I got rid cos it was too long for a sig.
And do your research before you talk about being ill informed.
By the IPCC's own figures it will cost $60.000 per person on the planet to carry out thier global man made climate dchange plan and it will have no effect on climate whatsoever. They want 2% of global GDP and then there is the green industry that more than half the world cannot afford the tech they produce.
A tesla car is $100k, yet the company gets 4,5bn in tax breaks so the average tax payer is paying for electric cars for the rich
30% of crops to useless biofuel. That caused the food price increases in the mid 2000s and pushed millions into starvation globally.
Then go look up the top 10 investors in Greenn tech, look at the massive subsidies they get. The failure of cap and trade in Europe and the US. Utter failure. The system was totally corrupted. Trading in imaginary carbon credits ffs, what a ****ing con.
Also factual is the money in green tech, that half of Africa and Half of India can never afford, the only thing they can afford is cheap energy, coal. So hundreds of millions must stay wuthout power.
Solar is a joke in its current form ie expense and storage of energy are seriously expensive and it only works during the day, wind farms only work when and where there is wind. Neither of these are viable solutions for the energyless masses. Plus that energy is far more expensive
It is also factual that the wind turbines are made in China in toxic wastelands for the cheapest possibly price, like Boatou. The land around for miles is destroyed ruining agriculture ground water and air. You tell me how that is green? Most of western pollution has been moved to china over the decades and it's the only reason emissions are down in places like the US cos everything is made in China. That's a fact. The world economy needs china which is why they can build coal stations till 2030 not because that is when they must stop, but that is because ecomomists speculate their economy will plateau. So if it doesn't China can and will just keep building more cheap energy because that cheap energy has been a huge boost to the European and US economy.
Anything you use made in China, pollutes China, but ye all just think it's all China's fault.
There would have been no other solution to China and therefore Europe and US energy needs for the products they wanted other than fossil fuel being used in China. Simples.
The only way several hundred million Indians can get out of abject poverty and living conditions is cheap energy, half of india has no juice, and the IPCC plans means they cannot have juice, they must accept poor living conditions and and services, squalor basically, same in Africa.
No cheap energy means higher infant mortality poorer or no medical services sanitation and a standard of living that is like the 1400s, transport, and all manner of **** becomes impossible. But it's OK, the developed world created its wealth on fossil fuels but no one else can?. IPCC planned policies will kill millions over time.
Raising people out of poverty reduces birth rates, proven that the wealthier we get the less we reproduce which is a solution for a future population problem.
Actual empirical data measured the radiation leaving earth and it at elevated rates where AGW says it would decrease because of more clouds from warming, this is scientifically invalid and it has been proven to be wrong.
There is NO media scrutiny and no mention of the hundreds of scientific papers that disagree based on science. They attacks on people are vcious and I can cite many an example. Sure they call people "deniers", actual NASA scientists who initially worked on climate change called deniers, and people like Freeman Dyson who's been in science for 60 years.
Climatology is a religion and the predict thermageddon, like some mayan bullshit, oh in 100 to 1000 years boo here comes CO2, bollocks
But in the end, there is no ****in warming
EDIT : The 97% consensus, yeah that was checked and a paper did on it, it turned out that 60 papers out of 11000 agreed with man being the primary cause of man made global warming, how that equated to 97% is beyond me, it was less than .5%
