The climate change scientist-government-industrialist complex has to be fed.
Billions of dollars support subsidies and loans for renewable energy programs that represent major revenue streams for companies large and small, and part of that money ends up in campaign war chests for (mostly Democrat) legislators who support the climate change scientist-government- industrialist complex.
“A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”
~Greenpeace co-founder Peter Moore
CLIMATE CHANGE: What has been happening for billions of years, but should now be flogged to produce ‘panic for profit.’
Just look at the corrupt leftist bureaucracy known as the IPCC also known as the foundation of climate fraud.
The IPCC was created in 1988 largely due to the efforts of Maurice Strong, a billionaire and self-confessed socialist, as part of a larger campaign to justify giving the United Nations the authority to tax businesses in developed countries and redistribute trillions of dollars a year to developing nations.
“…one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth…”
~ IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer
Whether you believe in global warming or not is not the issue up for debate. Global warming is a scientific fact. The argument now, is not whether global warming is occurring or not, but about what is causing the warming. The Sierra Club, who year after year successfully lobby in Washington for green legislation, argue that the warming is caused by us (our pollution). On the other hand, many tea party members (or the ones who actually recognize global warming), believe that the warming of the globe is occurring at an entirely natural rate, not due to human activity whatsoever. The reason that portions of our tax money go into global warming prevention programs is not only because the United Nations as well as the White House recognize that investing in global warming prevention now is a lot less costly than trying to reverse its course later when it's far too late, but also because the restrictions these programs put on companies saves gas, electric, and oil for America. So whether or not one believes in global warming, tax money is spent on its behalf to lower costs here in America by forcing efficiency to increase and also because many people support the spending and will vote for the politician tied to the program in return. It's a third logic, third politics and third economics.
STOP......... STOPPPPPPPPPPPP STOP.
The world's climate may not be warming currently, but the climate is drastically changing. You can physically see the planet changing. Glaciers are melting and sea levels are rising, causing changes in weather.
So, you ask, why is it so cold if its called "global warming?"
Due to the change in climates and the warmth growing in the north pole, the polar vortex was pushed out and into the americas and europe and russia.
Why is it warm in the North pole?
When the gas burned from factories and cars is released, it is kept in the atmosphere.. these gasses heat up in the presence of sunlight, causing an increase in temperature,
Scientists need more money to fix and stop these changes.
If you still dont believe that climate change is real,
Well, Springer and Christy say it is warming, based on satellite data.
More research can confirm that, get more data to show how it i swarming, and project how much warmer it will get.
If deniers would admit that they were wrong, some of the money could go toward thorium reactors or sequestering CO2.
The whole basis of taxpaying is for the Government to keep their boot on the throats of the average citizen until such point when it becomes unsustainable (like NOW) or uprisings occur, at which point martial law or other excessive use of force is implemented. The Government does not care about anything other than revenue collection and the politicians are only in bed with the lobbyists. End of story
Global Warming Taxpayer $Billions are actually nothing more than Welfare for Alarmist scientists and universities and so-called renewable energy businesses.
These entities are living on the Taxpayer dole........they should be thankful for the gifts we taxpayers provide them.
Next time you see the Hockeystick guy on TV or a Website, remember that he (and others like him) are living on Taxpayer-provided Welfare and are actually non-productive members of society.
They are to be pitied.
It is called wealth redistribution.
Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."
They take our money and redistribute it to the rich, like Al Gore, George Soros and Maurice Strong. Wealth Redistribution is one of the main tenets of Communism.
Stop Funding Climate Scientist and the IPCC
It does exist just because it isent effecting you right now it will in the future but can't answer that
Taxpayers are not paying billions each year for Global Warming, even though some people constantly say they are.
According to RSS Satellite data there has been no warming for more than 18 years.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9-EqBi3gVAE/VC6pDRiNPUI/AAAAAAAArik/m1OBzYMXoaI/s800/monckton18years1month.png
Over 31,487 American scientists agree that it is False, http://www.petitionproject.org
A careful look at global warming, as a topic, shows that there is a great deal of disagreement about the facts and substance of climate change. Those who blame man for climate change often disagree about what facts lead them to that conclusion. Those who hold man totally innocent of it often ignore established facts. Experience and research leads us to believe that warming is, in fact, occurring; however, there is little to no objective evidence that man is the cause, nor that the effects will be catastrophic. The idea of earth “wearing out” is an apt analogy. This entire world has been continually decaying since the fall.
Global warming “facts” are notoriously hard to come by. One of the few facts universally agreed upon is that the current average temperature of Earth is indeed rising at this time. According to most estimates, this increase in temperature amounts to about 0.4-0.8 °C (0.72-1.44 °F) over the last 100 years. Data regarding times before that is not only highly theoretical but very difficult to obtain with any accuracy. The very methods used to obtain historical temperature records are controversial, even among the most ardent supporters of the theory of human-caused climate change. The facts leading one to believe that humans are not responsible for the current change in temperature are as follows:
? Global temperature changes from past millennia, according to available data, were often severe and rapid, long before man supposedly had any impact at all. That is, the current climate change is not as unusual as some alarmists would like to believe.
? Recent recorded history mentions times of noticeable global warming and cooling, long before man had any ability to produce industrial emissions.
? Water vapor, not CO2, is the most influential greenhouse gas. It is difficult to determine what effect, if any, mankind has on worldwide water vapor levels.
? Given the small percentage of human-produced CO2, as compared to other greenhouse gases, human impact on global temperature may be as little as 1%.
? Global temperatures are known to be influenced by other, non-human-controlled factors, such as sunspot activity, orbital movement, volcanic activity, solar system effects, and so forth. CO2 emission is not the only plausible explanation for global warming.
? Ice Age temperature studies, although rough, frequently show temperatures changing before CO2 levels, not after. This calls into question the relationship between warming and carbon dioxide; in some cases, the data could easily be interpreted to indicate that warming caused an increase in carbon dioxide, rather than the reverse!
? Computer simulations used to “predict” or “demonstrate” global warming require the assumption of human causation, and even then are not typically repeatable or reliable. Current computer weather simulations are neither predictive nor repeatable.
? Most of the global temperature increase of the last 100 years occurred before most of the man-made CO2 was produced.
? In the 1970s, global temperatures had actually been dropping since 1945, and a “global cooling” concern became prominent, despite what is now dismissed as a lack of scientific support.
? The “consensus” claimed by most global warming theorists is not scientific proof; rather, it is a statement of majority opinion. Scientific majorities have been wrongly influenced by politics and other factors in the past. Such agreement is not to be taken lightly, but it is not the same thing as hard proof.
? This “consensus,” as with many other scientific theories, can be partially explained by growing hostility to those with differing viewpoints, making it less likely that a person without preconceived notions would take on the subject for research. The financial and political ramifications of the global warming debate are too serious to be ignored, though they should not be central to any discussion.
? The data being used to support anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming is typically based on small data sets, single samples, or measurements taken in completely different regions. This creates an uncertainty in the results that rarely gets the attention that alarmist conclusions do.
While the above list is not exhaustive, it does include several of the major points that raise doubts about mankind’s actual effect on global temperatures. While no one can deny that warming is occurring, “overwhelming evidence” of any objective type does not exist to support the idea that global warming is significantly influenced by human actions. There is plenty of vague, short-sighted, and misunderstood data that can be seen as proving “anthropogenic” global-warming theory. All too often, data used to blame humans for global warming is far less reliable than data used for other areas of study. It is a valid point of contention that the data used in these studies is frequently flawed, easily misinterpreted, and subject to preconception.
In regards to issues such as this, skepticism is not the same as disbelief. There are fragments of evidence to support both sides, and logical reasons to choose one interpretation over another. The question of anthropogenic global warming should not divide Christian believers from each other (Luke 11:17). Environmental issues are important, but they are not the most important questions facing mankind. Christians ought to treat our world with respect and good stewardship, but we should not allow politically driven hysteria to dominate our view of the environment. Our relationship with God is not dependent on our belief in human-caused global warming.
For further research on global warming, we recommend the following articles:
http://www.icr.org/article/3233/
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossi...
http://www.xtronics.com/reference/global...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles...
http://www.whrc.org/carbon/images/Global...
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1...
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/global-warmi...
it's a tax
