Regardless of the fact that a majority of those in
this country refuse to buy into the continuing propaganda from Democrats and
their many minions in the state-controlled media regarding what was once
referred to, decades ago, as global cooling, then as global warming, then
simply as climate change and then, when
nothing else seemed to apply, as climate disruption. But a by any other name it’s still a scam. And now it’s been reported, as we always knew
it would, that Barry “Almighty’s” global warming scam would cost America’s poorest
families Billions every year. That’s
according to a report recently published by the Manhattan Institute.
The study estimates that Barry’s global warming plan
would increase the costs of living for the poorest American families an
additional $19 Billion per year, equivalent to increasing their taxes by 166
percent. The tax increase would also raise taxes on other poor families by an
extra $25 Billion, equal to a 33 percent tax increase. Meanwhile, Living costs
for the richest households would only increase by 4 percent. Perhaps here we have a reason why Democrat
and wealthy liberals like George 'Looney' Clooney, Alec ‘The Moron’ Baldwin and
of course Lenny DiCaprio seem to be so very firmly on the side of this
insanity.
And oddly enough it’s the very ones who would be
getting hit the hardest, if Barry and his Democrat allies are able to succeed
with their plan, who insist upon voting for the very ones who agree with Barry
that ‘climate change’ is to be the next great apocalypse to be face by man, and
only man can do something about it. So
these people are doing nothing than to essentially make themselves poorer for
no reason. Because all of the money Barry
wants to spend will accomplish nothing more than to drive energy costs up while
having what will be virtually no impact on the climate. It simply makes no
sense to support those who support this insanity.
What Barry wants to do is to implement the Environmental
Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, which would effectively tax four-fifths
of American carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and be similar in scope to an
economy-wide carbon tax. In addition,
Barry has also proposed a $10.25-per-barrel oil tax. Neither plan would have a large impact on
global warming/climate change. Data modeling created by the EPA and run by the
libertarian Cato Institute shows that the Clean Power Plan would only have
adverted 0.019° Celsius of warming by the year 2100, an amount so small that it
couldn’t be detected. So what’s really
behind Barry’s plan?
Oren Cass is a senior fellow at the Manhattan
Institute, and he is also the man who authored this specific study. He said, “The greatest tragedy of the
Democrats’ climate agenda is not how little it will accomplish but rather how
costly it will be for those least able to afford it.” The study determined that
taxing CO2 emissions or gasoline inherently hurts the poor far more than the
rich because the lowest-income U.S. households spend roughly 35 percent of
their annual income on energy; while the highest income households spent less
than 3 percent of their income on energy.
And yet the Democrats portray themselves as being defenders of the poor.
The average American’s electric bill has already gone
up 10 percent just since Barry took office in January, 2009, all due to federal
regulations. Granted to rich Hollywood
types that a pretty trivial amount, but to many Americans it’s significant. The
amount spent to meet global carbon dioxide emissions reduction goals could be
as high as $16.5 Trillion between now and 2030, when energy efficiency measures
are included, according to projections from the International Energy Agency
(IEA). To put these numbers in perspective, the U.S. government is just over
$19 Trillion in debt and only produced $17.4 Trillion in gross domestic product
in 2014.
Wouldn’t it be nice for change that if what this
next election resulted in was us electing a president who bases their policy on
the hard facts of this issue. Because if
that were to actually occur the fact are easily available, all one has to do is
want to pay attention to them. As an
example, here are but a few crucial, easily verifiable facts about
human-generated carbon dioxide and its effect on global warming that he, and
everyone else, needs to know and to better understand. The fact is, there has
been global warming, but the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is
necessarily so minuscule as to be nearly undetectable.
Here's why:
1. Carbon dioxide, considered the main vector for
human-caused global warming, is some 0.038% of the atmosphere - a trace gas.
2. Water vapor varies from 0% to 4%, and easily
averages 1% or more near the Earth’s surface, where the greenhouse effect would
be most important, and is about three times more effective a greenhouse gas
than is carbon dioxide. So water vapor is at least 25 times more prevalent and
three times more effective; that makes it at least 75 times more important to
the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide.
3. The TOTAL contribution of carbon dioxide to the
greenhouse effect is therefore 0.013 or less. The total human contribution to
atmospheric carbon dioxide since the start of the industrial revolution has
been estimated at about 25%.
4. So humans’ carbon dioxide greenhouse effect is a
quarter of 0.013, works out to about 0.00325. Total warming of the Earth by the
greenhouse effect is widely accepted as about 33 degrees Centigrade, raising
average temperature to 59 degrees Fahrenheit. So the contribution of
anthropogenic carbon dioxide is less than 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit, or under 0.1
degree Centigrade. Global warming over the last century is thought by many to
be 0.6 to 0.8 degrees Centigrade.
But that's only the beginning:
5. We've had
global warming for more than 10,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age,
and there is evidence temperatures were actually somewhat warmer 9,000 years
ago and again 4,500 to 8,000 years ago than they are today.
6. Whatever caused that, it was not human activity.
It was not all those coal burning power plants and factories and SUVs being
operated by Stone Age cavemen while chipping arrowheads out of bits of flint.
Whatever the cause was, it melted the glaciers that in North America once
extended south to Long Island and parts of New York City into virtually
complete disappearance (except for a few mountain remnants). That's one big
greenhouse effect!
7. If we are still having global warming - and I
suppose we could presume we are, given this 10,000 year history - it seems highly
likely that it is still the overwhelmingly primary cause of continued warming,
rather than our piddling 0.00325 contribution to the greenhouse effect. Yet
even that trend-continuation today needs to be proven.
8. Evidence is that the Medieval Warm Period
centered on the 1200s was somewhat warmer than we are now, and the climate was
clearly colder in the Little Ice Age in the 1600s than it is now. So we are
within the range of normal up-and-down fluctuations without human greenhouse
contributions that could be significant, or even measurable.
9. The principal scientists arguing for human-caused
global warming have been demonstrably disingenuous, and now you can see why.
They have proven that they can not, and should not, be trusted.
The idea that we should be spending hundreds of Billions
of dollars and hamstringing the economy of the entire world to reduce carbon
dioxide emissions is beyond ludicrous in light of the facts stated above; it’s simply
insane. Furthermore, it sucks attention and resources from seeking the other
sources of warming and from coping with climate change and its effects in
realistic ways. The true motivation underlying the global warming movement is
almost certainly ideological and political in nature, and I predict that
climate change, as currently presented, will go down as the greatest fraud of
all time. It makes Ponzi and Madoff look like rookies by comparison.
No comments:
Post a Comment