Continuing the Theme

As world leaders prepare to gather in Copenhagen in December to sign yet another accord on CO2 emissions, The New York Times reports that world leaders are actually beginning to think about what it will cost.  According to the article, the cost to reach the CO2 goals to be set in Copenhagen may reach $1 Trillion per year by 2020.  Think about that number for a moment:  $1,000,000,000,000 per year.  And who is going to pay for it?  If you guessed "we will", then you would be correct.  The dollars reaped from huge tax increases and massive increases in energy costs that will result from the so-called "cap and trade" legislation that is pending in Congress will be shipped overseas to pay for the cost to produce "green" energy in the developing world.  And what of the other developed nations?  Won't they be paying too?  Not according to The New York Times:

Xie Zhenhua, the lead Chinese climate negotiator, speaking at a news conference in New York last month, said the United Nations should not expect China to pay.  “Global warming is a result of CO2 from developed countries during their industrialization,” Mr. Xie said. “China is one of the countries that has borne the brunt of that.”

Well, if China won't help with the cost, how about Europe?

Germany and France suggested at a recent Group of 20 meeting in London that they would contribute to the fund by reducing other types of aid.

In other words, if India and Africa expect to receive any aid from Europe to implement "green" energy, then they should also expect that other types of aid, such as infrastructure grants and food shipments, will be cut.

So here we are, debating over how we are going to come up with the trillions and trillions and trillions of Dollars it will take to reduce CO2 emissions, when we don't even know if CO2 causes "global warming"!! 

Somewhere, Al Gore is laughing as he watches the value of his portfolio grow.

I Feel a Chill in the Air

The concept of "global warming" has become a religion to its followers, with all of the elements required to qualify as a religion.  The god of global warmism?  Mother Earth.  The prophet? Al Gore.  The sacred text?  The proceedings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a creation of--what else?--the United Nations.  And of course, the central tenent:  that the Earth's climate is warming and that mankind is responsible.  The Global Warmists have been such successful evangelists of their religion that their central tenet (see above) is now taught in schools as irrefutable fact.  The mainstream media breathlessly reports every pronouncement from the Prophet and presents those who question the central tenet as mouth-breathing, imbecilic heretics.  The Prophet even received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, which, when combined with President Obama's 2009 award, proves that the prize panel has little interest in peace and a lot of interest in liberal political causes.

But in a jaw-dropping development, the BBC has published an article that dares to question the central tenet of Global Warmism.   The article points out that the warmest year on record--1998--was more than ten years ago and that since then, global temperatures have moderated "even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise." Oh my goodness!  And from the BBC no less, which is hardly a bastion of conservative thought.  The article goes on to quote scientists with differing viewpoints about future climate issues, and it concludes that, "it seems the debate about what is causing global warming is far from over."

Nevertheless, American liberals and their allies in Congress are trying to push a "cap and trade" carbon emission bill that would result in massive tax increases on American businesses and massive increases in the prices that every American must pay for energy and other goods.  Among other things, the cap and trade bill could signal the end of the American coal industry, putting an end to the source of more than half of all electricity generated in the United States today.  And closer to home, the end of the coal industry would mean incredible hardship for the State of West Virginia and its citizens, where tax revenue generated by the coal industry provides the bulk of state revenue and where wages and benefits paid by the coal industry provide the highest-paying blue collar jobs available.

A new documentary film will be released on October 18 titled, "Not Evil, Just Wrong" that dares to ask the questions that have been ignored by the mainstream media.  The film also addresses the hardships that will be imposed upon the world's poorest people if the Global Warmists have their way.  But you ask:  how could this be?  Liberals are all about the poor!  In truth, liberal policies have been harming the poor and keeping them down for decades.  By working to eliminate cheap and plentiful carbon-based fuel sources, the Global Warmists will guarantee massive increases in the cost of energy around the world, costs that will fall the hardest upon those peoples who would benefit the most from new development and new jobs created by cheap energy.