It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So many new developments: which story do we pick? Maybe best to summarise, instead. After all, it’s not like you’re going to find much of this reported in the MSM.
1. Australia’s Senate rejects Emissions Trading Scheme for a second time. Or: so turkeys don’t vote Christmas. Expect to see a lot more of this: politicians starting to become aware their party’s position on AGW is completely out of kilter with the public mood and economic reality. Kevin Rudd’s Emissions Trading Scheme – what Andrew Bolt calls “a $114 billion green tax on everything” – would have wreaked havoc on the coal-dependent Australian economy. That’s why several opposition Liberal frontbenchers resigned rather than vote with the Government on ETS; why Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull lost his job; and why the Senate voted down the ETS.
2. Danes caught fiddling their carbon credits. (Hat tip: Philip Stott) Carbon trading is the Emperor’s New Clothes of international finance. It was invented by none other than Ken Lay, whose Enron would currently be one of the prime beneficiaries in the global alternative energy market, if it hadn’t been shown to be (nearly) as fraudulent as the current AGW scam. It is a licence to fleece, cheat and rob. Still, jolly embarrassing for the Danes to get caught red handed, what with their hosting a conference shortly in which the world’s leaders will try, straight-faced, to persuade us that carbon emissions trading is the only viable way of defeating ManBearPig.
Who was the late Ken Lay, the architect and chairman of Enron throughout its 16-year history? All parties to the current legislative debate on a CO2 cap-and-trade bill should know. After all, Lay’s tireless efforts to promote CO2 regulation and enact renewable energy quotas make him a father figure for HR 2354, the Waxman-Markey climate bill, what I have called the Enron Revitalization Act of 2009.
The 219–212 passage of HR 2454 inspires another look at Enron’s infamous “Kyoto memo,” written almost 13 years ago by company lobbyist John Palmisano. Indeed, an Enron memo upon House passage of the Waxman-Markey climate bill would have been similar! Change the dates and some other specifics and the bottom line would be the same–potential gains for Enron’s profit centers in wind, solar, CO2-emissions trading, energy outsourcing, and natural gas.
One can imagine a quotation like this from Enron’s fabled public relations department, hyperbolizing a half-victory into something bigger in the attempt to create a bandwagon effect:
“This historic vote was heard ’round the world,” stated Kenneth L. Lay, chairman of Enron Corp. “Although much work remains before we have new law, HR 2454 signals a new commitment toward clean, green energy, of which Enron is the acknowledged world leader. All of us look forward to working with lawmakers and citizens in this new era of global climate protection.”
Perhaps Al Gore himself would have placed a call to Ken Lay to congratulate the company that did to much so spark the CO2 reduction debate within the industry in the 1980s and 1990s. Indeed, the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (US CAP), a bootleggers-and-Baptists coalition that had much to do with the opening draft of Waxman-Markey, probably had more to do with Ken Lay protégé James Rogers (now chairman of Duke Energy) than any other single person.
Reprinted below, verbatim, is the infamous Enron Kyoto Memo, the original copy of which is posted here.
Implications
If implemented, this agreement will do more to promote Enron’s business than will almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring of the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States. The potential to add incremental gas sales, and additional demand for renewable technology is enormous. In addition, a carbon emissions trading system will be developed. While the trading system will be implemented by 2008, I am sure that reductions will begin to trade with 1-2 years. Finally, Enron has immediate business opportunities which derive directly from this agreement.
Anyway, acting the fool isn't what I'd call a "confrontation". If you want to do something, get some money, start a YouTube channel, and challenge him to a debate.
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
You think he would accept that challenge?
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Ish, this is a great thread. The Climategate thing really, really pisses me off. It calls into question every single piece of science, IMO. It is a major, major showing of how science can present lies concealed by truth. Statisticians know that figures don't lie, but liars can sure figure. That is what happened with this.
Al Gore is the biggest charlatan of our generation. The snake oil he sold has cost more money than any Rube Goldberg, back page comic ad could ever dream of bilking. Xray vision, indeed.
good stuff, madam.
Originally posted by Granite
If Gore did accept, we should demand to go first and play the Youtube movies of JFK's illuminati warning and Eisenhower's military industrial complex warning speeches.
He would be stumped.
Originally posted by woodwardjnr
This behaviour on the protesters part, just confirms the mainstream medias image of nutty conspiracy theorists, yelling NWO in crowded book shops. Doing more ham than good. IMO. It's not helpful
THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a “load of hot air underpinned by fraud”.
Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going.
In a controversial talk just days before the start of a climate summit attended by world leaders in Copenhagen, Prof Plimer said Governments were treating the public like “fools” and using climate change to increase taxes.
He said carbon dioxide has had no impact on temperature and that recent warming was part of the natural cycle of climate stretching over billions of years.
ì
If you have to argue your science by using fraud, your science is not valid.
î
Professor Pilmer
Prof Plimer - author of Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, The Missing Science - told a London audience: “Climates always change. They always have and they always will. They are driven by a number of factors that are random and cyclical.”
Professor Plimer said climate change was caused by natural events such as volcanic eruptions, the shifting of the Earth’s orbit and cosmic radiation. He said: “Carbon dioxide levels have been up to 1,000 times higher in the past. CO2 cannot be driving global warming now.
“In the past we have had rapid and significant climate change with temperature changes greater than anything we are measuring today. They are driven by processes that have been going on since the beginning of time.”
Originally posted by FortAnthem
Dirtbags on the left have been using the same tactics for years. Shouting and intimidation have been applauded in the past when it was directed against the right.
The lefties can't stand it when the tables are turned.
Originally posted by swiftfootedachilleus
So , if Mr Gore is lying and global warming is a myth does that mean that we can all drive enormous filthy motor cars , continue our dependance on an ever decreasing , ever polluting oil ?
Can we cut down all the trees as well and kill all the animals too ?
Even if the illustrious Mr Gore has told lies , do we not all need to take action and leave a cleaner world for our children and theirs too ?
The way we have shaped the world in the past 200 years has polluted our only home and poisoned our own food supply . Surely we all agree with Mr Gore that we need to clean up our act .
Originally posted by woodwardjnr
This behaviour on the protesters part, just confirms the mainstream medias image of nutty conspiracy theorists, yelling NWO in crowded book shops. Doing more ham than good. IMO. It's not helpful