Climate Science Dialog

Not that you'll accept it...

You need to read up on Goldman Sachs and the carbon trading scam, the Ponzi scheme from the vampire squid.

Fast-forward to today. It's early June in Washington, D.C. Barack Obama, a popular young politician whose leading private campaign donor was an investment bank called Goldman Sachs — its employees paid some $981,000 to his campaign — sits in the White House. Having seamlessly navigated the political minefield of the bailout era, Goldman is once again back to its old business, scouting out loopholes in a new government-created market with the aid of a new set of alumni occupying key government jobs.
Gone are Hank Paulson and Neel Kashkari; in their place are Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson and CFTC chief Gary Gensler, both former Goldmanites. (Gensler was the firm's co-head of finance.) And instead of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs, the new game in town, the next bubble, is in carbon credits — a booming trillion dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party that it gave $4,452,585 to in the last election manages to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an "environmental plan," called cap-and-trade.
The new carbon credit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that's been kind to Goldman, except it has one delicious new wrinkle: If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices will be government-mandated. Goldman won't even have to rig the game. It will be rigged in advance.
Here's how it works: If the bill passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a. greenhouse gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy "allocations" or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years; one of his top economic aides speculates that the real number might be twice or even three times that amount.
The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the "cap" on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually; for comparison's sake, the annual combined revenues of all electricity suppliers in the U.S. total $320 billion.


Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405#ixzz2CcUp0tFq




 
can you provide some evidence to prove this asssertion? I've grown very tired of warmers propagating this bullshit meme. Either you find some evidence of some vast funding conspiracy or you are a fucking nutjob.

How about this? They say Exxon Spends an average of 8million+ a year to pay hurting scientists to say there is no link between fossil fuel pollution and global warming. That like the Tobacco companies used to spend millions on mis-information to say that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer. Well guess what? We know today they were FULL OF SHIT! Just like the oil company and their payed off scientists.

Exxon Mobil accused of misleading public
By JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press WriterWed Sep 20, 8:36 PM ET
Britain's leading scientific academy has accused oil company Exxon Mobil Corp. of misleading the public about global warming and funding groups that undermine the scientific consensus on climate change.

The Royal Society said Wednesday that it had written to Exxon asking it to halt support for groups that have "misrepresented the science of climate change."
The Sept. 4 letter was sent to Esso U.K., Exxon's British arm, by the society's official spokesman, Bob Ward.

The letter said Exxon had given $2.9 million to 39 groups that "have been misinforming the public about the science of climate change."
The groups — among more than 50 listed on Exxon's Web site as receiving funding for "public information and policy research" — include the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market advocacy group based in Washington, and the Tempe, Ariz.-based

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, which Ward said disputes the link between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.
"It's bizarre that a company like ExxonMobil should be funding an organization that so clearly is putting out information that is at odds with the opinion of the scientific community," Ward told The Associated Press.
ExxonMobil confirmed it had received the letter.

In a statement, the company said it funded "organizations which research significant policy issues and promote informed discussion on issues of direct relevance to the company."
"These organizations do not speak on our behalf, nor do we control their views and messages," it added.
ExxonMobil said its reports "explain our views openly and honestly on climate change." The company said it accepted that carbon dioxide emissions were "one of the contributing factors to climate change."
Founded in 1660, the Royal Society is Britain's leading academy of scientists, and counts Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein among its past members.

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
 
Here is the latest. The idiots that deny climate change are just that. Idiots. the question is....Is it caused by man or climate cycles. Even if it is a climate cycle, there is no doubt that greenhouse gases are adding to the problem which will amplify the problem.

Therefore cutting green house gases will either solve the problem or at the very least? Stop contributing to it(making it worse).

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/video/abc-chasing-ice-time-lapse-080000723.html
 
Back
Top