The truth behind Big Green Fascism

[rugatika]

Great article that outlines the incredible amounts of money being profiteered by the elites off of fear mongering and stolen from everyday working joes. Not to mention the squashing of dissenters who dare to disagree and point to actual science.


http://sultanknish.blogspot.ca/2016/...rty-power.html


California carbon auctions are climbing into the billions. And the endgame is a national and a global
carbon tax that will allow Big Green to take money out of the pockets of every single human being.

Environmentalism isn’t a hippie with a cardboard sign. It’s multinational corporations and big banks. It’s environmental consultants padding the bill for every government project. It’s subsidies that get carved up ten different ways into highly profitable investments at taxpayer expense. It’s brand greenwashing and useless recycling programs. It’s a dime, a dollar or a hundred dollars added to every bill.

Big Green is booming business. But it can’t succeed on its own. Without public policy based on the hoax that the planet is going to be destroyed unless Big Green gets more green cash, the scam collapses.

Even as the science behind the conspiracy theory that claims humans are warming the planet continues to fall apart, Big Green is escalating its crackdown on climate science. If you are going to falsely claim that 99.99% of scientists agree with you, the best way to ensure that is by criminalizing scientific dissent.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called for punishing and imprisoning dissenters. Bill Nye endorsed such a call just last week. And while it’s easy to dismiss Kennedy and Nye as famous crackpots, Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that there had been discussions about prosecuting climate dissenters. And that materials had been passed along to the FBI.

[Scruffie]

Excellent article!! Thanks

[calgarychef]

It's true, the population are most easily duped when they're afraid of something

[V_1]

Thanks for sharing.

[rem338win]

"Science" is the new religion. These guys sound exactly like the religious elite of Europe when they ruled with an iron first. Instead of yelling "the Lord wills it" they yell "it's science!" And never have to prove it.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by calgarychef

It's true, the population are most easily duped when they're afraid of something

Hence Trump's rise? Schicklgruber was able to harness that fear also.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by rem338win

"Science" is the new religion. These guys sound exactly like the religious elite of Europe when they ruled with an iron first. Instead of yelling "the Lord wills it" they yell "it's science!" And never have to prove it.

One doesn't 'believe' in science, one understands it. Science is not a philosophy, it is a method of discovery and replication of that discovery.

[Freddy]

Its because they all worship mother earth.

[ak-71]

Originally Posted by avb3

One doesn't 'believe' in science, one understands it. Science is not a philosophy, it is a method of discovery and replication of that discovery.

Sometimes science just can't give you a full and definite answer to a very complex issues. Just not enough data and understanding yet. It's normal. When politicians start to interpret science to their advantage, and "activists" to promote it to profit at general population and vital industries expense - that is just disgusting, but it seems to be happening with "green movement" a lot right now. Short summary of my point of view is - keep working, if you think you can come up with economically viable alternative, fund it like any other R&D of anything, just like fusion folks do, for example.
But right now you don't have a viable solution yet and I am not paying for what is pushed on a consumer (me) now and all the circus partying in Paris, Al Gore and Suzuki shows and such.

PS. BTW in general understanding of limitations/assumptions of scientific solutions to a particular problem is a big part of understanding the science

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by avb3

One doesn't 'believe' in science, one understands it. Science is not a philosophy, it is a method of discovery and replication of that discovery.

While you are correct, many new ideas in the science world have not been proven yet. One glaring example is the Big Bang theory. It has never been proven, and what's more is that it is scientifically impossible for what we have today to come from a Big Bang. Evolution itself has not been fully proven or understood. While I believe that certain creatures can change their habits to adapt to a gradual change in the environment, we are still nowhere near the extent that Darwin has preached. The bombardier beetle is a prime example. There is no way that this beetle would be alive today if evolution was real.

[bobtodrick]

I'm kinda thinking there are a lot of people in Ft Mac who would disagree with what a lot of you are saying.
Yup...the planet has gone through periods of warming and cooling...processes in the past that took thousands of years to occur...this warming period (geologically proven to be one of the warmest) has occurred in two hundred years...oddly coinciding with the wholesale burning of fossil fuels.
Thankfully the majority of humans don't subscribe to conspiracy theories.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

I'm kinda thinking there are a lot of people in Ft Mac who would disagree with what a lot of you are saying.
Yup...the planet has gone through periods of warming and cooling...processes in the past that took thousands of years to occur...this warming period (geologically proven to be one of the warmest) has occurred in two hundred years...oddly coinciding with the wholesale burning of fossil fuels.
Thankfully the majority of humans don't subscribe to conspiracy theories.

Is that you Tom Moffat?

[ak-71]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

Yup...the planet has gone through periods of warming and cooling...processes in the past that took thousands of years to occur...this warming period (geologically proven to be one of the warmest) has occurred in two hundred years...oddly coinciding with the wholesale burning of fossil fuels.

I am sorry, but this statement is just plain wrong, unless you studied some alternative geology.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by Newview01

While you are correct, many new ideas in the science world have not been proven yet. One glaring example is the Big Bang theory. It has never been proven, and what's more is that it is scientifically impossible for what we have today to come from a Big Bang. Evolution itself has not been fully proven or understood. While I believe that certain creatures can change their habits to adapt to a gradual change in the environment, we are still nowhere near the extent that Darwin has preached. The bombardier beetle is a prime example. There is no way that this beetle would be alive today if evolution was real.

Science is not static, which some would have us believe, it's an ongoing process looking for a final truth, which it may never find. Rationalize Quantum Physics for me. Evolution ? Just like the monkeys working on a masterpiece, given enough monkeys with unlimited time, stats say it will happen.



Grizz

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

I'm kinda thinking there are a lot of people in Ft Mac who would disagree with what a lot of you are saying.
Yup...the planet has gone through periods of warming and cooling...processes in the past that took thousands of years to occur...this warming period (geologically proven to be one of the warmest) has occurred in two hundred years...oddly coinciding with the wholesale burning of fossil fuels.
Thankfully the majority of humans don't subscribe to conspiracy theories.

Really? Fort Mac was under a 1 mile high Ice sheet just 200 years ago.......
Do you also believe the earth is only 10,000 years old and is square?

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Science is not static, which some would have us believe, it's an ongoing process looking for a final truth, which it may never find. Rationalize Quantum Physics for me. Evolution ? Just like the monkeys working on a masterpiece, given enough monkeys with unlimited time, stats say it will happen.



Grizz

I won't even begin to try understand physics, I know nothing about it.

About monkeys - there has never been evidence that humans evolved from monkeys either. Lots of fakes and hoaxes, but not one proven shred of evidence that can prove humans were once monkeys.

[Newview01]

Sorry to derail the thread rugatika. Some stuff grinds my gears.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Sorry to derail the thread rugatika. Some stuff grinds my gears.

No worries...nothing wrong with derails. I've twisted more than a few tracks as well.

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by sikwhiskey

Do you also believe the earth is only 10,000 years old and is square?

No, it's pie shaped with whipped cream on top, I've seen it from space. Earth girls are easy and I'm hungry.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Newview01

While you are correct, many new ideas in the science world have not been proven yet.

Ideas are not theories.

One glaring example is the Big Bang theory. It has never been proven, and what's more is that it is scientifically impossible for what we have today to come from a Big Bang.

Explain the Red Shift then.

Evolution itself has not been fully proven or understood. While I believe that certain creatures can change their habits to adapt to a gradual change in the environment, we are still nowhere near the extent that Darwin has preached. The bombardier beetle is a prime example. There is no way that this beetle would be alive today if evolution was real.

You don't understand evolution then. Darwin didn't 'preach' a hypothesize, he proposed a theory, one that has been strengthened by scientific inquiry again and again over the past 150 years. Please don't tell me you're going to present the "kinds" discussion. If you do, I know you have no concept of how theories are developed.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by avb3

Ideas are not theories.

Neither are they facts. An idea is less of a fact then a theory.

Explain the Red Shift then.

Just because the universe is expanding, it doesn't mean it started as a bang. Keep in mind, the theory is implying that 'nothing' decided to compact into a ultra dense mass and explode. Nothing is nothing, there is no explanation to what was before the Big Bang.

You don't understand evolution then. Darwin didn't 'preach' a hypothesize, he proposed a theory, one that has been strengthened by scientific inquiry again and again over the past 150 years. Please don't tell me you're going to present the "kinds" discussion. If you do, I know you have no concept of how theories are developed.

First off, it wasn't even Darwin who invented the theory of evolution. I should have touched on that. Some Greek philosophers were claiming that all life came from water. Darwin was just made it more public. I am not aware of this 'kinds discussion'.

Give me one piece of evidence proving evolution. And don't start commenting on dog breeds or similarities between organisms, or other discussions that simply have no hard proof.

As I said before, the bombardier beetle may be one of the strongest examples of how evolution as it is taught is false. Do some research into it.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Neither are they facts. An idea is less of a fact then a theory.

Just because the universe is expanding, it doesn't mean it started as a bang. Keep in mind, the theory is implying that 'nothing' decided to compact into a ultra dense mass and explode. Nothing is nothing, there is no explanation to what was before the Big Bang.

First off, it wasn't even Darwin who invented the theory of evolution. I should have touched on that. Some Greek philosophers were claiming that all life came from water. Darwin was just made it more public. I am not aware of this 'kinds discussion'.

Give me one piece of evidence proving evolution. And don't start commenting on dog breeds or similarities between organisms, or other discussions that simply have no hard proof.

As I said before, the bombardier beetle may be one of the strongest examples of how evolution as it is taught is false. Do some research into it.

The Theory of Evolution, and it's proof, was central to the Dover trial in the US. Look it up, but here was a critical part of the scientific evidence.

DNA and Genes don't lie. We came from a common ancestor, and this explains it. It also explains why humans have 2 less genes than the other great apes.

If you need explanation, I will provide:

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by avb3

The Theory of Evolution, and it's proof, was central to the Dover trial in the US. Look it up, but here was a critical part of the scientific evidence.

DNA and Genes don't lie. We came from a common ancestor, and this explains it. It also explains why humans have 2 less genes than the other great apes.

If you need explanation, I will provide:

The origin of man: a chromosomal pictorial legacy.
Yunis JJ, Prakash O.
Abstract
Man, gorilla, and chimpanzee likely shared an ancestor in whom the fine genetic organization of chromosomes was similar to that of present man. A comparative analysis of high-resolution chromosomes from orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzee, and man suggests that 18 or 23 pairs of chromosomes of modern man are virtually identical to those of our "common hominoid ancestor", with the remaining pairs slightly different. From this lineage, gorilla separated fist, and three major chromosomal rearrangements presumably occurred in a progenitor of chimpanzee and man before the final divergence of these tow species. A precursor of the hominoid ancestor and orangutan is also assumed.

Not a lot proof with words such as "likely" "similar" "suggests" "assumed".

While I will readily admit that the DNA is very, very close, it still does not prove that humans came from monkeys.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Newview01

The origin of man: a chromosomal pictorial legacy.
Yunis JJ, Prakash O.
Abstract
Man, gorilla, and chimpanzee likely shared an ancestor in whom the fine genetic organization of chromosomes was similar to that of present man. A comparative analysis of high-resolution chromosomes from orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzee, and man suggests that 18 or 23 pairs of chromosomes of modern man are virtually identical to those of our "common hominoid ancestor", with the remaining pairs slightly different. From this lineage, gorilla separated fist, and three major chromosomal rearrangements presumably occurred in a progenitor of chimpanzee and man before the final divergence of these tow species. A precursor of the hominoid ancestor and orangutan is also assumed.

Not a lot proof with words such as "likely" "similar" "suggests" "assumed".

Science always uses that terminology. Read some papers if you doubt it.

While I will readily admit that the DNA is very, very close, it still does not prove that humans came from monkeys.

Man didn't come from monkeys. We have a common ancestor. Evolution is not a straight line, it is like a tree, it branches.

The excerpt you pulled above says exactly that.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Great article that outlines the incredible amounts of money being profiteered by the elites off of fear mongering and stolen from everyday working joes. Not to mention the squashing of dissenters who dare to disagree and point to actual science.


http://sultanknish.blogspot.ca/2016/...rty-power.html


California carbon auctions are climbing into the billions. And the endgame is a national and a global
carbon tax that will allow Big Green to take money out of the pockets of every single human being.

Environmentalism isn’t a hippie with a cardboard sign. It’s multinational corporations and big banks. It’s environmental consultants padding the bill for every government project. It’s subsidies that get carved up ten different ways into highly profitable investments at taxpayer expense. It’s brand greenwashing and useless recycling programs. It’s a dime, a dollar or a hundred dollars added to every bill.

Big Green is booming business. But it can’t succeed on its own. Without public policy based on the hoax that the planet is going to be destroyed unless Big Green gets more green cash, the scam collapses.

Even as the science behind the conspiracy theory that claims humans are warming the planet continues to fall apart, Big Green is escalating its crackdown on climate science. If you are going to falsely claim that 99.99% of scientists agree with you, the best way to ensure that is by criminalizing scientific dissent.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called for punishing and imprisoning dissenters. Bill Nye endorsed such a call just last week. And while it’s easy to dismiss Kennedy and Nye as famous crackpots, Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that there had been discussions about prosecuting climate dissenters. And that materials had been passed along to the FBI.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/03/15...dest-in-canada

Pass this along. Great project god green entrepreneurs.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/03/15...dest-in-canada

Pass this along. Great project god green entrepreneurs.

Old news. And just like computers, that technology is like MS-DOS compared to what is out there today.

But I give you credit for fighting against the flow.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/03/15...dest-in-canada

Pass this along. Great project god green entrepreneurs.

This quote from your article says it all.

“We’re anxiously waiting to see what incentives might come from our new government. … Alberta is an open market and the wholesale price when it’s windy is quite low so there’s just not the return on investment in today’s situation. So, if there is an incentive, we’d jump all over that.”

At least the guy's honest. There isn't any money to be made unless it's from the government. Classic. That's exactly what Alberta needs is more money being taken from taxpayers and given to Green scams. What a slap in the face to taxpayers!!

[Sundancefisher]

Big business

http://www.windontario.ca

[Sundancefisher]

Looks like they are learning wind power is a money pit.

http://jg-tc.com/news/lake-land-boar...e75438f33.html

$2.5 MM grant

Lots of repairs

Minimal power generation.

Massive losses.

Tearing them down after 4 year.

Lesson learned.


If it costs your pocket book you run away. If hidden in your power bill you squawk. If hidden in your taxes you smile and take it in the chin.

[guywiththemule]

Originally Posted by Newview01

The origin of man: a chromosomal pictorial legacy.
Yunis JJ, Prakash O.
Abstract
Man, gorilla, and chimpanzee likely shared an ancestor in whom the fine genetic organization of chromosomes was similar to that of present man. A comparative analysis of high-resolution chromosomes from orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzee, and man suggests that 18 or 23 pairs of chromosomes of modern man are virtually identical to those of our "common hominoid ancestor", with the remaining pairs slightly different. From this lineage, gorilla separated fist, and three major chromosomal rearrangements presumably occurred in a progenitor of chimpanzee and man before the final divergence of these tow species. A precursor of the hominoid ancestor and orangutan is also assumed.

Not a lot proof with words such as "likely" "similar" "suggests" "assumed".

While I will readily admit that the DNA is very, very close, it still does not prove that humans came from monkeys.

I think there was an alien or two involved. In other words "space-man" DNA.