EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Fence sitters and those who are looking for more information
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24371
Page 89 of 89

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Milton Banana wrote:
A little extra information for the fence sitters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j46mnIcz330



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gHbwT_R9t0

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Dec 16, 2018 12:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Your attention again please fence sitters. This is what a carbon tax looks like.

Image

And, similar protests are starting in Brussels, Amsterdam, Calgary, Edmonton, and Regina. It seems the socialist model is experiencing a problem.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Milton Banana wrote:
Your attention again please fence sitters. This is what a carbon tax looks like.

Image

And, similar protests are starting in Brussels, Amsterdam, Calgary, Edmonton, and Regina. It seems the socialist model is experiencing a problem.


Actually it is more what the effect of the 1% getting ever more wealthy as opposed to the rest being stagnate or even shrinking in wealth, but then again you have an agenda to support.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

How many times have I said follow the money?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/30/ ... ate-money/

Quote:
Climate Crisis Inc. gets billions to promote imaginary manmade cataclysm – but attacks realists

Paul Driessen

The climate crisis industry incessantly claims that fossil fuel emissions are causing unprecedented temperature, climate and weather changes that pose existential threats to human civilization and our planet. The only solution, Climate Crisis, Inc. insists, is to eliminate the oil, coal and natural gas that provide 80% of the energy that makes US and global economies, health and living standards possible.

Failing that, CCI demands steadily increasing taxes on carbon-based fuels and carbon dioxide emissions.

However, as France’s Yellow Vest protests and the latest climate confab in Poland demonstrated, the world is not prepared to go down that dark path. Countries worldwide are expanding their reliable fossil fuel use, and families do not want to reduce their living standards or their aspirations for better lives.


Quote:
Nothing that is required to harness breezes and sunshine to power civilization is clean, green, renewable, climate-friendly or sustainable. Tens of billions of tons of rock would have to be removed, to extract billions of tons of ores, to create millions of tons of metals, concrete and other materials, to manufacture millions of wind turbines and solar panels, and install them on millions of acres of wildlife habitats – to generate expensive, intermittent energy that would be grossly insufficient for humanity’s needs. Every step in this process requires fossil fuels – and some of the mining involves child labor.

How do CCI alarmists respond to these points? They don’t. They refuse to engage in or even permit civil discussion. They rant that anyone “who denies climate change science” is on the fossil fuel industry payroll, thus has a blatant conflict of interest and no credibility, and therefore should be ignored.

“Rebuttals” to my recent “We are still IN” article cited Greenpeace and DeSmogBlog as their “reliable sources” and claimed: I’m “associated with” several “right-wing think tanks that are skeptical of man-made climate change.” One of them “received $582,000 from ExxonMobil” over a 14-year period, another got “$5,716,325 from Koch foundations” over 18 years, and the Koch Brothers gave “at least $100,343,292 to 84 groups denying climate change science” in 20 years, my detractors claimed.

These multi-year contributions work out to $41,571 annually; $317,574 per year; and $59,728 per organization per year, respectively – to pay salaries and overhead at think tanks that are engaged in multiple social, tax, education, medical and other issues … not just energy and climate change.



Quote:
But let’s assume for a moment that money – especially funding from any organization that has any kind of financial, regulatory or other “special interest” in the outcome of this ongoing energy and economic battle – renders a researcher incapable of analyzing facts fairly and honestly.

Then apply those zero-tolerance, zero-credibility Greenpeace-DeSmogBlog-CCI standards to those very same climate alarmists and their allies – who are determined to shut down debate and impose their wind, solar and biofuel policies on the world. Where do they get their money, and how much do they get?

Billionaire and potential presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg gave the Sierra Club $110 million in a six-year period to fund its campaign against coal-generated electricity. Chesapeake Energy gave the Club $26 million in three years to promote natural gas and attack coal. Ten wealthy liberal foundations gave another $51 million over eight years to the Club and other environmentalist groups to battle coal.

Over a 12-year period, the Environmental Protection Agency gave its 15 Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee members $181 million in grants – and in exchange received quick rubberstamp approvals of various air quality rules. It paid the American Lung Association $20 million to support its regulations.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Let's break it down fence sitters shall we.

Quote:
During the Obama years, the EPA, Interior Department and other federal agencies paid environmental pressure groups tens of millions in collusive, secretive sue-and-settle lawsuit payoffs on dozens of issues.


Quote:
Then we get to the really big money: taxpayer funds that government agencies hand out to scientists, computer modelers and pressure groups – to promote global warming and climate change alarmism.

As Heritage Foundation economist Stephen Moore noted recently, citing government and other reports:

* Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.



Quote:
* The Feds spent an estimated $150 billion on climate change and green energy subsidies during President Obama’s first term.



Quote:
* That didn’t include the 30% tax credits/subsidies for wind and solar power: $8 billion to $10 billion a year – plus billions more from state programs that require utilities to buy expensive “green” energy.


Quote:
* Worldwide, according to the “progressive” Climate Policy Initiative, climate change “investment” in 2013 totaled $359 billion – but this “falls far short” of the $5 trillion per year that’s actually needed.


Quote:
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change echoes those greedy demands. It says the world must spend $2.4 trillion per year for the next 17 years to subsidize the transition to renewable energy.

Bear in mind that $1.5 trillion per year was already being spent in 2014 on Climate Crisis, Inc. research, consulting, carbon trading and renewable projects, according to the Climate Change Business Journal. With 6-8% annual growth, we’re easily looking at a $2-trillion-per-year climate industry by now.


Quote:
The US Government Accountability Office puts United States taxpayer funding alone at $2.1 billion per year for climate change “science” … $9.0 billion a year for technology R&D … and $1.8 billion a year for international assistance. Total US Government spending on climate change totaled $179 billion (!) from 1993 through 2017, according to the GAO. That’s $20 million per day!


Quote:
At the September 2018Global Climate Action Summit, 29 leftist foundations pledged to give $4 billion over five years to their new Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming campaign. Sea Change Foundation co-founder Nat Simons made it clear that this “is only a down payment”!



Quote:
And I get pilloried for working with organizations that received $41,571 to $59,728 per year from fossil fuel interests … questioning claims that fossil fuels are causing climate chaos … and raising inconvenient facts and questions about wind, solar and biofuel replacements for coal, oil and natural gas.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

And there is this. :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/greenp ... 45722.html

Quote:
Caught Dumping Decommissioned “Rainbow Warrior 2” On Bangladeshi Beach!
Scrapping On The Cheap: GREENPEACE Caught Dumping Decommissioned “Rainbow Warrior 2” On Bangladeshi Beach!



Quote:
The latest involves Greenpeace’s dirty scrapping of its retired Rainbow Warrior II ship on a Bangladeshi beach under horrendous environmental and social conditions, Spiegel reports here.

Greenpeace has always been a harsh critic, and often justifiably so, of ship-scrapping under awful environmental, work and social conditions in third world countries like India or Bangladesh. So it’s surprising to hear that the famous environmental protection organization has been caught breaking its own Commandments (probably to save money).


Do as I say, and not as I do?

Its all about the money fence sitters.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

And, there is this.

https://nypost.com/2018/12/29/nycs-deer ... big-bucks/


Quote:
The wildlife ecologist running Mayor de Blasio’s deer-vasectomy project raked in more than $603,000 in the first two years of the budget-busting program.

Dr. Anthony DeNicola, founder of the nonprofit White Buffalo Inc., was paid up to $2,500 a day for 250 days of project management and field sterilization work during the 2016/17 and 2017/18 seasons, according to city budget documents reviewed by The Post.

DeNicola’s wife Vickie was a staff member during the project’s first season, shooting bucks with tranquilizer guns and wrangling the dazed animals, the Staten Island Advance reported. That role paid $1,600 a day for 150 days of work – a total of $240,000 for a job that typically pays just $29,968 a year, according to Ziprecruiter.com.


Money fence sitters, and the power to see to it who gets it. That's what its all about.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Milton Banana wrote:
How many times have I said follow the money?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/30/ ... ate-money/



Search WUWT:
Search
Search …
Donate to support WUWT
Support our work: HERE
The Maxim of our resolve
“Walk toward the fire. Don’t worry about what they call you.” – Andrew Breitbart

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

When you need a lesser educated weatherman to tell you the conspiracy theories on climate change you always have Watts.


https://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

Anthony Watts

Credentials

Anthony Watts studied Electrical Engineering and Meteorology at Purdue University, but according to correspondence between Purdue University and SourceWatch, he did not graduate. [1], [2]

Background

Anthony Watts is a former television meteorologist best known as the founder and editor of the blog Watts Up With That (WUWT), which primarily publishes articles critical of mainstream climate change science. [1]

Watts is the director and president of IntelliWeather Inc., a weather graphics company alternatively known as Innovative Tech Works (ITWorks), and Weathershop. Watts also founded Surfacestations.org, a project with the stated purpose of documenting the siting quality of weather stations in the United States. [1], [3]

Watts previously worked as an on-air meteorologist for WLFI-TV in Lafayette, Indiana, and later joined KHSK-TV in 1987. In 2002, Watts left his position as a television weatherman to devote time to his private business, ITWorks. He returned to work part-time at KHSL in 2004, and has also been the chief meteorologist for KPAY-AM (an affiliate of Fox News) since 2002. [5], [6]

Watts admits he is ”not a degreed climate scientist.” His primary credential appears to be an American Meteorological Society Seal of Approval. This does not mean that Watts is “AMS Certified” as some sources have inaccurately claimed. The AMS Seal of Approval is a discontinued credential that does not require a bachelor's or higher degree in atmospheric science or meteorology. [1], [7], [8], [9]

Watts's “About” page mentions neither his Purdue attendance nor whether he graduated. Email correspondence between SourceWatch and Purdue University confirm he attended from August, 1975 to May, 1982, however registrar staff also confirm it is safe to assume that Watts attained no qualification from the university. [1], [2]

According to leaked documents released in 2012, Watts has received funding from the Heartland Institute. [4]

Author:  Milton Banana [ Tue Jan 01, 2019 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Happy new year fence sitters. 2019 is ringing in some good news indeed.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/31/clim ... -protests/

Quote:
Despite increasingly apocalyptic warnings from U.N. officials, 2018 has seen a number of high-profile defeats for policies aimed at fighting global warming. Politicians and voters pushed back at attempts to raise energy prices as part of the climate crusade.

It started in June with election of Ontario Premier Doug Ford. Ontario residents overwhelmingly voted Ford’s conservative coalition into power on a platform that included axing the Canadian province’s cap-and-trade program.

Ford said his first priority upon taking office would be to “cancel the Liberal cap-and-trade carbon tax.” Ford then joined a legal challenge led by Saskatchewan against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s policy of a central government-imposed carbon tax on provinces that don’t have their own.

Carbon tax opponents called Trudeau’s plan an attempt to “use the new tax to further redistribute income, which will increase the costs of this tax to the economy.”



Quote:
Roughly ten thousand miles away in Australia another revolt was brewing. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull saw his power base crumble within days of failing to pass a bill aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Turnbull’s so-called National Energy Guarantee to reduce energy sector emissions was opposed by a group of conservative members of Parliament led by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Turnbull tried to delay the vote on his climate bill in response to the opposition but was too late. Turnbull stepped down in late August and has since been replaced by Scott Morrison.



Quote:
Back in the U.S., $45 million was being pumped into the battle over a Washington state carbon tax ballot measure. Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee, who has 2020 presidential ambitions, supported the measure though refiners, but other opponents outspent carbon tax supporters.

The Inslee-backed measure called for taxing carbon dioxide emissions at $15 a ton in 2020, which would increase at $2 a year above the rate of inflation until the state meets its emissions goals. (RELATED: Greenpeace’s Iconic ‘Rainbow Warrior’ Ship Chopped Up On A Third-World Beach, Sold For Scrap)

However, Washington voters rejected the carbon tax measure in the November election despite Inslee’s support. It was the second time in two years that Washington voters rejected a carbon tax ballot initiative.

Quote:
The November elections also saw the defeat of a group of Republican lawmakers in the House Climate Solutions Caucus. Among those defeated was caucus co-chair Florida GOP Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who introduced carbon tax legislation in July.

Curbelo’s legislation called for a $23 per ton carbon tax that would primarily fund the Highway Trust Fund. Despite this, environmentalists funneled money to his Democratic challenger Debbie Mucarsel-Powell.



Quote:
Shortly after the U.S. elections, it became clear trouble was brewing across the Atlantic in France. French President Emmanuel Macron’s economic reforms, which included planned fuel tax increases, were not winning over much of the population.

Macron spent years styling himself as a staunch supporter of efforts to tackle global warming, including the Paris agreement. Indeed, raising taxes on diesel and gasoline was part of Macron’s plan to meet France’s Paris accord pledge.

It backfired. Angered over the new carbon taxes on fuel, tens of thousands of protesters, called “yellow vests” for the vests drivers are required to have in their cars, took to the streets calling for an end to the taxes and for Macron to resign.



Quote:
Macron initially resisted, arguing France needed to do more to address global warming, but the French government capitulated in December and scrapped the planned tax increases. Macron also said he’d increase the minimum wage and begged companies to raise salaries, if possible.

Macron’s backpedaling on climate policy couldn’t have come at a worse time for the climate-conscious president. The U.N. annual climate summit was being held in Poland as Macron conceded to the “yellow vests.”

France’s carbon tax revolts sent a clear message to Democratic lawmakers across the Atlantic Ocean. Democrats will take control of the House in 2019 and want to make global warming a central part of their agenda.

Democrats and even environmentalists distanced themselves from carbon taxes in the wake of French riots. However, far-left Democrats are pushing “Green New Deal” legislation, which could become the largest expansion of government in decades.



Democrats can push their Green New Deal all they want. Its not going to make it past the House. And, they would do well to observe the majority of the world population don't want this stupid crap.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Milton Banana wrote:
Happy new year fence sitters. 2019 is ringing in some good news indeed.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/31/clim ... -protests/

Quote:
Despite increasingly apocalyptic warnings from U.N. officials, 2018 has seen a number of high-profile defeats for policies aimed at fighting global warming. Politicians and voters pushed back at attempts to raise energy prices as part of the climate crusade.

It started in June with election of Ontario Premier Doug Ford. Ontario residents overwhelmingly voted Ford’s conservative coalition into power on a platform that included axing the Canadian province’s cap-and-trade program.

Ford said his first priority upon taking office would be to “cancel the Liberal cap-and-trade carbon tax.” Ford then joined a legal challenge led by Saskatchewan against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s policy of a central government-imposed carbon tax on provinces that don’t have their own.

Carbon tax opponents called Trudeau’s plan an attempt to “use the new tax to further redistribute income, which will increase the costs of this tax to the economy.”



Quote:
Roughly ten thousand miles away in Australia another revolt was brewing. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull saw his power base crumble within days of failing to pass a bill aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Turnbull’s so-called National Energy Guarantee to reduce energy sector emissions was opposed by a group of conservative members of Parliament led by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Turnbull tried to delay the vote on his climate bill in response to the opposition but was too late. Turnbull stepped down in late August and has since been replaced by Scott Morrison.



Quote:
Back in the U.S., $45 million was being pumped into the battle over a Washington state carbon tax ballot measure. Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee, who has 2020 presidential ambitions, supported the measure though refiners, but other opponents outspent carbon tax supporters.

The Inslee-backed measure called for taxing carbon dioxide emissions at $15 a ton in 2020, which would increase at $2 a year above the rate of inflation until the state meets its emissions goals. (RELATED: Greenpeace’s Iconic ‘Rainbow Warrior’ Ship Chopped Up On A Third-World Beach, Sold For Scrap)

However, Washington voters rejected the carbon tax measure in the November election despite Inslee’s support. It was the second time in two years that Washington voters rejected a carbon tax ballot initiative.

Quote:
The November elections also saw the defeat of a group of Republican lawmakers in the House Climate Solutions Caucus. Among those defeated was caucus co-chair Florida GOP Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who introduced carbon tax legislation in July.

Curbelo’s legislation called for a $23 per ton carbon tax that would primarily fund the Highway Trust Fund. Despite this, environmentalists funneled money to his Democratic challenger Debbie Mucarsel-Powell.



Quote:
Shortly after the U.S. elections, it became clear trouble was brewing across the Atlantic in France. French President Emmanuel Macron’s economic reforms, which included planned fuel tax increases, were not winning over much of the population.

Macron spent years styling himself as a staunch supporter of efforts to tackle global warming, including the Paris agreement. Indeed, raising taxes on diesel and gasoline was part of Macron’s plan to meet France’s Paris accord pledge.

It backfired. Angered over the new carbon taxes on fuel, tens of thousands of protesters, called “yellow vests” for the vests drivers are required to have in their cars, took to the streets calling for an end to the taxes and for Macron to resign.



Quote:
Macron initially resisted, arguing France needed to do more to address global warming, but the French government capitulated in December and scrapped the planned tax increases. Macron also said he’d increase the minimum wage and begged companies to raise salaries, if possible.

Macron’s backpedaling on climate policy couldn’t have come at a worse time for the climate-conscious president. The U.N. annual climate summit was being held in Poland as Macron conceded to the “yellow vests.”

France’s carbon tax revolts sent a clear message to Democratic lawmakers across the Atlantic Ocean. Democrats will take control of the House in 2019 and want to make global warming a central part of their agenda.

Democrats and even environmentalists distanced themselves from carbon taxes in the wake of French riots. However, far-left Democrats are pushing “Green New Deal” legislation, which could become the largest expansion of government in decades.



Democrats can push their Green New Deal all they want. Its not going to make it past the House. And, they would do well to observe the majority of the world population don't want this stupid crap.


It would be like Lemmings voting to run off cliffs en mass, if Lemmings actually did that. The masses generally have limited vision and only concentrate on short term gain, so long term problems generally get ignored.

Author:  Amyrich [ Fri Jan 04, 2019 5:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Wayne Stollings wrote:
Milton Banana wrote:
Quote:
It means the extinction of ~87% of all species including humans. So there is plenty of reason to act fast and in enough quantity to get this reduction.


I have pointed out that leftist policies are hurting the poor in Germany. Leftist policies promise the world to the poor don't they? Here we have a committed leftist saying f##k the poor for the benefit of future humanity. Fence sitters hear me well. Leftists politics are not about helping the poor. They are about cementing power for tyrants. And the green movement is at the heart of leftist politics. Understand exactly what you are supporting.


Politics are not science. Science gives the warning and the political entities ignore the long term threats in favor of the short term benefits far too often. At some point there will be suffering no matter what and that suffering will be hitting the poor hardest regardless. Higher prices, decreased supplies, increased health threat, increased discomfort, and on and on all impact the poor worse and will always do so.


"At some point"? I'm sorry, but the effects have already started manifesting across the world. Several island nations are already suffering. And, at the risk of stating the obvious, the Syrian crisis began due to adverse effects of climate change...and of course, we humans politicked and messed it up further.

Author:  Milton Banana [ Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

What effects are you referring to? And, how are the island nations and Syria linked together in climate change? As you state its obvious.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

Milton Banana wrote:
What effects are you referring to? And, how are the island nations and Syria linked together in climate change? As you state its obvious.


The effects you go so far out of your way to try to ignore. Changing precipitation patterns, changing plant zones, increased pest impacts on flora, rising sea levels, warming oceans, ocean pH moving more acidic, bleaching corals, current impacts, etc., etc.

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Fence sitters and those who are looking for more informa

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst ... smsnnews11

Ice loss from Antarctica has sextupled since the 1970s, new research finds

Antarctic glaciers have been melting at an accelerating pace over the past four decades thanks to an influx of warm ocean water — a startling new finding that researchers say could mean sea levels are poised to rise more quickly than predicted in coming decades.

The Antarctic lost 40 billion tons of melting ice to the ocean each year from 1979 to 1989. That figure rose to 252 billion tons lost per year beginning in 2009, according to a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. That means the region is losing six times as much ice as it was four decades ago, an unprecedented pace in the era of modern measurements. (It takes about 360 billion tons of ice to produce one millimeter of global sea-level rise.)

“I don’t want to be alarmist,” said Eric Rignot, an Earth-systems scientist for the University of California at Irvine and NASA who led the work. But he said the weaknesses that researchers have detected in East Antarctica — home to the largest ice sheet on the planet — deserve deeper study.

“The places undergoing changes in Antarctica are not limited to just a couple places,” Rignot said. “They seem to be more extensive than what we thought. That, to me, seems to be reason for concern.”

The findings are the latest sign that the world could face catastrophic consequences if climate change continues unabated. In addition to more-frequent droughts, heat waves, severe storms and other extreme weather that could come with a continually warming Earth, scientists already have predicted that seas could rise nearly three feet globally by 2100 if the world does not sharply decrease its carbon output. But in recent years, there has been growing concern that the Antarctic could push that even higher.

That kind of sea-level rise would result in the inundation of island communities around the globe, devastating wildlife habitats and threatening drinking-water supplies. Global sea levels have already risen seven to eight inches since 1900.

Page 89 of 89 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/