 |
| Global warming or nature swarming? |
THE MESSAGE:
Mankind in its pursuit of happiness and well-being is totally incapable of controlling the forces of nature. Consider the devastating effects of volcanos, earthquakes with their resulting tsunamis, tornados, hurricanes, floods or wildfires. These forces will always be present. Perhaps we should focus on things we can control: common societal goals and values, less of political and tribal harping, hatred, jealousy, violence and vanity. Mankind is in dire need of compassion, understanding and integrity.
Global warming, carbon footprint, greenhouse gasses, I say bah humbug and what a total waste of time and resources!
However, don't just take my word for it!
In 1633, opposition to the common viewpoint could mean death. This was the case with Galileo when he proposed that the Earth revolved around the sun. He was tried for heresy. Of course things are different today. People who question dogma are no longer burnt at the stake. Instead, they're branded as having suspect motives, as reactionaries or simply as nut cases.
Consider global warming. The common viewpoint is that man-made carbon dioxide is to blame, but the Earth has been through ice ages and periods of global warming for millions of years. As recently as 1,000 years ago, the Earth was a degree warmer in the "Medieval Warm Period" and the Vikings could grow crops in Greenland. No one questions how this could happen so many years before our recent fuel consumption excesses. No one questions why man-made carbon dioxide would have any effect on global warming when it constitutes less than 1 percent of greenhouse gases (the major greenhouse gas is water vapor). No one questions the recent Antarctic ice cores from Dome Concordia, with ice up to 700,000 years old, which show increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration occurring about 1,000 years after global temperature rises, thus suggesting that high carbon dioxide levels are a result of global warming and not a cause.
VIVIAN KRAUSE:
This lady has done extensive research on the 'American Hoax' that has been perpetrated on Canadians in the name of environmental concerns. She has exposed David Suzuki as a lying, hypocritical fraud. Vivian has uncovered the self-serving motivation of the Brothers Rockefeller and their foundation in their attempts to stir up scattered opposition, within Canada, as we strive to become a world leader in fossil fuel development.
Vivian shared her thoughts and research in a recent article in the Financial Post
Heads up, Canada! Our one and only big energy customer, the United States, isn’t going to need Canadian oil any more. That’s the implication of the International Energy Agency’s latest predictions. The U.S. will be the world’s largest oil producer by 2020 and a net oil exporter by 2030. Some say this could happen a lot sooner.
At the same time that the U.S. is fast becoming an energy exporter, American charitable foundations are restricting Canadian fossil fuel development with conservation initiatives that put huge areas of land off-limits to natural resources development. Whether it is their intention or not, large conservation areas are de facto trade barriers that would restrict Canada’s marine access to global energy markets — on all three coasts — and maintain the U.S. monopoly on Canadian exports, keeping Canada over a barrel and on the sidelines of the global energy market.
DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO!
North American oil production LED BY THE US will dominate world-wide supply growth over the next five years, the International Energy Agency predicted Tuesday, the result of growing production from "fracking" and other technologies that access once-inaccessible reserves.
DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO!
North American oil production LED BY THE US will dominate world-wide supply growth over the next five years, the International Energy Agency predicted Tuesday, the result of growing production from "fracking" and other technologies that access once-inaccessible reserves.
The downside of the U.S. monopoly on Canadian exports is huge. Joe Oliver, Minister of Natural Resources told the B.C. Business Council in a speech Tuesday that the Canadian economy loses out on $18-billion annually – $50-million every day – because Canadian oil is sold into the U.S. market below market value.
For the Canadians on the front lines of environmental conservation initiatives, it’s all about saving the bears, caribou, salmon and so forth. But for the U.S. foundations that fund these initiatives, this is about oil.
The largest environmental initiatives in Canada are the Great Bear Rainforest on the north coast of B.C., the Canadian Boreal Initiative and the Yellowstone to Yukon Initiative. In all three, the big funder is an American foundation.
Since the late 1990s the San Francisco-based William & Flora Hewlett Foundation (“Hewlett”) and the David & Lucile Packard Foundation (“Packard”), both created by the founders of tech giant Hewlett-Packard, have paid US$90-million to First Nations and environmental groups, tax returns show.
SOME OF THE PROPAGANDA.
William and Flora Hewlett have long recognized the importance of preserving the environment, making it a cornerstone of their Foundation's work. Four decades later, their foresight is evident as the world continues to face complex environmental problems. Questions of greenhouse gases and climate change, land and water conservation, energy efficiency and clean transportation, all demand the world's attention.
MEANWHILE CHECK OUT WILLIAM HEWLETT'S SHIRT!
The same U.S. foundations that fund conservation in Canada also fund American groups working towards energy security, including a foundation called Securing America’s Future Energy. The name says it all.
American foundations aim to reduce fossil fuel dependence to stop global warming and strengthen U.S. national, energy and economic security. That’s clear. What’s unclear is whether they fund conservation initiatives in Canada, in part, to foster U.S. energy security.
The main funder of the Presidential Climate Project is the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF).
 |
| I THOUGHT THERE WERE ONLY 3 STOOGES! |
This is the same foundation that is behind-the-scenes on the campaign to block the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and ban oil tanker traffic – but only on the strategic coast of British Columbia and in the Canadian arctic. Never mind the dozens of tankers that import oil to the U.S. on a daily basis, the Rockefeller Brothers are only against the tankers that would export Canadian oil to Asia.
THESE PAYMENTS ARE NOT HUGE SUMS INDIVIDUALLY BUT ARE DESIGNED AS A SERIES OF SMALLER DONATIONS TO VARIOUS 'CHARITIES?' OR ABORIGINAL GROUPS WITHIN CANADA. THIS IS DONE TO MAKE IT SEEM LIKE THE CANADIAN PROTESTERS ARE HUGE IN NUMBER.
Heads up Ontario! Ontarians are well aware of the Mcguinty Wynne boondoggle created by 'The Green Energy Act' and the gas plant cancellations. Energy Minister Chiarelli tries to cover this up by attaching blame to previous governments.
According to Ontario’s energy minister, Bob Chiarelli, electricity rates will increase 42% over the next five years. And 54% over the next 10, and 68% over the next 20.
And guess whose fault it is? Incredibly Chiarelli blames Mike Harris. "OH MY POLITICAL GRANNY!"
Yes, the former Ontario premier, who left office almost 12 years ago, is responsible for the fact Ontario energy prices have escalated exponentially under the Liberal government, which has been in place for the past decade.
The news is not good. For the first 10 months of 2013, Ontario exported 14,983,776 MWh (enough to power almost 1.6 million average Ontario homes for a full year). Revenue from those exports totaled $381-million. Average price for the exports works out to 2.54 cents per kWh.
Now let’s look at what those 14,983,776 exported MWh cost ratepayers. Using the IESO monthly reports, we find that the all-in cost – as reported in the IESO’s “Summary of Wholesale Market Electricity Charges in Ontario’s Competitive Marketplace”– for the 10 months worth of exports is $1.6-billion, or 10.5 cents a kWh. From the two above dollar figures any literate person can quickly determine that we lose just over $1.2-billion on our exports. That’s a loss of eight cents per kWh and a cost $250 for every average ratepayer in the province over 10 months. The last two months of the year will likely push that to $300.
No sign of these numbers at Chiarelli’s web site. And no indication that the main source of all that exported energy is the wind and solar plants installed by Chiarelli’s government. Ratepayers are subsidizing wind and solar at home and at the same time delivering cheap power to Ontario’s economic competitors.
QUESTION: Is anyone actually considering voting Liberal in Ontario?
QUOTE: "A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice."-Bill Cosby
LEMONS TO:
THE ONTARIO LIBERAL PARTY
 |
| DULLTON |
 |
| WINNIE |
 |
| BOOBY |
CLIP OF THE WEEK:
2 comments:
Mandatory reading!
What does 'mandatory' mean?
Post a Comment