Sports Parlor South
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 23, 2012, 03:49:37 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to Sports Parlor South, Please Register
104785 Posts in 8426 Topics by 407 Members
Latest Member: Rubes
* Home Help Login Register
If your Thick Skinned & like hard-nosed Sports and or Political conversation then this steel and barbed wire cage match type of forum is for you................

Click To Enter

Sports Parlor South  |  The Parlor  |  Political Parlor (Moderator: The One Man Gang)  |  Topic: Nasa contradicts Nasa 0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Nasa contradicts Nasa  (Read 354 times)
Dementia_Madness
Global Moderator
Legion of the Miserable
*

Karma: +44/-411
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 4746


Law to the proud, Grace to the humble.


« Reply #24 on: February 13, 2010, 03:56:10 PM »

http://www.prisonplanet.com/big-oil-behind-copenhagen-climate-scam.html

Quote
The big irony behind top globalists descending on Copenhagen in luxury private jets and stretch limos is not just the fact that their own behavior completely contradicts their self-righteous hyperbole about CO2 emissions, but that their propaganda is vehemently supported by the very same big oil interests they accuse climate skeptics of pandering to.

Probably one of the most flagrant examples of climate cronyism to emerge from the climategate scandal were emails in which CRU scientists, the body that provides much of the foundational global warming data for the UN IPCC, discuss how they conducted meetings with Shell Oil in order to enlist them as a “strategic partner” while getting them to bankroll pro-man made global warming research.

The emails reveal that the CRU was also trying to get money from oil giants British Petroleum and Exxon-Mobil, under its former identity as Esso.

“Now who is the shill for Big Oil again?” asks Anthony Watts. “Next time somebody brings up that ridiculous argument about skeptics, show them this.”

A “Copenhagen Communiqué” put out by leaders of over 500 global corporations in advance of this week’s summit calls for drastic measures on behalf of developed countries to “de-carbonise their economies” – a move that would completely devastate living standards and lead to gargantuan levels of unemployment.

The communiqué also demands that a global carbon tax be implemented via a carbon trading system. Bear in mind that the very people calling for such a system are the same people who will benefit from it to the tune of billions, as we shall explore later.

The statement calls for, “Measures to deliver a robust global greenhouse gas emissions market in order to provide the most effective, efficient and equitable emission reductions. It would be comprised of a growing series of national or regional “cap-and-trade” markets linked together, in which the “caps” are brought down in line with the
targets that have been adopted for emission reduction.”

The document also states that CO2 emissions need to be reduced by a staggering 50-85% by 2050, a process that would return humanity to a near stone age level of development.

And who are the radicals calling for such severe measures in the name of fighting the evil life giving gas that humans exhale and plants breathe? Greenpeace? Al Gore?

Namely – James Smith, chairman of UK Shell Oil, Tony Hayward, Group Chief Executive, British Petroleum, along with hundreds of other global corporate giants, many of whom are directly tied in with big oil, and central banks who, far from bankrolling climate change skeptics, are directly invested in the scam of human-induced global warming.

A common charge leveled against global warming skeptics is that they are on the payroll of transnational oil companies, when in fact the opposite is true, oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change propaganda, emphasized recently by Exxon Mobil’s call for a global carbon tax.

According to Exxon Mobil chief executive Rex Tillerson, the cap and trade nightmare being primed for passage in the Senate doesn’t go far enough – Tillerson wants a direct tax on carbon dioxide emissions, essentially a tax on breathing since we all exhale this life-giving gas.


In a speech earlier this year, Tillerson brazenly called out the cap and trade agenda for what it was, an effort to impose a carbon tax camouflaged only by a slick sales pitch and deceptive rhetoric.

“It is easier and more politically expedient to support a cap-and-trade approach, because the public will never figure out where it is hitting them,” said Tillerson. “They will just know they hurt somewhere in their pocketbook,” he added, pointing out that he disagreed with this convoluted method of introducing a carbon tax, arguing instead that it would be more successful to openly propose a straight carbon tax.

Tillerson firmly expressed Exxon’s support for climate change alarmists in stating, “I firmly believe it is not too late for Congress to consider a carbon tax as the better policy approach for addressing the risks of climate change.”

Exxon’s push for a carbon tax was subsequently restated by its vice president for public affairs Ken Cohen, who told a conference call that he wants a climate policy that creates “certainty and predictability, which is why we advocate a carbon tax.”

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,55826,00.html

http://www.topix.com/com/oxy/2009/11/occidental-well-positioned-for-oils-next-vault-to-the-stratosphere

and IF you are presuming that the data from the other two groups responsible for the remainder of the KNOWN PUBLISHED data used by EVERY global warming theorist (NASA and NCDC) too bad for you those "separate and independent" groups all three of them relied heavily on the SAME archive of data to come to their conclusions, data that we know now was manipulated and not trustworthy. The organizations, though supposedly separate and independent, were indeed all interdependant with one another, many of the same scientists also did work for all three.
 Now it seems YOU agree that there is indeed a possibility of "financial" incentive in this data, but you make a sad pathetic little foolish mistake, you arbitrarily assume that all the data against MMGW is provided by people working for the big evil greedy corporations who would benefit from the "status quo" Number one the OIL COMPANIES happen to be making BIG profits from GLOBAL WARMING....they actually support the ALARMISTS and not (or as well as) the skeptics.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 04:25:58 PM by Darth_Mondo » Logged

"We rage against the reptile, not against his prey." - Russell Moore
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
Sports Parlor South  |  The Parlor  |  Political Parlor (Moderator: The One Man Gang)  |  Topic: Nasa contradicts Nasa « previous next »
Jump to:  

The Paul Finebaum Radio Network

SPS ADMIN & Webmaster-PV, ADMIN-OMG, PREZ&ADMIN-RUDEDOG, TBA RESIDENT MONK

Copyright © Sports Parlor South 2010 All Rights Reserved


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!