Agmates

Imagine it is the start of summer, and my roof leaked, and I needed to spend $2000 to avoid $20,000 damage from winter rains…

Well if I looked at the costs of fixing the roof vs the cost of doing nothing, and looked at say the end of Feb as my date (ie the 2020 Piers has chosen) then one may well conclude that the costs of fixing the roof are great than the costs of inaction.

WITHOUT ENRON there would have been no Kyoto Protocol

Few people realise that Kyoto was the brainchild of a corrupt multinational energy company, looking to make a buck out of the green movement.

The name Enron has all but faded from our news pages since the company went down in flames in 2001 amidst charges of fraud, bribery, price fixing and graft. But without Enron there would have been no Kyoto Protocol.

In the early 1990s Enron had helped establish the market for, and became the major trader in, EPA’s $20 billion-per-year sulphur dioxide cap-and-trade program, the forerunner of today’s proposed carbon credit trade.

The problem was that CO2 is not a pollutant, and therefore the EPA had no authority to cap its emission. Al Gore took office in 1993 and almost immediately became infatuated with the idea of an international environmental regulatory regime. He led a U.S. initiative to review new projects around the world and issue ‘credits’ of so many tons of annual CO2 emission reduction.

Executives at Enron worked closely with the Clinton administration to help create a scaremongering climate science environment because the company believed the treaty could provide it with a monstrous financial windfall. The plan was that once the problem was in place the solution would be trotted out.

Enron then started to finance everything related to the global warming hype, including grants to scientists – but asking for results favorable to their interest – “proof” that humans were responsible for the excessive emissions of CO2 through fossil fuel burning. The fire of malaise, now lit and kindled, only required feeding.

As the movement to establish the Kyoto Protocol developed momentum, it was necessary for Ken Lay to build up alliances with the green movement including Greenpeace.

The purpose of this commission was clear – high-level trashing of dissident scientists. Setting up a panel to do this was simple; just look at the recent issue of Scientific American where four attack dogs were called out to chew up Bjorn Lomborg.

He had the audacity to publish The Skeptic Environmentalist demonstrating that global warming is overblown. David Bellamy, the world’s foremost environmentalist also stepped out of line with his widely printed article “Global Warming? What a load of old Poppycock.”

In the same way Galileo was forced to publicly utter that the moon had no effect on tides, so Bellamy under pressure backtracked on some of his claims.

”Enron stood to profit millions from global warming energy-trading schemes,” said Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association and American Coal Coalition.

The investigation into the collapse of Enron will reveal much more about the intricacies of the Baptist-bootlegger coalition which was promoting the Kyoto cause within the Republican Party and within US business circles. Coal-burning utilities would have had to pay billions for permits because they emit more CO2 than do natural gas facilities.

Enron commissioned its own internal study of global warming science. It turned out to be largely in agreement with the same scientists that Enron was trying to shut up. After considering all of the inconsistencies in climate science, the report concluded: “The very real possibility is that the great climate alarm could be a false alarm. The anthropogenic warming could well be less than thought and favorably distributed.”

One of Enron’s major consultants in that study was NASA scientist James Hansen, who started the whole global warming mess in 1988 with his bombastic congressional testimony. Recently he published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences predicting exactly the same inconsequential amount of warming in the next 50 years as the scientists that Enron wanted to gag.

They were a decade ahead of NASA. True to its plan, Enron never made its own findings public, self-censoring them while it pleaded with the Bush administration for a cap on carbon dioxide emissions that it could broker.

That pleading continues today – the remnant-Enron still views global warming regulation as the straw that will raise it from its corporate oblivion. Some greenie campaigning in America is still directed from this source. On July 7, 2004, Kenneth Lay was indicted by a federal grand jury for his involvement in the scandal.

But just as Enron came unstuck mired in financial ruin and scandal, so too is the Kyoto Protocol set to ruin economies and bring down governments and any players foolish enough to be taken in.

Enron collapsed in a quagmire of bribery, misinformation, energy price manipulation and the use of political connections to exert pressure on energy boards. Anything connected to the Kyoto Protocol will turn out to be good money after bad, because a scheme instigated by half-truths and hype must eventually collapse under the weight of the spin of its own cover-up.

Despite all the hand wringing and increasingly desperate hysteria, where global warming is concerned there has been a failure to force this paranoid religion onto the world.

Since the Rio Conference in 1992, the greens have tried using the threat of global warming to induce Protestant guilt in us all, to cap growth, to change lifestyles, to attack the car industry and the Great Satan of America. They have lost.

Only schoolchildren remain rich fodder willing to believe it is up to them now to Save The World, which hasn’t needed saving one iota during the last 4,000,000,000 years or it wouldn’t still be here.

Now it is surely time to face the facts: there isn’t a snowflake-in-hell’s chance of global warming altering real life. But the failure of the greens is not just with the public.

While playing the climate-change card at the G8 Summit, the final Gleneagles’ declaration shows that the leaders of the developed world have no intention of sacrificing growth and economic success for an ascetic global warming religion.

To quote Michael McCarthy, the environment editor of the Independent:

‘The failed agenda that Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the World Wide Fund for Nature and others were complaining of – that the US has still not agreed to cut its carbon dioxide emissions – was the green groups’ own agenda, not the British government’s. At G8 the idea of capping greenhouse gas emissions was cleverly replaced by an emphasis on technological innovation and imaginative development. The Kyoto Protocol is effectively dead.’

I have read also that Garnaut has been or still is on the board of BHP and Lihir Gold .

The mining companies can’t lose - if the liberals get in they can increase mining coal, iron ore, uranium etc and if labor gets in the carbon trading farce will allow them to buy up lots of farming land so they can plant millions of trees and offset their carbon footprint.

It is a win win situation for big mining.

Both sides of politics are identical and Piers Ackerman is part of the media coverup to stop real democracy.

The above link about Enron did not seem to open. This one will.

Before the Rio Conference in 1992 was the Thatcher era, with her government using the specter of CO2 pollution to curb the 11 months old Welsh coal miners strike. Ending with the closure of most of these mines.

An interesting Chronology of the Global Warming Swindle can be found at:
http://tinyurl.com/6e3jym

Covers the period from post war 1945 to 2007 as The Gore Dossier.

Don’t flinch, it’s from Larouche Publishing, but the facts fit. Add the Enron connection, makes it a confirmed hoax continuing today.

For those interested, there is quiet a bit of video on the Rio Conference 1992 on Youtube. All the old faces, Maurice Strong and a younger Al Gore, hippies and new age types, Gaia worshippers.

Hi All,

Von Curtis, some interesting comments there - sure, I like the concept of putting a value on a resource, like the carbon trading concept, but yes, I also think there’s too much profit motive behind much of the schemes thrown around the big end of town at the moment.

But was wondering from comments towards the end of that post, hopefully VC and other readers aren’t equating misguided motives for carbon trading with an excuse to continue the status quo?

Sure, the planet might not have needed saving in the last 4.5 Byrs, but from my rudimentary history, I don’t recall having a pop’n of 7-9 B people on it, dozing forests, digging holes, rearranging the furniture so to speak.

Sure, we might not have much more effect that a few massive volcanic eruptions - but the difference? we can mitigate our activities, and there’s always the chance of some seismic activity compounding what we’ve done as well!

I’m for erring on the side of caution - that doesn’t mean going blindly along with the ‘hype’ that’s been repeatedly objected to in posts here, but at the same time, I see benefits in the basis of that ‘hype’.

We can throw facts and figures around plenty, but why does it seem so hard to accept that we do have an impact, that we will never agree on exactly what that impact is, but doing what we can as soon as we can is surely better than doing nothing and waiting for time to probably prove us wrong?

The global warming/carbon trading garbage nonsense is more of the same criminal rhetoric brought to you by the same big oil/military/ US/UK/Israel /Australian trans-national corporations who staged 911 to initiate the illegal wars of Iraq and Afghanistan.

If you really understood what 911 was about and why corporations did it you wouldn’t go along with GW stupidity. That is unless you like squashing small farmers and businesses , taxing ordinary people relentlessly and going along with anything no matter how criminal that will increase the value of your share portfolio.

9/11 and the Great American Decline