, noted Swedish geophysicist, said today. – New York Times, May 30, 1937
“Greenland's polar climate has moderated so consistently that communities of hunters have evolved into fishing villages. Sea mammals, vanishing from the west coast, have been replaced by codfish and other fish species in the area's southern waters.” – New York Times, Aug. 29, 1954
“An analysis of weather records from Little America shows a steady warming of climate over the last half century. The rise in average temperature at the Antarctic outpost has been about five degrees Fahrenheit.” – New York Times, May 31, 1958
“Several thousand scientists of many nations have recently been climbing mountains, digging tunnels in glaciers, journeying to the Antarctic, camping on floating Arctic ice. Their object has been to solve a fascinating riddle: what is happening to the world's ice? – New York Times, Dec. 7, 1958
“Like an outrigger canoe riding before a huge comber, the earth with its inhabitants is caught on the downslope of an immense climatic wave that is plunging us toward another Ice Age.” – Los Angeles Times, Dec. 23, 1962
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Virginia Is Sinking
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++