With the price of electricity supply soaring and no end in sight, people are looking for less expensive ways of heating their homes in the winter.

For pensioners and those on other government subsidies, a hefty electrical bill is out of the question. People have to choose between eating and keeping warm. What is a person to do? I know “let’s warm up a bowl of soup and take it to bed, snuggle down and watch the TV tonight – it’s going to be another cold one”.

For many there has been the option of a wood burning stove/fire, but if the NSW Government has its way, that option will soon be unavailable also.

THE smoky haze from wood fires is Sydney’s biggest source of air pollution in winter, and wood smoke will add $8 billion to the health budget by 2030, says an independent report commissioned by the state government and kept secret for six months.

One of the options put forward by the report, produced by the environmental consultancy AECOM, is a tax on wood fuel that which would keep the cost of burning wood rising in line with the federal government’s carbon price.

Other options include tighter regulation in new development areas, a tax on wood-burning heaters, or a ban on the heaters phased in over several years.

With electricity prices expected to rise up to 40 per cent by 2014 due to new network infrastructure and the carbon price, the report said wood heaters would become cheaper by comparison.

”Discretionary control measures may need to be considered to manage the undesirable outcomes, for example, a tax on wood fuel,” the report said.

Basically what I am reading in all of this is that the elderly, the disabled, the poor and those on Government benefits, will be denied the right to stay warm in their own homes come winter time. Right now they may have a very small advantage over those already forced to use electricity/gas for all home requirements. That will soon be phased out, either by an additional tax on buying wood, or these wood heaters will be phased out completely – (read outlawed), at some future date (read as soon as possible). All in the name of the so called Carbon Dioxide Taxation Scheme put in place to save the planet from (so called) manmade climate change. 

Perhaps it is time someone told the NSW (and the Federal) Government that Scientists (credible ones) are claiming there is absolutely no need to panic about Global Warming, the scare is completely overblown. Gee folks, do you think they would listen?

From Choice Magazine
Heating options for your home buying guide.
How to keep your home warm this winter.
Get unbiased advice and reviews on heaters and heating options.

More than 2,700 people are dying each year in England and Wales because they cannot afford to keep their homes warm, according to an official study. The spiralling cost of gas and electricity combined with the impact of green taxes is putting health and lives at risk, researchers found.

Green taxes designed to meet a £200billion bill to switch to wind, wave, solar and nuclear power currently add around £100 to annual bills.

However, this figure is set to rise sharply in the next few years and will hit the poor, particularly pensioners on fixed incomes, harder than most.

The figure for deaths is higher than the number killed on the roads and has brought demands for urgent government action.

Professor Hills’s interim report found: ‘Most dramatically, the UK has a higher rate of ‘‘excess winter deaths’’ than other countries with colder climates.

‘Even if, at a conservative estimate, only a tenth of ‘‘excess winter deaths’’ are due to fuel poverty, that means 2,700 people are dying each year in England and Wales, more than die on the roads.’

However, his report conceded that the true number of premature deaths linked to the cold could be considerably higher at around 5,400.

It said: ‘Health impacts caused by exposure to cold tend to relate to cardiovascular and respiratory problems.

‘Low temperatures are also associated with diminished resistance to infections and the incidence of damp and mould in the home.

‘These effects are most important for the youngest children and increase for the most elderly.’ Professor Hills found that poor pensioners and families are having to spend an extra £1.1billion a year in total on heat because they often live in poorly-insulated, cold and draughty homes.

He said they do not have the money to pay for home insulation, double-glazing and gas efficient boilers at the same time as covering other essentials.

‘People with hard-to-heat properties may trade off other necessities to keep warm, at the most dramatic facing a choice of ‘‘heat or eat’’, with some evidence of reduced food spending at times of the very lowest temperatures by pensioners with the lowest incomes,’ he said.

 

Now if only Julia would tell Bob Brown where to get off on his Carbon Dioxide Taxation Scheme I truly believe the Australian People would hold her in far greater esteem.

What we find though is she is telling him to nick off over wanting to turn the Island of Tasmania into a National Park. At least for once she is telling him who actually holds the key position (sadly) of Prime Minister for a short while..

Bob meanwhile is throwing a public tantrum and cancelling his monthly’s…. err his monthly scheduled meeting with Julia. Like as if she cares! As she said in the media today ‘he can come if he wants’ to’…..    “I make myself available. Whether Senator Brown wants to take up that opportunity is entirely a matter for him. Ah well Julia looks like you get an hour or two, to yourself, enjoy!

Really folks, Bob is throwing a tantrum, and YES I do care about Old Growth Forests…… over a promise Julia has broken, according to him. Way back when, or rather when those two got all buddy buddy and fixed things so Julia could keep the top job, with Bob’s support, things in the forestry industry in Tasmania were not quite so dire.

Since then the situation has changed and Julia has had to make a few Prime Ministerial decisions. Obviously she made this one without consulting His Bobship and getting permission – ergo the tantrum.

I for one am pleased to see Bob showing his true watermelon colours for all and sundry to watch in public. It really does let one and all see just who he thinks he is!

However he above all should remember Julia cannot keep a promise, after all he supported her openly with her broken promises on the Carbon Dioxide Taxation Scheme, so why would he be so bothered now that she is changing her stance on logging in Old Growth Forests in Tasmania?

Now if only Julia would…… (fill in the blanks)………. Australia could regain its National Identity with pride. Might mean her resigning and taking His Bobship and a few dozen others with her, but so what…. geesh I reckon most of us would put up with that small (not) inconvenience.

If China does implement its proposed Carbon Emissions Tax, I do not see how Julia Gillard can sing its praises.

After all, the Chinese (proposed) Taxation Plan will be ONLY 1/14^th the size of Australia’s, so just who does Julia think she is kidding? Australia’s evil scheme is coming in at $23 per tonne (starting price only – it will escalate), while China is postulating about $1.55 per tonne. 

Meanwhile in Europe the price has fallen to (about) $8.00 AU, Oh how the mighty have fallen, and still Australia is preening and claiming to be setting the tone for the rest of the world.

Me thinks Ms. Gillard and her Green ‘bedfellow’ Greg Combet have their heads up their proverbial you know what’s and cannot – or will not see the light of day.

Why Oh why can they not see what this will do to Australia’s industry and households. The families and Pensioners of Australia are going to be hit with a giant thumping hammer. As it currently stands many households have to go without necessary heating and cooling simply to make ends meet. Currently it is summer time in the southern hemisphere.

If it gets too hot, people with serious medical conditions and very young children are likely to need medical attention if finding a cool place is impossible. Have they considered the possible loss of life? But wait till winter arrives, particularly in the higher altitudes and down in Tasmania.

No money for electricity, no heating, no electric blankets. What are they supposed to do? Live in their beds simply to survive?

This Australian Carbon Dioxide Taxation Scheme, which has been implemented supposedly to help reduce the temperature of the Earth, is nothing more than money grabbing by the government elites, to fill their dwindling coffers, which have been misspent on other poorly designed government programs.

When Julia and Greg take their heads out of you know where, perhaps they will see what is happening around the globe, and concede they have made a vast error of judgment. Personally I will not be holding my breath waiting for this to happen.

When was the last time you read of a politician acknowledging they had made an error? Are there really flying pigs over Canberra?

When Governments allocate pay rises for themselves whilst raising taxes on the general population (think the Australian Carbon Dioxide Taxation scheme) it certainly does not bode well. Perhaps we can all march on Parliament House to let our feelings be known. Or would that be considered a march of no consequence? Let’s get this Carbon Dioxide Tax repealed!

The people of Singapore made their feeling loudly known, and now it has been decided that from the Prime Minister on down, there will be substantial pay cuts. Not that this will bring their salaries onto a level similar to most of the population, but the Opposition in Singapore sees this as ‘a good first step’.

We elect people into positions of authority in Australia. They are mandated to work on our behalf, yet time and time again, we see them allowing a little power to go to their heads. Why is it that they can award themselves huge pay rises, while the voting public are doing it tough, and struggling to make ends meet in many cases?

Just prior to Christmas 2011 we read that:

The heads of key federal government departments will receive an unprecedented pay rise – in some cases more than $200,000 a year – taking the annual salaries of Canberra’s top mandarins to well over $700,000.

As The Daily Telegraph revealed earlier this month, the salary for the Prime Minister will be increased to nearly $500,000 – placing Julia Gillard in a higher wage bracket than US President Barack Obama and British PM David Cameron.

The base salary for federal MPs, currently just over $140,000, will jump to about $180,000 – although they will lose a number of perks including overseas study travel.

Diddums!!!! They get so many lurks and perks that if they
were removed, they would almost be on a level playing
field with the rest of the nation.
(read here)

Never mind folks, if you are an Australian Aged Pensioner YOU TOO will be getting an increase in your pension in 2012.

These Age Pension payment rates are effective from 1 January 2012.

An income and assets^[1] test will be used to work out how much you can get.

*These amounts exclude the Pension Supplement^[2] amount which is currently a maximum of $59.80 a fortnight for singles and $90.20 a fortnight for couples (combined).

Now if only our politicians would be paid in a similar
fashion, I feel certain they would battle to get
the pension rate increased accordingly.
And yes pigs can fly!

Daily headlines from around the world speak of the numbers found dead from mudslides, avalanches, flooding, rockslides, not to mention wars, insurgencies, terror attacks, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, earthquakes etc etc etc. All in all the count is exceedingly large and I would imagine causes most of us heartache and grief when we watch the evening news.

These are the facts and statistics for the seen catastrophes and disasters. Yes even influenza numbers, those who might have succumbed to bacteria and viral infections make the evening news.

Nowhere in the mainstream media have I seen the catastrophic records of death by medicine reported. Has anyone actually ever done the work, sorted through all the reports and looked and complied all the statistics? The answer may surprise you – YES in fact it has been done and the information is readily available for anyone, including the Government and the Media to view report on and make suggestions about.

A group of researchers meticulously reviewed the statistical evidence and their findings are absolutely shocking. These researchers have authored a paper titled “Death by Medicine” that presents compelling evidence that today’s system frequently causes more harm than good.

This fully referenced report shows the number of people having in-hospital, adverse reactions to prescribed drugs to be 2.2 million per year. The number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections is 20 million per year. The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million per year. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million per year. The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year.

It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. (By contrast, the number of deaths attributable to heart disease in 2001 was 699,697, while the number of deaths attributable to cancer was 553,251.5) Source

So there you have it the American Medical System kills, maims, and injures a phenomenal number of innocent sick people every year, yet do we hear this reported in the media? NO! What we do hear though are how dangerous to the human body are vitamins. VITAL are vitamins. Vitamin actually means VITAL – (for life).

In a media release issued by the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, December 28, 2011, we read:

There was not even one death caused by a vitamin supplement in 2010, according to the most recent information collected by the U.S. National Poison Data System.

The new 203-page annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers, published online at http://www.aapcc.org/dnn/Portals/0/2010%20NPDS%20Annual%20Report.pdf, shows zero deaths from multiple vitamins; zero deaths from any of the B vitamins; zero deaths from vitamins A, C, D, or E; and zero deaths from any other vitamin.

Additionally, there were no deaths whatsoever from any amino acid or dietary mineral supplement.

Three people died from non-supplement mineral poisoning: two from medical use of sodium and one from non-supplemental iron. On page 131, the AAPCC report specifically indicates that the iron fatality was not from a nutritional supplement.

Fifty-seven poison centers provide coast-to-coast data for the National Poison Data System, “one of the few real-time national surveillance systems in existence, providing a model public health surveillance system for all types of exposures, public health event identification, resilience response and situational awareness tracking.”

Well over half of the U.S. population takes daily nutritional supplements. Even if each of those people took only one single tablet daily, that makes 165,000,000 individual doses per day, for a total of over 60 billion doses annually. Since many persons take far more than just one single vitamin or mineral tablet, actual consumption is considerably higher, and the safety of nutritional supplements is all the more remarkable.

Over 60 billion doses of vitamin and mineral supplements per year in the USA, and not a single fatality.  Not one.

If vitamin and mineral supplements are allegedly so “dangerous,” as the FDA and news media so often claim, then where are the bodies?

Look at the figures once more.

2.2 Million People have adverse (dangerous) side effects from doctor prescribed drugs every year.

ZERO people taking vitamins and mineral supplements have a fatality NOT ONE!

Be afraid – be very afraid:

The total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year.

Personally I would rather take my vitamins, how about you?

 Vitamins, which were previously referred as, vital amines, are figured out as the most essential nutrients of food. Since the discovery of vitamins, several other forms of vitamins were also discovered. Prominent amongst them are vitamin A, vitamin B, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E and vitamin K. Vitamin B is again classified into different sub forms, which are, vitamin B1, vitamin B2, B4, B5, B6, B7, B9 and finally vitamin B12.

At times a person can feel as if they are knocking their heads against a brick wall. You can talk until you are hoarse it seems with the Government, but if there is a dollar to be made, to help fill the coffers in Canberra – they turn off their hearing aids and carry on regardless.

Hydraulic Fracturing AKA Fracking is the method currently being hyped as THE BEST WAY to access and obtain oil and natural gas from subterranean reservoirs.  These reservoirs are typically porous sandstones, limestones or dolomite rocks, but also include ‘unconventional reservoirs’ such as shale rock or coal beds.  In simple English – chemicals are pumped into the rocks under high pressure to release the stored oil and gas. The chemicals and the process used have been blamed for damaging ground water supplies, amongst other things.

There have been many outcries about this method of extraction, but most of them have been denied or ignored. As I said – if there is a dollar to be made, many a blind eye will be turned!

I was pleased to learn of a new report today on the dangers of this proceedure, written by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). My only questions now are will the Australian Government Listen? Will they take heed of this report? Will they put the interests and health of the people of Australia before those of the mining industries and the coffers in Canberra?

An article at Lock The Gate Alliance spells out quite clearly why the Australian Government should ban the practice.

The EPA found that compounds likely associated with fracking chemicals had been detected in the groundwater beneath a Wyoming community where residents say their well water smells of chemicals.

Fracking involves pumping millions of litres of water and sand and thousands of litres of chemicals under very high pressures into the coal seam in order to better release the gas trapped in that seam.

The report, which has been two years in the preparation, challenges long-stated assertions by the gas industry. These include assertions that hydrologic pressure would naturally force fluids down, not up; that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren’t connected to fracking.

Lock the Gate Alliance president, Drew Hutton, called on Australian state governments to impose an indefinite moratorium on the practice of fracking. In New South Wales this would involve the O’Farrell government in extending its six-month moratorium and in Queensland, it would require a complete turn-around by the Bligh government and the LNP Opposition which have both placed their faith in the coal seam gas industry.

“Fracking is a high-impact activity that clearly has the capacity to contaminate aquifers outside the coal seam,” Mr Hutton said.

“According to the industry’s own sources 40 per cent of coal seam gas wells will be fracked in Queensland. That is a very large number of wells and the potential for inter-aquifer contamination is unacceptably high.

“Once you have contaminated an aquifer with these chemicals there is no way to fix it.”

It seems no matter what the Australian public says NO to, our Politicians will decide for themselves and seemingly go the opposite way.  NO CARBON TAX stands out in recent memory.

So let us see if they will actually listen to this and decide in favour of the people who they are supposed to represent.

Gone will be the days of hopping on an airplane and flying off to exotic and not so exotic locations if the EU has its way.  So sorry

The EU has proposed – no let’s try something stronger than that word – The European Union has decided to levy a Carbon Tax on all flights to from and within Europe. Even though this stance has been challenged, the European Court of Justice has upheld it.

If only the EU had correctly named this tax a POLLUTION TAX I think many people would have begrudgingly agreed with the proposal, grumbled but paid up and shut up accordingly. Instead they are doing their utmost to tie airline emissions into the false religion of global warming supposedly caused by human kind. (Also known as AGW OR CAGW where the C = catastrophic)

From 1 January, the EU will bring aviation into the Emissions Trading System, intended to help Europe to comply with its commitments on climate change. All airlines whose routes touch the EU will need carbon permits. Costs to carriers will rise steeply unless they cut flights or increase efficiency.

This will not only increase the cost of an average airline ticket it will increase the cost of all air cargo as well. Think of your letters and parcels, think of food and drink freighted by air, think of essential emergency medical supplies. This could be (according to WUWT) the Great War of Flying Carbon Credits.

Not to get side tracked here, but I think it is worth mentioning that agencies such as the United Nations, who pride and preen themselves – remember their very public righteous image, of wanting to save the world from catastrophic climate change, don’t give a rat’s ass about polluting the planet via air travel or any other way for that matter.

Take for example the last useless climate conference held in Durban, South Africa. Reading the Daily Caller, we discover:

Professor Karl Coplan questioned, on Pace University’s GreenLaw, the logic of working to reduce carbon emissions by incurring the very large carbon footprint associated with dozens of round-trip flights by students and professors from the United States to Durban.

How large? According to Coplan, round-trip travel for one individual from New York to Durban results in eight tons of CO2 equivalent emissions. That’s about the same, again according to Coplan, as the emissions from a year of travel (15,000 miles) in a Lincoln Navigator, “probably the ultimate American rugged-individualist anti-environmentalist status symbol.” And it’s about twice the average annual global per-capita carbon footprint, even including drivers of Lincoln Navigators.

What was mostly absent from the law profs’ exchange was any serious discussion of what might actually be accomplished in Durban — probably because, as much as they wish otherwise, most of the professoriate understood that nothing much would be accomplished. And nothing much was.

Despite valiant claims to the contrary, two weeks in Durban, with all expenses paid, only kicked the can down the road, thus assuring future annual meetings in far-flung locations with carbon footprints greater than all the Lincoln Navigators that Ford will ever produce. Even The New York Times accepted that the meeting was a flop by burying its brief story on page 7.

Now we all have been told that aviation fuel does cause pollution. There are even some petitions circulating to have all lead removed from aviation fuel. But lead is not the only dangerous pollutant in aviation fuel.

There are currently two (ordinary) aviation fuels on the market which are licensed for use.

AVGAS and JET FUEL are according to Wikipedia:

Aviation fuels consist(ing) of blends of over a thousand chemicals, primarily hydrocarbons (paraffins, olefins, naphthenes, and aromatics), as well as additives, such as antioxidants and metal deactivators, and impurities. Principal components include n-heptane and isooctane. Like other fuels, blends of aviation fuel used in spark-ignited piston-engined aircraft are often described by their octane rating.

(I am deliberately refraining from including in this blog, any discussion of Chem trails)

I hope you can see from the above Wiki explanation, aviation fuels are full of what we should term harmful and dangerous chemicals. As such, when burnt (is that the correct term?) by aircraft engines, they spew out immense pollution into our skies.

Pollution (chemical) is the number one danger factor to be associated with aviation, not Carbon Pollution. Let Europe impose a POLLUTIUON TAX and even though you will get disagreements about the cost of global trade, you will get the ordinary man on the street to understand the argument.

There are many schemes and plans afoot to manufacture an affordable, non polluting Bio Fuel for use in aviation. But once again, like far too many green schemes this is proving illusive. See HERE and HERE. There have been others too!

But so far the promise of greener aviation remains elusive, and the industry concedes it is years away from making a significant dent in the billions of gallons airlines consume each year.

According to the Beginners Guide to BioFuels: bio-derived oil, commonly sourced from plants such as corn, soybeans, algae, jatropha, halophytes and camelina, is processed and can either be burned directly or converted by chemical processes to make high-quality jet and diesel fuels. These are known as second-generation biofuels and can be used for aviation.

So what will we have? More fields turned over to the growing of BioFuels and less crops available for the poor and hungry nations worldwide!

To say I am darned PEED off with the Carbon Tax Religion is an understatement.The EU is doing what it can to raise revenue. This has nothing to do with saving the planet from Global Warming, and much more to do with getting more money in their coffers. Blind Freddie is able to see, daily on the news how serious the financial situation is in Europe….. So you are about to be screwed yet again….. Follow the money trail folks!

I don’t know about you but I personally am getting sick and tired of hearing about – scheme after scheme, put in place by the ALP (Australia), spending gazillions of our hard earned taxpayer monies on FAILED schemes.

The most notables ones jumping to mind are the Home Insulation (pink batts), burn your house down; the School Hall building program; the Skills Program which also failed to deliver; the Set Top Box fiasco – and there are many others you can relearn about here.

Now as if they were not enough for you to be angry about – after all it is your money they have frittered away, the next BIG ONE is reported today, and it comes as no surprise to anyone who has been following the **‘watermelons’ push for a green clean economy.

The Gillard government’s energy White Paper shows that its roof-top solar policies must now be put in the same category as pink batts and school halls as proof it could not organise a drink in a brewery, does not learn from its mistakes, and has no comprehension whatsoever of value for vast sums of public money

The White Paper warns the cross subsidisation of roof top solar by families that haven’t installed systems could be $4.7billion by 2020. It urges the federal and state government to work towards harmonising state based tariffs paid for roof-top solar power to reduce the cost (although it is the Commonwealth, not the States, who was mainly responsible for the wasteful mess.)

The explosion in demand for roof-top solar systems remains primarily built on massive upfront cash subsidies from federal taxpayers that have been augmented by the decision of states to buy the electricity they generate at inflated prices

The federal government knew, no later than mid 2009, that it had a tiger by the tail with runaway demand for the systems based on its massive subsidy and the emerging tariffs , but it has only ever tinkered at the edges because the Greens demand that roof-top solar is important for greenhouse gas abatement.

The claims about abatement from roof-top solar had been utterly destroyed by former Climate Change Department secretary, Dr Martin Parkinson, now Treasury Secretary, who said in a March 2010 speech that the cost of delivering 13 million tonnes of abatement by putting a system on every roof in the country would be $100 billion.

That puts the cost of roof-top abatement at a ridiculous $7692.30 per tonne. Source

I hope you will take time to read the linked article, particularly the comments section, where you will find many writers hanging their head in shame for being taken in yet again, by this governments green agenda.

It is noted that one person’s loss is another’s gain. In this case look at it as a means of vote buying. How much was this Labor Green bed partner alliance prepared to pay the voting public (individual homes) to be assured of their votes at the next election? So, $7692.00 seem reasonable to you does it? Oh well, it is your children and their children who will now be stuck with the bill.

**Watermelons refers to something that’s green on the outside, but red (communist) inside SEE ALSO James Delingpole’s book.

Here is another valuable article with explanation.

The Island(s) Nation of The Maldives is, according to some sources, going to meet a very watery grave within the next one hundred years (or so), depending upon who you talk to. This is of course all due to Global Warming, or more precisely Man Made (First World) Global Warming – caused by Carbon Dioxide Pollution you and I are fully responsible for.

Not only are we the cause of this impending disaster, we are being forced to pay for the impending doom to The Maldives and other poorer countries, by way of contributions to the (newly created) Green Climate Fund being set up by the United Nations (set up commenced at COP 17 [conference of pirates] in Durban, 2011). ….   Green Climate Fund – that would mobilize $US100 billion in cash transfers from the developed to the developing countries.  The details of both the new binding treaty and the fund were left for later.

Now it is important to understand that it is the United Nations bureaucracy that will be both levying the taxes (into this new fund) and administering them at the same time, effectively setting up a structure of the transfer of wealth world wide. One could almost name it worldwide social welfare. Remember also that the UN is a non elected bureaucracy who, according to my limited understanding, has no authority to do this. No authority to trample the sovereign rights of ours or any other nation, by enforcing mandatory taxation, to fill their own coffers.

Why would I be so aggravated by this announcement? Could it possibly have anything to do with the fact that Global Warming – Cooling – Climate Change has nothing to do with happened in Durban – it was all about the money the setting up of this new Green Climate Fund.

Do you think for one minute the money raised will actually do anything to help the poorer nations? Do you actually believe the people themselves will benefit one iota from monies raised?

The Associated Press described the UN climate fund as a method to “distribute tens of billions of dollars a year to poor countries to help them adapt to changing climate conditions and to move toward low-carbon economic growth.”  

(South African development activist Leon Louw declared the UN’s “Green Climate Fund” nothing more than an attempt by wealthy nations to keep the poor nations from developing.) 

But Louw, says the UN climate fund will wreak havoc on the developing world’s poor. Louw explained: “The money goes to government and governments spend it on of course on themselves, meaning various government projects, creating bigger departments — bigger bureaucracies, it’s called big bureaucratic capture. They build empires, they build conference centers, and they buy political support. They go and distribute the money to communities where they want support and votes.”
Louw was at the Durban summit to oppose the UN climate fund to poor nations. According to Louw, the entire UN foreign aid process is aimed at keeping the developing world’s poor – poor.

Here is an example of a country / nation who has cried out for assistance from the developed world, because they say their nation will be underwater within a hundred or so years and they NEED money and assistance now to save themselves from this unspeakable disaster.

I began this article specifically mentioning The Maldives and their ‘so called’ dire plight. But a small amount of research, simply done using Mr. Google, shows that the Maldives really don’t believe it themselves, otherwise why would they be embarking now upon a process of encouraging investment in eleven (11) new airports. Unless or course they are specifically for seaplanes! Perhaps they are floating airports.

Actually The Maldives are Open For Business, and if you are interested in doing business with them, and have the money to back that up, they will be very happy to hear from you.

Does that sound like a Nation preparing to go out of existence? I think not! But what I do think is that they are ready willing and quite able to hold out their hands, demanding assistance, to mitigate a problem that is not actually happening. It seems a bit like when the government says it has money for funding for projects on climate change – all sorts come out of the woodwork!

 Oceans are NOT rising.

But if they make sufficient noise about it, and make enough people feel guilty and responsible, they will no doubt eventually be given a hand out from the Green Climate Fund – your hard earned tax dollars are building…. that is of course, after the UN has taken its own cut / percentage first for administration purpose etc.

Australia has already voluntarily pledged loads of your money to the UN.

….. Combet in Cancun promised  10% of the Australian carbon tax as a tithe to the UN. (And there’s the $599 million as part of the Fast Start Finance program over three years that is in the pipeline.)

I feel it is safe to say that neither the sky is falling nor are oceans rising, but it is accurate to say we are being screwed and our taxes will be rising accordingly.

Durban achieved little more than an agreement for thousands of bureaucratic sycophants to meet each other again next year in Qatar, to frolic in the sun at your expense, oh and to spend our money ad infinitum!

Solar Radiation Management SRM (AKA geoengineering) for short is being discussed at COP 17 in Durban as a possible means of reducing the amount of radiation reaching the earth from the sun. Rather strange really as most of the IPCC type scientific lackeys have disputed the possibility of this actually causing changed weather systems on earth. They are far more prone to accusing you and I of being greedy with our use of carbon fossil fuels.

“Solar radiation management might sound, at first, like something from science fiction – but it’s not. There are already serious discussions beginning about it, and that’s why we felt it was urgent to create this governance initiative. Solar radiation management could be a Plan B to address climate change, but first we must figure out how to research it safely.” (plan A is to cut carbon dioxide emissions – what is known as AGW or CAGW)

So what exactly would this Plan B potentially comprise of? Various techniques have been suggested such as placing huge space reflectors in orbit to reflect the sun’s energy, releasing stratospheric aerosols into the upper atmosphere, and brightening clouds with seawater.

Playing God

Those who tend to be in the scientists shouldn’t “play God” school of thought are simply aghast that anybody could even seriously consider such a possibility for more than a split second. Their argument is that the unforeseen results could be utterly catastrophic, and that the report’s acknowledgement that deliberately attempting to pervert the course of the weather is fraught with danger is an understatement. The divine creation is magnificent and far more complex than humans could ever understand, so just let God, or nature if you prefer, get on with it, they say.

I MUST ADMIT I TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.

Silvia Ribeiro, the Latin American director of the ETC Group, which campaigns against geoengineering, said:

“This report is dominated by scientists engaged in geoengineering research in the UK, US and Canada. They are advocates for more research; several of them have claimed patents and have significant financial, institutional and professional interests in the field of geoengineering research. There are the same familiar names that we have seen in a whole series of recent reports: John Shepherd or David Keith.

The Global warming – cooling – climate changing or whatever they are currently naming it mob, all have vested interests as far as I can tell. From the scientists who would lose immense amounts of funding were the truth to be known, and should they come out of their insulated closets to publicly admit they really have no proof, to the Green Energy Companies and right down to the Carbon Trading giants, all have a vested interest in seeing to it that we are told rather large fibs so that the money keeps flowing right into their bank accounts.

Should it be shown that there is no human causation for climate change and variations etc, then they would all be out of work – and good riddance I say!  No man-made climate change then all these new fangled taxation schemes would have to be done away with – hence the reason your governments won’t allow the truth to be known – they would lose your money arghhhhhh!

I am one of the many who are thrilled to see a second serving of delicious emails released, affectionately being called Climategate 2. These are finally putting into context the first round of emails released approximately two years ago. Some claimed all these emails have been taken right out of context, so now we have them in all their ugliness – in context for the world to see. Check them out do please.

“Solar radiation management technologies are high-risk and extremely dangerous and they should be treated under international law like nuclear weapons – except, unlike nuclear weapons, we have an opportunity to ban their testing and their proliferation them before the technology is fully developed, rather than trying to prevent their proliferation after the fact. This is where we should be looking to for guidance on governance. We need to ban these technologies, not facilitate their development.”

For the complete article click here.