The EU and Climate exchange

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Webbman » Tue Apr 03, 2018 7:31 pm

now you know why they are really scared of co2.

its ok to breathe. Its what your here to do.
its all lies.

Aardwolf
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Aardwolf » Wed Apr 04, 2018 6:29 am

archmage wrote:IThe phytoplankton of the ocean are said to be responsible for a huge chunk of the global oxygen production... something like HALF. I think an extinction event accelerates and worsens dramatically when our oxygen producers at the bottom of the food chain are impacted... I don't know how threatened the phytoplankton are, but I remember feeling uneasy about it... they say life began in the oceans... I think an extinction event can begin there as well.
Odd that you are worried about the impact of CO2 on phytoplankton when CO2 is phytoplankton food. Are you worried they are going to get fat and lazy?

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Webbman » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:04 am

At the end of the day there is not much reason to believe any of the offerings. Its all misdirection and you will always be shockingly blindsided by whatever doom comes and never that of which your constantly harped on about.
its all lies.

ElecGeekMom
Posts: 328
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 9:01 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by ElecGeekMom » Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:30 pm

Someone asked me one time why they would even create the AGW global warming myth and work so hard to make people believe it.

I told them that I believe the hidden agenda is to lower the value of the so-called "fossil fuel" companies and their resources and lead them into bankruptcy. Then their properties can be acquired for a pittance, probably by people like Soros and his minions. I don't have the URL handy, but I did see a recent article that described his doing just that.

The sun's emissions are considerably lower than they have been for some time. We are staring down the barrel of a grand solar minimum, if not a real ice age. If you were George Soros and knew that was reality (and not AGW global warming), and knew that coal and oil and gas had propped up modern civilization for a long time, and you didn't want Western civilization to survive and thrive through the coming cooling, wouldn't you try to turn people against the use of coal, oil and gas? Wouldn't you try to get people and governments to throw their money away on expensive, alternative sources of energy that will not survive an ice age? I mean, who really thinks snow-covered solar panels or ice-frozen wind turbines will ever serve to provide the energy we have all come to know and love?

George Soros is a handy villain, but there are apparently lots of folks who think the population of the planet needs to be reduced greatly. What better way than to inhibit our ability to keep warm and produce food in the face of a cooling planet?

I find it hard to wrap my head around how some evil people must be to set out to ensure the demise of the vast majority of the planet's inhabitants as it becomes harder and harder to stay warm and to grow crops.

Cargo
Posts: 294
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Cargo » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:23 pm

A couple tangets too far, but well thought none the less. Although I could link Soros with Agenda 21 only through his funding of destroying states, chaos to breed war. It's a far stretch to connect that to EU or "Climate Deniers".
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

seasmith
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by seasmith » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:49 pm

ElecGeekMom wrote:

Someone asked me one time why they would even create the AGW global warming myth and work so hard to make people believe it.

I told them that I believe the hidden agenda is to lower the value of the so-called "fossil fuel" companies and their resources and lead them into bankruptcy. Then their properties can be acquired for a pittance, probably by people like Soros and his minions.
Fossil fuel is a scapegoat. One of several well planned diversions to draw the ire and fear by which the masses are led.

The ultimate goal has long been a Global Carbon Tax. Why else to demonize good old CO2 ?

When Earth was finally seen as a beautiful blue bauble floating on black velvet, the aim of those who lust for power and dominion became Global, with a capital G.
Every one uses carbon, so everybody is guilty and must pay the tithe. A global tax is funneled to a global government (already shaping up in Brussels), to maintain a global army (the corps of which is already organized in that well-known "treaty organization"), which enforces a global court (already fully-formed at the Hague), to legitimize a global bureaucracy to levy the taxes and allow a "globalist" aristocracy to rule in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

The burgeoning population is herded to where they are needed (the highly industrialized but increasingly infecund countries at present), or can be allowed to cull their own populations by well-funded wars, pollution, famine and plague.

Read the ancient empires, oriental and accidental, and of their now unimaginable brutality; all in a quest to power for the few.
History repeats with a sometimes alarming regularity.
:twisted:

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Webbman » Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:36 am

i wonder if your big G and the big G gravity constant have anything in common?

6.67 X 10-11. I guess they were fearful of using 6.66 though i suppose it will be refined later on with special equipment.
its all lies.

User avatar
orrery
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: USA

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by orrery » Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:01 pm

People who push CO2 as a driver for climate change / global warming are brainwashed and haven't performed real fact checking. This belief is largely modeled on the planet Venus, however, Venus is a scorching hell because it has no magnetosphere, not because it has a CO2 rich atmosphere.
"though free to think and to act - we are held together like the stars - in firmament with ties inseparable - these ties cannot be seen but we can feel them - each of us is only part of a whole" -tesla

http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmaCosmology

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:08 pm

For the original poster

Many people are not aware of the generous use of Global Circulation Models in making the scientific case for clim te change. The alarming warming modeled in the forecasts then find their way into the summaries written for politicians, who pursue ghg reduction schemes. These policies (such as a carbon tax) are a guaranteed loser in elections, so they are introduced through bureaucracies and through international treaties.

John Christy often gives Congressional testimonies on the temp. data sets, and the use of computer models which form the basis of the anthropogenic warming claims.

Atmospheric Scientist John Christy exposes inaccuracy of climate models
Channel: The HARRY READ ME File
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uimiXfONbRk
dur 1min 48 sec

It is up to you as a citizen to decide if computer models really constitute evidence in science, esp. if the models have made forecasts which were as wrong as these ghg models are.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
orrery
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: USA

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by orrery » Sat Apr 07, 2018 8:44 am

A computer model breaks down in to a set of mathematical equations. When it comes to climate modeling, that model MUST take the form a matrix set of multivariable differential equations. Anyone who has ever taken Linear Algebra or even Pre-Calculus should realize that you can not solve an unknown variable without a sufficient number of relationship equations. You can't solve a 5x5 matrix with 10 unknowns regardless of how good you think your computer model / program is because it is mathematically impossible and no computer can possibly do it. Computer based climate modeling is and always has been total bullshit. Anyone that claims that they have solved the CO2 factor is lying out of their ass such that they can say something like "2 degree increased caused by CO2" is full of it and are are just magically pulling numbers out of their ass.
"though free to think and to act - we are held together like the stars - in firmament with ties inseparable - these ties cannot be seen but we can feel them - each of us is only part of a whole" -tesla

http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmaCosmology

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Webbman » Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:43 am

The model i use is "how would the gangsters do it?"

my model is pretty much always right.


co2 is just more bullshit that can be controlled and exploited.
its all lies.

BeAChooser
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by BeAChooser » Sat Apr 07, 2018 4:48 pm

seasmith wrote:The ultimate goal has long been a Global Carbon Tax. Why else to demonize good old CO2 ?
I agree. There was (may still be) uncountable BILLIONS OF DOLLARS riding on a carbon tax ... money that the left and statists hope to put in their pocket. Consider this. Very early, the left planned for a carbon tax. They set up exchanges here in the US and a few other places in anticipation of it. And they expected to make massive amounts of money from it.

Al Gore expected to become filthy rich. He co-founded a London Based firm called Generation Investment Management (GIM) in 2004. He was a major stockholder. In turn, GIM was the fifth largest shareholder (10%) in CCX (the Chicago Climate Exchange), which if Cap and Trade had passed was expected to trade over $10 TRILLION in carbon credits each year by 2050 ... that’s according to the head of CCX, Richard Sander. The New York Times seemed to agree, saying that carbon credit trading held the potential to become the world’s largest commodity market. At a commission rate of just 2%, that $10 trillion in trades would have generated about $200 BILLION dollars a year in PROFIT for it's owners.

But CCX commission rates were higher than 2%. In 2008, before Obama was even in office, CCX traded about 44 million tons of CO2. Carbon credit prices had climbed to over $5 a ton. So even before the Cap and Trade legislation was expected to be passed, the exchange was already doing over $220 million dollars in trades a year. Historically, the price of carbon credits was between $1.00 and $6.45 (as I said, it was over $5 in 2005) and CCX charged $.20 per carbon credit for registration and trading. Divide $5 by $0.20 and you get a 4% commission. At that commission rate $10 trillion in trades would have generated $400 billion in profit.

And Al Gore expected to get a large share of that. How big? Well, say he owned just a tenth of GIM (not unreasonable given that he was the founder). Then he’d get about a 100th of the CCX's profit … or about $4 billion … A YEAR … by 2050, if projections panned out. And that ignores CCX’s share of the European and Indian carbon credit exchanges which it was helping set up and which would also make huge amounts of money from trades. So it is clear that Al Gore expected to get filthy rich from the carbon tax. And he wasn’t alone. Many other highly vocal AGWalarmists were similarly motivated.

For instance, the head of the IPCC at the time, Rajendra Pachauri, was heavily involved in the Indian Carbon Credit exchange. He was on the advisory board of CCX, which leads me to suspect he was also invested in that. And CCX's own website stated that an India Climate Exchange (ICX) was being formed and "to further this goal, an ICX technical design committee and advisory board" was being formed with Dr. Pachauri as it's chairman. So Pachauri was directly involved in two of the newly created exchanges ... exchanges that would generate tens (perhaps hundreds) of billions of dollars each year for it's owners. And if you don't believe that he was involved in the creation of ICX, he admits it in his own 2010 book, Dealing With Climate Change. And in addition to likely being an owner of CCX, he also expected to make several hundred million dollars, alone, in EU carbon credits just by closing a factory that he was involved in Britain at the time. Can you spell a *conflict of interest* to his being in charge of the IPCC, which was recommending the establishment of carbon taxes? And he had many other conflicts of interest too, but none seemed to matter to the mainstream press or liberals because he was one of them.

Leftist billionaire George Soros (one of Obama's key backers) and his leftist Center for American Progress was also heavily involved in crafting the Cap and Trade legislation.  Do any of you think he didn’t expect to profit from AGWalarmism and Cap and Trade? Franklin Raines (you remember … the crooked Democrat who was the ex-head of Fannie Mae) was also involved in CCX. At least until recently (I haven't checked), he held the patent for the mechanism by which carbon tax trading would occur. He bought it using some of his ill-gotten gains from Fannie Mae (remember, he stole about $50 million, only a portion of which he returned, before he was forced to resign). You think he didn’t expect to profit from AGWalarmism and Carbon Taxes?  

Another CCX shareholder was Goldman Sachs. In fact, Goldman Sachs was the largest CCX shareholder. So it's not surprising that Goldman Sachs was a big supporter of Obama and the one trying to bail out ShoreBank. Oh wait, perhaps you haven't heard of ShoreBank? Well, in a nut shell, Shorebank was designated the "banking arm" of the CCX. And Goldman Sacks was contracted to run the investment trading floor of the carbon tax exchange.  So as you can see, it and it's leftist/statist investors stood to make LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of money from carbon taxes.

And look at some of the other spiders in ShoreBank's tangled web. One was The Joyce Foundation, one of ShoreBank's major shareholders. It's significant because Obama was on the board of the Joyce Foundation when it made the decision to fund the creation of the CCX.   And after Obama left the board, Valerie Jarrett, the VERY close personal friend of the Obama's (who still even vacations with them), was made a member. And during the time funding for CCX was approved, Paula DiPerna, the Joyce Foundation's president became the Executive Vice President for CCX.  Everyone starting to get the picture?

So I agree with you, seasmith. The ultimate goal of AGWalarmism was Carbon Taxes. And still is in many quarters.



 

User avatar
Brigit Bara
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:37 pm

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Brigit Bara » Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:26 pm

BeaChooser says,
GIM was the fifth largest shareholder (10%) in CCX (the Chicago Climate Exchange), which if Cap and Trade had passed was expected to trade over $10 TRILLION in carbon credits each year by 2050 ... that’s according to the head of CCX, Richard Sander. The New York Times seemed to agree, saying that carbon credit trading held the potential to become the world’s largest commodity market. At a commission rate of just 2%, that $10 trillion in trades would have generated about $200 BILLION dollars a year in PROFIT for it's owners.

"The EU and Climate exchange" -- perhaps that wasn't a typo after all!
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

Webbman
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by Webbman » Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:58 pm

Carbon taxes just another plague to open the door to a world where you cant chop down a tree and burn it or eat meat because both of these activities generate co2. These activities will be reserved for the elite.

its enforcing a false reality on you for some perceived greater good that will never benifit you or pretty much anyone else.

Thats why these "ideas" never die no matter how wrong they are proven to be. Anything backed by the money power is basically undead and will keep coming until the money power (the head) is destroyed.

This has nothing to do with money and everything to do with removing any remaining freedom you might think you have.
its all lies.

User avatar
neilwilkes
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: The EU and Climate exchange

Unread post by neilwilkes » Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:20 am

I could not agree more that the whole idea is to destroy our economies & get very rich at the same time. When Gore was VP he was worth about $1.9 million, now it is well in excess of $300 million and counting. His houses consume more power than a small town, he flies everywhere in corporate private jets yet has the brass balls to demonize the rest of us? The phrase "canting hypocrite" comes to mind.

As previously posted, check out Tony Heller's realclimatesciencce.com as well as wattsupwiththat.com, which has a superb list of all the excuses given for the abject failure of their "models" (and we all know how good their models are) - it was being claimed 100 years ago that we are burning up, and the Arctic is melting away, then it was freezing into a new ice age in the 70's and now we are full circle and all burning up again - and unless we all make sacrifices we will all burn. Sorry, but this sounds more like an apocalyptic religious cult than science, plus it does not MATTER about so called consensus either, as the empirical method (ie proper science) only takes ONE observation that does not fit a theory to falsify it (or at least it should only take one) because any data that appears to prop this up may have a previously unknown cause and in this case it does. Sadly we see this again & again and not just in climate.

I repeat again - nothing is broken, and nobody can fix it. CO2 is a gas of life and not a pollutant and my school physics teacher always used to say that we are dangerously LOW in CO2 these days (okay that was back in the 70's but still we are not high and CO2 does not drive climate here or anywhere else for that matter. Re Venus, I would say it is hot because it is still a very new planet - no other reason - and as for the so called greenhouse effect I have 2 problems with it:
1 - Hot air in a greenhouse rises indefinitely until it either disperses into space or is blocked by a glass ceiling, and as far as I am aware there is no glass ceiling around Venus.
2 - The whole thing is an ASSUMPTION because for ages it was thought Venus was a sister planet to Earth, and the Russian landers forced a rapid rethink and that was what they came up with.

Sea Ice in the Arctic is normal - NASA started their recent measurements from the last minimum in 1979 to make it look like it is all melting - see https://realclimatescience.com/governme ... ce-fraud/ and note well the real graphs and not the lies publicly pushed by NASA & NOAA, and I am in total agreement with Tony when he states that
I do agree that human activity is driving Arctic sea ice fraud by government agencies. There is zero evidence that CO2 emissions have any influence on Arctic ice however.
The shadow government have finally found a way to tax the air we breathe. TERMITES emit more CO2 than people do, yet Obama did not declare war on termites, and I shudder to think how much the meat industry releases with all the cow farts - don't laugh, please - it isn't meant to be funny.
We also hear Trump castigated for reneging on the Paris agreement - yet this was never ratified in the US as Obama never did that, so the US were never signed up to it fully in the first place!!
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests