1 – 1 of 1
Blogger opit said...

" support American interests, rather than preventing future climate catastrophes"
Actually, I have been looking at this for years. One story was that the US switched position papers at the conference, which was leaked by the Danes. The changed outline would have given preferential rates to polluters.
But one must check out the reason for the IPCC to understand how devious things really are. It is an intergovernmental panel tasked with representing reasons to fear anthropogenic global warming, with 'scientific studies' funded to support the proposition that temperature is linked to energy consumption. People are freezing on the rez already. Global tax payable to the UN is not just regressive, it is a power grab affecting countries' autonomy. And the problem ? Increased co2 should stimulate plant growth if it works. If it doesn't - and there can be no proof it does as prophecy is involved - then it is a con.
The allegation that oil company shills are 'denying the science' is powerful libel - and it fixes discussion over the truth of an allegation being disputed rather than unproven. If it were proven we would have descriptions of process on a background of natural cycles. They aren't even trying.

January 29, 2014 at 10:28 PM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
Please prove you're not a robot