Fully 95% of the carbon dioxide, now identified by Greens, i.e., U.S. and worldwide environmentalists, as a form of pollution, is produced by natural sources such as evaporating seawater, decaying organic matter, and from plant and animal respiration. Each year, 157 billion metric tons is released in the atmosphere. Of this amount, barely 457.2 million tons comes from cars and trucks. According to American Enterprise Institute researcher, James Johnson, "Eliminating all U.S. gasoline powered vehicles would reduce worldwide carbon dioxide emissions by 0.18%." Less than one half of one half of one percent.
Despite this minuscule contribution, Albert Gore, Jr., in his book "Earth in the Balance", advocates "eliminating the internal combustion engine" by the year 2018! This is the same gentleman who has been a driving force behind the United Nations treaty on Climate Control, formulated in Kyoto, Japan.
And, despite the fact the U.S, Senate passed a unanimous resolution saying it would never ratify this treaty, the acting U.S. representative to the UN signed it in November 1998.
Neither the President, nor Vice President, participated in this event. In August, however, the Associated Press reported that the President had called the mid-year heat wave the latest symptom of global warming and had ordered energy-saving measures in all federal buildings.
"Global warming is real; the risks it poses are real," said Clinton. "The sooner Congress understands that, the sooner we can protect our nation--and our planet--from increased flood, fire, drought, and deadly heat waves." He asked for $6.3 billion in research and tax incentives over the next five years to "encourage the private sector to cooperate..."
The obvious question, given the President's fears of global weather catastrophes, is why didn't he personally sign the UN treaty? Or designate the Vice President, its strongest advocate, to do so? Contrary to the Constitution which states that two-thirds of the Senate must approve a treaty, the Environmental Protection Agency is reportedly already taking steps to implement it.
In October 1997, President Clinton addressed the National Geographic Society saying, "The United States proposes at Kyoto that we commit to the binding and realistic target of returning to emissions of 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. And we should not stop there."
Why? Why reduce carbon dioxide emissions from human activities when (1) they represent less than 1% of all emissions and, (2), by any measurement applied, would have a crippling impact on the nation's economy? The UN treaty, moreover, would exempt both China and India, along with more than a hundred other nations.
Why are both the President and Vice President of the United States advocating a program that would, according to many organizations, think tanks, and experts on the subject, do immeasurable harm to the nation?
The Ultimate Scare Campaign
Today's Greens would prefer that you forget how much time and effort they put into convincing everyone that an Ice Age was on the way back in the 1970's. Why? Because it failed to frighten enough people. By the 1980's, Greens totally reversed course and began to warn of a massive heating of the earth.
In 1998, James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, testified at a Gore-sponsored Senate hearing that "The greenhouse effect has been detected and it is changing our climate now." Wrong. Very wrong. By 1998, Hansen, writing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, said, "The forces that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change." The interactions of atmospheric components remain, said Hansen, "major areas of uncertainty."
The only people who are completely certain are the President and Vice President, supported by a wide range of Green organizations, all of whom are allied with the UN as "Non-Governmental Organizations."
Ironically, in 1990, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted that the average global temperature would rise 3.3 degrees Celsius over the next century. Two years later, the IPPC revised that figure downward to 2.8 degrees. By 1995, they revised it downward again to 2.0 degrees, and, after factoring out natural climate factors, the IPPC said human-caused warming would amount to 1 degree in the next century.
A warming of 1 degree Celsius could occur naturally without any human input. Acknowledging this, the IPPC says that, "some of the global warming since 1850 could be a recovery from the Little Ice Age rather than a direct result of human activities."
Widely reported in November 1998 was a statement by one of the major Green organizations, the Worldwatch Institute, along with Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer, who said, "More and more, there's a human fingerprint in natural disasters in that we're making them more frequent and more intense..." No, we're not. Weather related and other natural disasters occur every year. History is replete with such disasters and weather, perhaps, more than any other factor, has played a vital role in the development of the human race.
Simply put, the earth has warmed about one degree Fahrenheit in the past century and, as noted in the 1977 books, that warming ended fifty years ago in the 1940's. All the meteorological and radiosonde balloon data since then has found no evidence of any warming. It has, however, found a very slight cooling. This, despite the fact that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is rising. It is now about 360 parts per million vs. 290 at the beginning of the 20th century. As Arthur B. Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine notes, "This rise probably results from human burning of coal, oil, and natural gas, although this is not certain."
Writing in their book, "Age of Propaganda", authors Anthony Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson, said, "Experimental data overwhelmingly suggest that all other things equal, the more frightened a person is by a communications, the more likely he or she is to take positive preventive action."
And, famously, throughout 1998, a very warm year, indeed, Albert Gore, Jr. used every natural weather event from forest fires to droughts to proclaim that the earth was warming and that the global warming theory demanded the U.S. take the actions mandated by the UN treaty on climate control.
Again. Why? Why is Albert Gore, Jr. trying to frighten Americans and others around the world, saying things any freshman year meteorological student knows is false?
And why has The New York Times, since the early 1990's, been the leading advocate of the global warming theory, publishing hundreds of articles?
On Veteran's Day, November 11, 1998, the lead editorial in The Times said of the Kyoto agreement on global warming that "Nobody has successfully challenged the urgency of their mission." Not just wrong, but deliberately and knowingly wrong. Is the famed "newspaper of record", arguably the most influential daily newspaper in the world, engaging in a propaganda campaign which would do great harm to the United States and other industrialized nations?
The Times is fully aware that a Petition Project, sponsored by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, has been signed by more than 19,000 scientists from around the world disputing the theory. On April 22, 1998, an article by Times reporter Stevens attacked the Petition Project seeking to discredit it and, two weeks later, on May 2, 1998, The Times published an opinion editorial by a little known University of Maryland physics professor, Robert L. Park, who described the petition signers as "a vocal minority." One of the advocates of the Petition Project is Dr. Frederick Seitz, the president emeritus of Rockefeller University and a former president of the National Academy of Sciences, in whose Proceedings, the global warming theory was discredited by James Hansen. As far as The Times is concerned, this was a deliberate act of propaganda, not journalism.
A petition in support of the global warming theory, circulated by the Union of Concerned Scientists in 1997, had secured a paltry 1,559 signatures. That's more than 19,000 against and 1,599 for. Who do you believe?
The desperation of some leading media outlets to convince Americans that global warming is real has totally corrupted the reporting of some print and broadcast journalists.
Science reporters know that they should depend on refereed scientific literature, studies that have been examined by peers prior to publication, on which to based their stories. However, the Washington Posts's Joby Warrick, in early 1999, wrote about a speech, not even a paper, delivered in San Francisco by a federal climatologist, Jonathan Overpeck.
At a December 1998 meeting of the American Geophysical Union, Overpeck said that the Medieval Warm Period was local, not global. It was during this period that the Vikings crossed the Atlantic to colonize Greenland and North America. It was followed by the Little Ice Age that, in turn, was reversed by a century of warming which ended in the 1940's. Greens were delighted because now they could claim that, instead of saying that the 1990's were the warmest in 600 years, they could say there were the warmest in 1,200 years.
However, if Overpeck is right, a very big IF, than regional climate varies tremendously, whether or not the globe warms!
Patrick J. Michaels, a senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute, published a refereed paper in the journal, Climate Research, noting that temperature variability between seasons and between years has significantly declined in the second half of this century. Thus, Overpeck's reported comments are, in fact, bad news for Greens who are trying to convince everyone that a few warm years are a signal of a vast global warming. They're not.
The Weather Propaganda Wars
In 1999, one thing is guaranteed, the nation's print and broadcast news media will continue to report global warming as a fact supported by "most" scientists when it is not. Global warming is a theory based on flawed and incomplete computer models discredited by the same government scientist who triggered the scare campaign.
Led by newspapers such as The New York Times and Washington Post, among others, and supported by the Cable News Network (CNN), owned by Ted Turner, the single largest, individual contributor of funding to the United Nations, along with some television networks such as NBC, the public will be told over and over again that global warming is just around the corner and responsible for every blizzard, hurricane, flood, and other natural disaster that will inevitably occur.
Mobilized by the Clinton-Gore administration, U.S. governmental agencies, supported by the propaganda apparatus of the UN, will continue to maintain the party line.
As 1998 came to an end, a year that was filled with weather related disasters, Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmosphere Research in Boulder, Colorado, said, "We don't have definitive answers, but there is reason to believe this is part of the signals of global warming we may be seeing." May be seeing? No definitive answers? Weasel talk!
To his credit, in response to Trenberth, Jerry Mahlman, director of NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab at Princeton, said, "There's no bad guy out there. Basically, we're getting jerked around by the same stuff that's been jerking us around for a long time."
A very long time. The earth is an estimated 5.4 billion years old and it has gone through long glacial periods and others, like the Jurassic Age, when the earth was so warm it supported massive, cold-blooded dinosaurs.
There is no global warming, but there is a global political agenda, comparable to the failed Soviet Union experiment with Communism, being orchestrated by the United Nations, supported by its many Green NGO's, to impose international treaties of every description that would turn the institution into a global government, superceding the sovereignty of every nation in the world.
Don't believe it? Read "Our Global Neighborhood: The Report of the United Nations Commission on Global Governance." It is a chilling plan to have totally unelected, unknown UN bureaucrats determine how everyone will live. It dispenses with free speech and freedom of the press because anyone who disagrees with the UN will be in violation of its laws.
Shades of Galileo when he told the Church they were wrong. Only now, it is the United Nations and the two highest officer holders of the United States of America.
The Real Global Struggle Ahead
This is the next great struggle for the century about to begin in the year 2000. It is being fought with all the tools of modern propaganda and it is funded by many foundations and even corporations who believe that global governance will free them from the restrictions imposed by individual nations seeking to insure the welfare of their citizens.
The weather is both regional and global. The Greens are an international, i.e., global coalition. The battle that must be waged will determine the spread of democratic institutions that will protect individual human rights, not a United Nations with its own courts, its own military, its own powers of taxation. Nothing advocated by the United Nations can be taken at face value.
Based on the global warming theory, nothing advocated by the nation's current leaders, nor elements of its supine mass media, can be taken on face value. You've been warned.
Some "Greens" are in cahoots with the Islamists.
I always like to parse this name. What does the Council do? It 'defends' Natural Resources. Against what? Exploitation. But a "resource" which cannot be exploited is not a resource at all. If I told you there is a mountain of platinum on Venus, would it be a "resource"? No, because it cannot be exploited. Their goal is to deny human beings--in perpetuity, evidently--the resources they need to survive and prosper. They are another example of the "anti-human" branch of "environmentalism"...which is anti-human to its core.
April 2003: The global average temperature departure was 0.14°C; the Northern Hemisphere temperature departure was 0.25°C; and the Southern Hemisphere departure was 0.03°C.
Below: Monthly satellite temperatures for the Northern Hemisphere (top) and Southern Hemisphere (bottom). Trend lines indicate statistically significant changes only.
In Their Own Words
The Earth Liberation Front has this to say ...
Spokesman, North American ELF, 1997 - Sept. 2001. See also Liberation Collective.
"Revolution is necessary in the United States, and that revolution would naturally have to involve the use of violence as well as other tactics. I argue that it has to be used if people are serious about progressing social and political movements in this country." (On his new book The Logic of Political Violence, quoted in "Will readers judge this book by its cover?", KATU (Portland, OR), Oct. 16, 2003.)
"Driving a hummer, a $50,000 GM tool for the rich getting 10 miles to the gallon - that is violence. Going in and torching those and getting rid of those is an act of liberation and should be applauded." (CBS Evening News, Los Angeles, Sept. 23, 2003.)
"People need to at least consider if they are serious about stopping injustice perpetrated by our government, they need to be realistic about what it's going to take to stop that injustice. A variety of tactics should be considered, but they must include political violence." (Interviewed in "Violence and Protest" by Philip Dawdy, Seattle Weekly, Apr. 9, 2003; www.seattleweekly.com/features/0315/news-dawdy.php)
"The threat to the life of the planet is so severe that political violence must be understood as a viable option." (In a lecture March 2003, quoted in "Violence and Protest" by Philip Dawdy, Seattle Weekly, Apr. 9, 2003; www.seattleweekly.com/features/0315/news-dawdy.php)
"In light of the events on September 11, my country has told me that I should not cooperate with terrorists. I therefore am refusing to cooperate with members of Congress who are some of the most extreme terrorists in history. Currently they are responsible for allowing the slaughter of now over an estimated 1,500 Afghanistan civilians. They are responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks due to horrendous U.S. foreign policies of imperialism and they are responsible for the current ongoing genocide against the innocent people of Afghanistan. This alleged war on terrorism has largely been conducted to allow the U.S. to attempt to oust the Taliban, and put in place a new puppet regime in Afghanistan who would allow the U.S. to build their much sought after pipeline from the Turkmenistan oil reserves through southern Afghanistan, Pakistan, and to the Gulf. These sort of practices, mixed in with domestic policies of racism, classism, and further imperialism at the expense of life demonstrate the truly terrorist reality of the U.S. Congress and Government. I could not live with myself if I cooperated with that injustice." (In a statement distributed by the North American ALF press office following a subpoena for him to testify before a Congressional subcommittee on ecoterrorism, Nov. 1, 2001.)
"Our country [the USA] exists, you know, with certain traits in mind, apple pie, baseball, and screw anyone or any thing you can just to make a buck."
"Dating back to the time when we enslaved people and committed mass amounts of genocide, the law then was done for profit and based on capitalism. The possibility of solving grievances or problems caused by capitalism (through) passive means are next to nothing."
In response to the question "What keeps you going through all of this harassment?" : "The realization that what the ELF and ALF are doing is correct. The realization that I support underground direct action aimed at destroying the capitalist ideology, and I want it to increase, dramatically. The realization that in my conscience I know that I am doing what is right."
"If we are vandals, so were those who destroyed forever the gas chambers of Buchenwald and Auschwitz."
"People are tired of spending an incredible amount of time and energy to try and have campaigns legally that basically get nowhere at all. Individuals in the ELF want to see results. They want to pick up where the law is leaving off."
"The US Government realizes that with all its massive weaponry, the power lies in the hands of the people if only we recognize this. The ELF and ALF are representations of the people's struggle against a murderous government operating in a societal ideology which promotes monetary gain and property over life."
"It is clear that the formation of this grand jury is an attempt by the U.S. Department of Justice to silence the successful actions of the ELF and ALF. Throughout history whenever social movements have used successful tactics, the state has responded with an increase in severe repression. The state understands that the power can be truly in the hands of the people if indeed the people realize it. The ELF and the ALF are clear representations of the people's struggle against the capitalist ideology, and its horrifying effects on the planet and life. This struggle will not be stopped."
"Rosebraugh said ELF sources never divulge plans of future action. But he said the group's message is clear: As long as people 'profit off the natural environment, there are going to be people in the ELF who are going to try to stop them.'
"We must all act our consciousness and inflict economic harm upon all of those who are responsible for the destruction of the earth and its inhabitants. We encourage others to find a local Earth raper and make them pay for the damages they are inflicting on our communities and humanity's chance of survival. Furriers,meat packers, bosses, developers, rich industry leaders are all Earth rapers. They all profit off the destruction of life and liberty (whether it be animal, natural world, or worker). A crime against one inhabitant of the Earth is a crime against the Earth. The only language these people understand is money. We must inflict economic sabotage on all Earth rapers if we are ever to stop the madness we live in. To do so is not a crime, it is a necessity."
Co-founder (of PETA)
"[People] need to understand that if they support the torture and misuse of other animals they will be made to pay. The animals are defenseless. They can't fight back. But we can. And, no matter what it takes, we always will." (Quoted in "The Extremist: The Woman Behind the Most Successful Radical Group in America" by Michael Specter, The New Yorker magazine, Apr. 14, 2003)
Newkirk on having children: "I am not only uninterested in having children. I am opposed to having children. Having a purebred human baby is like having a purebred dog; it is nothing but vanity, human vanity." (Quoted in "The Extremist: The Woman Behind the Most Successful Radical Group in America" by Michael Specter, The New Yorker magazine, Apr. 14, 2003)
Like most clubs, there are 1 or 2 members playing dictator, a few true believers and the rest are there to hook up with someone new for sex, make sales contacts, or got dragged to the meeting by one of the true believers.
Get elected to the most unwanted club office.
As club secretary, you control the written record, committee membership functions, contacts, PR, membership credentials, funds, and you are placed to drive the dictators to war with each other, and destroy the club, or better yet, make them look like fools and frauds.
A FRiend controls everything about one of the eco clubs in this state. The last State meeting had less than a dozen members show up, and the voting majority were recruited by the FRiend. The next state over is undergoing the same FRiendly takeover, and they don't even know her real name.
You WANT the eco's to send in their disposable income. You DON'T want them to show up at the meetings.
The best poisons are systemic...from the roots to the foliage. You've just been recruited to help Round-Up® some human weeds.
Thank you for posting this. I'm compiling resources for a book and this is right up my alley. I've tracked a small group of environazis that use class action lawsuits to fund their movement.
If they truly cared about "the environment," they could use this money to buy land and then forbid the exploitation of their land and the critters living thereon.
That they don't do so betrays their socialistic and anti-property rights agenda.