Just read an intersting article [if any such articles can be believed]
1st:
That Cortez lady didn't suddenly decide to leave her job at a bar running the taps and waiting tables. She was recruited by some big money. I always wondered how knocking on doors could generate so much support. Any bid for election I know about needs money and lots of it. So much for Cortez. She had money supporting her bid for election. The anti fossil fuel people seem to be a possibility, specially listening to her green spiel. So: I guess D.C is still the same old, same old. You take the money and dance to somebodies tune.
The thing I don't understand is this; The article went on to warn us
If the earth warmed up by 2 degrees celcius, the planet was doomed. Is that enough to be harmful to the planet or is warming by 2 degrees celcius more of that good growing plant environment stuff Mike talks about
The article obviously was biased toward reduced fossil fuel useage and go green
How we can suddenly go green with today's technology is beyond me, or even in say 10 yrs. but that wasn't my question. Nobody said we could. Just reduce fossil fuel useage seemed to be the gist of the story and replace with green, or else we are doomed...
Is 2 degrees celcius on average, harmful to the planet Doesn't seem like much to me, but what do I know?? This wasn't an argument about amounts of CO2, but warming degrees. I suppose CO2 might have been blamed for the warming effect, but I also might have missed that part.
Wayne,
You will take great interest in this article:
“Dark Green Money” is a new report by Ottawa energy policy consultant, Robert Lyman, that takes the mask off the big green funding machine behind Canada’s Climate Change “Leadership”, issued by Friends of Science on Jan. 15, 2019. According to Friends of Science, what is in play in Canada sounds like the proposed US Green New Deal, as outlined by Vox, Jan. 7, 2019. Contrary to Al Gore’s claims of industry money funding climate dissenters, as reported Dec. 21, 2018 in National Geographic, “Dark Green Money” shows that billionaire foundations with vested interests in renewables and carbon trading, along with government policies are the big money pushing the climate narrative."
The US Senate Minority report the “Billionaire’s Club” of July 20, 2014 reported similar funding.
“Dark Green Money” gives a glimpse into a vast self-dealing network of foreign billionaire foundation funding in Canada, detailing staggering amounts of money pouring into questionable ‘climate change’ initiatives.
"Lyman writes, “While the funding provided by private foundations is large, by far the largest source of funding to promote climate “mitigation” in Canada is by governments …” Canadians should not have to guess how much money is being spent by governments to fund the “Iron Triangle” of climate change confirmation bias.
The Iron Triangle refers to a paper in the Journal of Physicians and Surgeons of Fall 2013 by Richard Lindzen, explaining how ambiguous scientific statements get hyped by self-interested advocates and media, who then generate public pressure on governments to ‘take action’, who in turn feed the frenzy with funding."
"Deloitte’s White Collar Crime update of Feb. 2018, explains the four-point fraud diamond. Touting a climate change ‘crisis’ provides the rationalization for any action; big funders provide the opportunity, governments provide the incentives and capability."
“The best-off country is Canada …” The estimated positive net benefit of CO2 emissions to Canada will steadily increase to be $100 billion by 2100."
Wayne,
The past 40 years have featured the best weather/climate for life and growing crops in the last 1,000 years............the last time that it was this warm during the Medieval WARM period(thats how it got that name).
2,000 years ago, there was the Roman WARM period and around 3,500 years ago , the Minoan WARM period.
Global temperatures have risen a bit over 1 deg. C during the last century. The increase in CO2 during that period has been massively beneficial to life.
The warming, however has slowed down over the past 20 years. The only place where dangerous warming is present is on computer simulations of the atmosphere going out 100 years using mathematical equations to represent a busted, speculative theory that has not verified. Observations/empirical data have proven to be less warm than almost all the models............but they just keep using the too warm models, instead of adjusting them.
Because this field is dominated by politics not authentic science.
Here are my 3 main/best threads on the subject:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/18326/
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/14777/
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/10741/
So who stands to benefit and how if we go green
There is a surplus of solar panels
I think the gov't collects the carbon tax to spend on who knows what
I aassume the gov't must have accountability in money spent from carbon tax
So: why the push for green
I understand your CO2 benefits
There has to be a skunk in the wood pile some place
And my experience is, it is usually money
Is our gov't that stupid to want to tax us
Ontario and some other provinces are giving push back to carbon tax
But: As usual the Fed gov't hold the hammer by with holding funds
I repeat
Who wins or think they do???