A call for the killing of dogs to depopulate them and save the world!

[Nathan Janes]

Dogs use up more energy resources than a car, authors claim
"In their book Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable
Living, New Zealand-based architects Robert and Brenda Vale say keeping
a medium-sized dog has the same ecological impact as driving 10,000km a
year in a 4.6 litre Land Cruiser."

Dogs use up more energy resources than a car, authors claim
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26248145-5009760,00.html

Not only now are babies killing the world, but the family pet is too.
I can't believe people really put up with this crap! Insanity. Don't people understand all this propaganda is doing is leading us to the slaughterhouse. It is not that hard to go from condemning humans and animals for our natural processes and basic needs with decent living standards to saying we must kill off a swath of the population to "sustain" our planet.
Eugenics...plain and simple...Eugenics.....

Adopt a dog today make the world a better place for you and your children. :)

[Darrell]

Here are the facts: Anyone who knows that thermometers measure temperature and knows that weather people and scientists have been recording such things around the planet for the last couple of hundred years and know how to accumulate said data and average it yearly and plot same on a graph knows that the surface temperature of the earth has been rising. This is global warming, duh! Along with this it has been found that sea levels are rising, ice is melting and climates are changing locally.

Global weather models are continually being improved that give us a glimpse into the not too distant future. We don't like what we see. We see valuable real estate along costal and inland regions being flooded into ruin, and the farm belts of the temperate regions moving north into canada and russia and argentina. We see substantial need for more water to grow things just as fresh water supplies dwindle. We see tropical regions becoming deserts and temperate regions becoming tropical. (picture swamps with alligators and water moccassins in minnesota) These changes will be very expensive and will cause major population shifts over the next century or two. Wars will probably precede said moves. Not a pretty picture.

Of course, we might be able to head it off or slow it down. Whether we can or not is debatable. Whether we should try is not. Certainly it can't hurt to stop poisoning the planet and to lower outputs of co2 and methane gas. Perhaps we might even take steps to cleanse the earth (whether it needs it or not)?

Or we could just sit on our butts arguing conspiracy theories while accomplishing nothing as our planet goes to hell in a handbasket. Frankly I don't care. I'm 65 and have no children. Not my worry. It's your decendants that will be affected, not mine. What kind of world do you want to leave your great grandchildren?

[Nathan Janes]

HHmmmm......you do know that this whole cap and trade and carbon credit scheme is to bring in a world government brought you by the United Nations.
Those that are proclaiming that humans are causing global warming...oooopps I forgot it's climate change (which is really just-the weather) are the same ones saying we need to create a global government.

Ban Ki-moon: Our Global Warming Crisis will bring in Global Governance
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/03/ban-ki-moon-clima...

Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About ‘Global Governance’
http://unplugthesignal.com/2009/07/14/gore-us-climate-bill-will-hel...

UN Boss Calls for “Global Governance Structure” Under Copenhagen
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/opinion/26iht-edban.html?_r=3&...

Talk about this fear being used as a Eugenics tool:
ABC website tells kids when they should die
http://unplugthesignal.com/2009/07/07/abc-website-tells-kids-when-t...


When it comes down to it, this is all about getting more control over our lives. Oh and your graph is inaccurate. Man is only responsible for less then like 3 percent of the co2 in the world, not to mention co2 is a life giving gas - Not a poison. People are really uneducated when it comes to this subject and just rely on the IPCC that is not trying to figure out if man is causing the earth to heat up, but how to convince the masses that they are responsible for a threat that is not a threat.
Do you know Enron was actually in the process of creating this idea to make money off the weather?

[Belles]

boring

[Michael William Shea]

LOL, you are so funny.

[Nathan Janes]

Conspiracy of the century? Hackers 'expose' climate change [HQ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFiDdLXbETE&feature=player_embedded

Flashback: The Great Global Warming Swindle
http://www.infowars.com/flashback-the-great-global-warming-swindle/

On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of climate change.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40&feature=player_embedded

As Lord Monckton explained in October, a realized Copenhagen treaty will establish a “one world Marxist government.”

“The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt’ – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement,” Monckton warned. “They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.”

[Darrell]

From the top graph, one can see that man's egress from africa to migrate the planet approximately 50,000 years ago has totally occurred within the last temperature cycle (as the earth cooled from its previous RELATIVE high temp). One can also see from that graph that at no time during the previous 800,000 years did the global average temperature RELATIVE high exceed today's yet to peak value.

The lower graph gives better resolution, and suggests that we are going higher this time due to something being different. Whether man is the cause or not isn't really the issue. The question is whether man can do anything to slow it down?

[Darrell]

Now take a real long look at a tempature record over millions of years of planet earth. We haven't been this hot for over 3 million years (well before man).

[Darrell]

nathan:

"Someone's been watching a little too much TV. Your information is incorrect and with just a little search you would find that your Hockey Stick graph is a fraud and that you are misinformed."

Tell that to the IPCC. Talk about being misinformed! (you really need to read the link I posted). I bet next you will be telling us that the world is flat and that man never landed on the moon. ROTFLMAO

[Darrell]

Per the IPCC:

"2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports
Related Links

Working Group I
EPA/DOE/DOC Joint Press Release
White House Press Release
DOC Press Release
NOAA Support for IPCC
USGRCP WGI Resources
Working Group II
White House Press Conference
USGCRP WGII Resources
NOAA Leads Climate Impact and Adaptation Activities
U.S. Climate Change Science Program Press Release
Working Group III
United States Joins In Approving Summary Report on Climate Change Mitigation
Press Briefing on Working Group III Report

Working Group I | Working Group II | Working Group III

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) to provide a comprehensive and objective assessment of the state of knowledge on climate change to the world community.

In 2007, the IPCC released reports covering climate change science (Working Group I), climate change impacts and adaptation (Working Group II) and climate change mitigation (Working Group III). They recently released an overall synthesis report (PDF) (23 pp., 6.4 MB, About PDF ) summarizing findings from the 3 main reports. The IPCC has previously assessed climate change issues in 1990, 1995 and 2001. Content on EPA's Climate Change Web site will be updated to reflect the findings and conclusions of these IPCC reports following the release of these assessments.

The United States government has been a significant contributor to these reports, with scientists serving as Lead and Contributing Authors and providing comments in the official government review process - in which EPA was involved. Official government delegations, including from the United States, have approved the Summary for Policymakers for Working Groups I and II and III and the respective underlying reports.

Working Group I (Science)

The Summary for Policymakers of the second volume of the IPCC's new assessment report "Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis" was released on February 2, 2007. You may download the Summary for Policymakers from the IPCC Web site . The full report is now available on the Working Group I Web site .

The report, prepared by IPCC Working Group I, assesses the current scientific knowledge of the natural and human drivers of climate change, observed changes in climate, the ability of science to attribute changes to different causes, and projections for future climate change that include temperature, precipitation and sea level rise.

The key findings in the Working Group I Summary for Policymakers follow:

Greenhouse gas concentrations have markedly increased since 1750 and far exceed pre-industrial values.
Temperatures are increasing, sea levels are rising and ice is melting. The warming of the climate system is "unequivocal."
Human activities have very likely1 caused most of the warming over the past 50 years.
Improved computer modeling has increased confidence in future climate projections: temperatures will continue to increase, sea levels will continue to rise, and ice will continue to melt.


Working Group II (Impacts and Adaptation)

The Summary for Policymakers of the second volume of the IPCC's new assessment report “Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability” was released on April 6, 2007. You may download the Summary for Policymakers from the IPCC Web site . The full report is now available on the Working Group II Web site .

The report, prepared by IPCC Working Group II, assesses current scientific understanding of impacts of climate change on natural and human systems, their capacity to adapt and their vulnerability.

The key findings in the Working Group II Summary for Policymakers follow:

Evidence from many parts of the world show that people, plants and animals are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases.
Warming caused by human activities has likely1 had a discernible influence on plants and animals.
More detailed information is now available about how climate change will impact water resources, ecosystems, agriculture and forestry, health, coastlines and regions of the world. These impacts will likely be both positive and negative across regions although it is very likely1 that all regions will experience declines in benefits or increases in costs if global average temperatures warm more than 3.6-5.4 degrees F.
A mix of adaptation (preparing for and responding to climate change impacts) and mitigation (e.g. reducing greenhouse gas emissions) can reduce the risks of climate change.
1 On this page the following terms, as defined by IPCC 2007, are used to 99% probability of occurrence, Extremely likely > 95%, Very likely > 90%, Likely > 66%, More likely than not > 50%, Very unlikely < 10%, Extremely unlikely < 5%.


Working Group III (Mitigation)

The Summary for Policymakers of the third volume of the IPCC’s new assessment report “Climate Change 2007: Mitigation for Climate Change” was released on May 4, 2007. You may download the Summary for Policymakers from the IPCC Web site . The full report is now available on the Working Group III Web site .

The report, prepared by IPCC Working Group III, assesses greenhouse gas mitigation options in each sector of the global economy, addressing the economic and environmental costs and benefits of mitigation, the technical aspects of mitigation options, and potential cross-sectoral synergies and trade-offs. It also assesses the compatibility of near-term greenhouse gas mitigation activities with long-term climate stabilization pathways.

The key findings in the Working Group III Summary for Policymakers follow:

Global greenhouse gas emissions have grown since pre-industrial times, with an increase of 70% between 1970 and 2004. With current climate change mitigation policies and related sustainable development practices, global GHG emissions will continue to grow over the next few decades.
There is substantial economic potential for the mitigation of global GHG emissions across all sectors over the coming decades, where economic potential assumes that additional policies have been put into place to remove barriers and include social costs and benefits.
In order to stabilize the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, emissions would need to peak and decline thereafter. The lower the stabilization level, the more quickly this peak and decline would need to occur.
The stabilization levels modeled are achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that are currently available and those that are assumed to be commercialized in coming decades.
Macroeconomic costs for multi-gas mitigation, consistent with emissions trajectories towards stabilization between 445 and 710 ppm CO2-eq, are estimated at between a 3% decrease in global GDP and a small increase in 2030 compared to the baseline, and 5.5% decrease and a 1% gain in 2050. Most estimates assume perfect implementation. Costs increase if some regions, sectors, options, or gases are excluded. Costs decrease with lower baselines and use of revenues from carbon taxes and auctioned permits. For specific countries and sectors, costs vary considerably from the global average.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last updated on Tuesday, September 8th, 2009.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ipcc2007.html

Print As-Is"

[Nathan Janes]

Didn't think you'd reply to this..

[Darrell]

nathan:

Surely you jest. Just read the thread. I replied to everything.

[Nathan Janes]

Al Gore Admits CO2 Does Not Cause Majority Of Global Warming
http://www.infowars.com/al-gore-admits-co2-does-not-cause-majority-...

In a new development that is potentially devastating to the agenda to introduce a global carbon tax and a cap and trade system, Al Gore admits that the majority of global warming that occurred until 2001 was not primarily caused by CO2.

Before we get too excited, Gore is not backing away from his support for the theory of man-made climate change, but his concession that carbon dioxide only accounted for 40% of warming according to new studies could seriously harm efforts to tax CO2, that evil, life-giving gas that humans exhale and plants absorb.

“Gore acknowledged to Newsweek that the findings could complicate efforts to build a political consensus around the need to limit carbon emissions,” reports BB News.

Yesterday we reported on how Gore was set to become the first “carbon billionaire” on the back of vast profits from companies invested in the “green revolution” that the former vice-president has a hefty stake in.


We also highlighted how the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has direct ties to both Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of CCX.

Gore stands to make windfall profits from his stake in carbon trading systems that would be used to manage the cap and trade system currently being readied for passage in the Senate, but his admission that CO2 is far less of a threat than global warming alarmists have been claiming could be a terminal blow for such a proposal.

As Andrew Bolt writes in today’s Australian Herald Sun, his flip-flopping “Suggests not only that was Gore wrong to claim the science was “settled”, but that the hugely expensive schemes to “stop” warming by slashing carbon dioxide emissions will be less than half as effective as claimed.”

“Over the years I have been among those who focused most of all on CO2, and I think that’s still justified,” Gore told Newsweek . “But a comprehensive plan to solve the climate crisis has to widen the focus to encompass strategies for all” of the greenhouse culprits identified in the Nasa study.”

Gore now blames soot and methane for the majority of global warming, leaving the door open for a tax on livestock, a tax on meat, a tax on milk, and on and on until he changes his mind again and blames another culprit so that too can be taxed.

In another indictment of Gore’s accuracy in warning about climate change, he has now virtually abandoned scientific “facts” in favor of characterizing his Inconvenient Truth presentation in the context of a religious sermon.

“Simply laying out the facts won’t work,” admits Gore.

That’s right, the church of environmentalism has come full circle with Gore’s intention to deliver his widely debunked presentation with spiritual overtones, a move that will shock most hard-headed empirical scientists.

“I’ve done a Christian [-based] training program; I have a Muslim training program and a Jewish training program coming up, also a Hindu program coming up. I trained 200 Christian ministers and lay leaders here in Nashville in a version of the slide show that is filled with scriptural references. It’s probably my favorite version, but I don’t use it very often because it can come off as proselytizing,” Gore tells Newsweek.

In a new book Gore has been working on, he attempts to address the rapidly growing skepticism towards global warming alarmism not with science, but by blaming people’s own thoughts, a Kafkaesque cop-out if ever there was one.

According to the book’s press release, “Among the most unique approaches Gore takes in the book is showing readers how our own minds can be an impediment to change.”

“Our own minds are the enemy! Don’t free the minds – imprison them!,” scoffs Tim Blair.