300 Million plus humans spew out CO2 at a never ending rate. What is the EPA going to do to humans? Tax us for spewing CO2? Will the gov make us wear a monitor tracking how many exhales we make and if we exceed the gov’s daily allowance, will we be sent of to the Gov’s version of Auschwitz?
I'm guessing we'll soon be told that "second-hand CO2" is even worse.
No, they will make up a proxy measurement which will turn out to be grossly inflated, but not before it has served its purpose, which is, of course, to send us to EPA Auschwitz.
Uh....yes.
will we be sent of to the Gov’s version of Auschwitz?
Rabid environmentalists believe that only 1/10th of the humans now alive should be alive. And some of them are nasty enough to try to make it happen...like Soros
will we be sent of to the Gov’s version of Auschwitz?
Rabid environmentalists believe that only 1/10th of the humans now alive should be alive. And some of them are nasty enough to try to make it happen...like Soros
The number one greenhouse gas is water vapor....what are we going to do about that?
I'm starting to believe this whole scam is fueling a move towards one world government and a redistribution of wealth from the west to the poor countries of the world....a macro version of what Barry the O is doing to this country...
They seem to have a lot of ideas, pizz be upon them:
1977 : (FUTURE OBAMA SCIENCE CZAR HOLDREN ON POPULATION)Holdren gave a clear indication of his philosophical views in the 1977 book Ecoscience, which he co-authored with Paul and Anne Ehrlich. [1] In its pages, the authors noted, "The neo-Malthusiasn view proposes...population limitation and redistribution of wealth." They concluded, "On these points, we find ourselves firmly in the neo-Malthusian camp" (p. 954).
Economist Thomas Malthus is one of the most literally anti-human theorists in human history. He viewed overpopulation as the fount of all woe, but one which could be staunched with enough blood. In "An Essay on the Principle of Population" Malthus wrote, "All the children who are born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to a desired level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the death of grown persons...if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use...and court the return of the plague."
Like their intellectual forebear, Holdren and the Ehrlichs proposed their own acceptable sacrifice to the environment.
Compulsory Abortion for American Women
The trio [Holdren and the Ehrlichs] prescribed a rigidly enforced, government-imposed limit of two children per family. Holdren and the Ehrlichs maintained "there exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated." Hiding behind the passive voice, they note, "it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."
(Emphasis added.) To underscore they mean business, they conclude, "If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" (pp. 837-838). Moreover, if the United States government refuses to take proper measures, they authorize the United Nations to take compelling force.
------ "Obama’s Biggest Radical," By: Ben Johnson, FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, February 27, 2009. "A Comprehensive Planetary Regime"