Archive for the ‘Eco-terrorism’ Category

…is easy to find, but this one takes the dumb shit prize.

What a fucking moron.

Only a moron can make the connection that a tornado was caused by global warming.

They did the same shit when it was global cooling that was going to destroy the world.

The sky is falling…

Flashback 1975: Outbreaks Blamed On Global COOLING…

Democratic Senator uses Okla. tornado for anti-GOP rant over global warming

While many Americans were tuned into news coverage of the massive damage from tornadoes ravaging the state of Oklahoma, Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse took to the Senate floor to rail against his Republican colleagues for denying the theory of anthropogenic global warming.

Whitehouse spent 15 minutes chastising GOP senators and justified his remarks by alluding to states that seek federal assistance in the wake of natural disasters.

via Democratic Sen. Whitehouse blames Republicans for tornado | The Daily Caller.

Reblogged from Watts Up With That?:

Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post

The press release below is from Wiley, where they worry that the polar bear can't find enough sea ice. Meanwhile, billboards proclaim the uptick in polar bear numbers thanks to conservation efforts and other factors. See below for 10 reasons to consider why we shouldn't worry. - Anthony

For polar bears, it's survival of the fattest 

One of the most southerly populations of polar bears in the world – and the best studied – is struggling to cope with climate-induced changes to sea ice, new research reveals.

Read more… 2,256 more words

Great billboard! Global warming scam exposed.

…up front. I’m easily amused.

…one has to really love this Nazi propaganda. I mean UK global warming scam video.
No pressure…
Douche bags.

Reblogged from Watts Up With That?:

Newsbytes from the GWPF, Lies, Damn Lies And Green Statistics

Almost all predictions about the expansion and cost of German wind turbines and solar panels have turned out to be wrong – at least by a factor of two, sometimes by a factor of five. --Daniel Wentzel, Die Welt, 20 October 2012

When Germany’s power grid operator announced the exact amount of next year’s green energy levy on Monday, it came as a shock to the country.

Read more… 528 more words

Smells like victory. The green energy morons were warned that the cost would be unsustainable. Morons.

…is poised to destroy American jobs and force energy prices through the roof. If he is reelected, he’ll unleash the full list of job killing, energy spiking regulations that the EPA has held in check until after the election. You haven’t wondered why he hasn’t promised that global warming will end in his next term?
The EPA has got to be stopped! If Obama is reelected, then there is no hope for America’s future energy independence.

Obama’s EPA Plans for 2013
By S. Fred Singer

The November elections will determine the direction of US climate policy — and therefore also energy policy and the pace of economic growth: jobs, standards of living, budget deficits and inflation.  Obama has already promised to make climate change the centerpiece of his concern — with all that implies: “Green” energy policy, linked to loss of jobs (Keystone pipeline disapproval), rising gas prices (ethanol mandates), and crony capitalism (Solyndra).

By contrast, Romney is a climate skeptic — and Ryan has been quite outspoken: the perfect anti-Gore.  The science supports Romney-Ryan — notwithstanding the UN-IPCC, and the bulk of the climate scientists living high on the hog on government grants.

All of this emerged from campaign rhetoric — but it needs to be spelled out more clearly.  Note that Obama no longer promises to “heal the Earth and stop the rise of the oceans.”  He has also been uncharacteristically quiet about his efforts to “make electricity prices skyrocket.”  But there is more in store if he is re-elected and unleashes the full regulatory apparatus of the EPA.

…is a long and undistinguished list of losers.

When the government is in the business of picking businesses to support, they usually fall flat on their face. In the case of the Obama Administration, the failure of the Green Energy sector is colossal and continues to be under reported in the MSM.

In fact they do talk about individual failures, but they don’t talk about all the past failures of green companies when they do it, giving the impression that it’s a rare thing.

Fail.

President Obama’s Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures
Ashe Schow

It is no secret that President Obama’s and green-energy supporters’ (from both parties) foray into venture capitalism has not gone well. But the extent of its failure has been largely ignored by the press. Sure, single instances garner attention as they happen, but they ignore past failures in order to make it seem like a rare case.

The truth is that the problem is widespread. The government’s picking winners and losers in the energy market has cost taxpayers billions of dollars, and the rate of failure, cronyism, and corruption at the companies receiving the subsidies is substantial. The fact that some companies are not under financial duress does not make the policy a success. It simply means that our taxpayer dollars subsidized companies that would’ve found the financial support in the private market.

via The Complete List of Obama’s Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures.

…is a waste of time, money and will do nothing to improve the health, or safety of foods.
Voting NO on this POS proposition is a no brainer. I’ll bet the morons in Kalifornia screw this up anyway.

In fact it will create problems through out the country for food producers.
It’s a proposition written by a trial lawyer for trial lawyers.
This proposition needs to be shit canned.
Here’s a great article about it.

“Genetically Engineered” In California: A Food Label We Don’t Need
By Gregory Conko, Henry I. Miller

October 08, 2012
Originally published in Forbes

From “food miles” to farmers’ markets, it seems that consumers have never been more interested in the ways their food is grown. That’s one motivation for Proposition 37, an initiative on California ballots in the coming election that would require labeling of “genetically engineered” (GE) foods.

It is a bad idea, and also an unlawful one. We discussed its legal problems in a previous Forbes.com column.

Labeling advocates claim that GE foods are somehow “unnatural” and might be unsafe. At the very least, they say, consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, so, why not tell people if their corn flakes have been engineered and let them decide what to buy?

That might sound reasonable and seem to reflect how our choice-driven marketplace works, but there are several problems with it. For starters, GE foods are not in any way a meaningful “category,” which makes any choice of what to include wholly arbitrary. Nor are they unsafe or any less “natural” than thousands of other common foods. If anything, they are likely to be safer, because the techniques used to make them are far more precise and predictable than older, conventional methods of genetic improvement. But as federal regulators have said, a mandatory label implies erroneously a meaningful difference where none exists.

More

…from the debate last night was this.

It’s actually a segment:

MR. ROMNEY: Jim, let’s — we — we’ve gone on a lot of topics there, and — so I’ve got to take — it’s going to take a minute to go from Medicaid to schools to —

PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Inaudible.)

MR. LEHRER: Come back to Medicaid, here, yeah, yeah, right.

MR. ROMNEY: — oil to tax breaks and companies overseas. So let’s go through them one by one. First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. And it’s actually an accounting treatment, as you know, that’s been in place for a hundred years. Now —

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It’s time to end it.

MR. ROMNEY: — oil to tax breaks and companies overseas. So let’s go through them one by one. First of all, the Department of Energy has said the tax break for oil companies is $2.8 billion a year. And it’s actually an accounting treatment, as you know, that’s been in place for a hundred years. Now —

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It’s time to end it.

MR. ROMNEY: And — and in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that’s about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives, and you say Exxon and Mobil — actually, this $2.8 billion goes largely to small companies, to drilling operators and so forth.

But you know, if we get that tax rate from 35 percent down to 25 percent, why, that $2.8 billion is on the table. Of course it’s on the table. That’s probably not going to survive, you get that rate down to 25 percent.

But — but don’t forget, you put $90 billion — like 50 years worth of breaks — into solar and wind, to — to Solyndra and Fisker and Tesla and Ener1. I mean, I — I had a friend who said, you don’t just pick the winners and losers; you pick the losers. All right? So — so this is not — this is not the kind of policy you want to have if you want to get America energy-secure.

The second topic, which is you said you get a deduction for getting a plant overseas. Look, I’ve been in business for 25 years. I have no idea what you’re talking about. I maybe need to get a new accountant.

(Emphasis mine).

…that’s the title I would have chosen, but I suppose I can be rather crass.

This is a most excellent essay on the EPA and how it has been the ruin of many and is bound and determined to ruin America’s prosperity.
If it weren’t for the EPA, gas would be $1.50 a gallon or even less.
They exert an authority that is totally contravening to the Constitution and the principles of freedom.
Read on.

Dethrone the EPA
By Robert Zubrin

The current presidential campaign hinges on jobs and the economy. Yet most of the debate has centered on peripheral issues such as the Bush tax cut, when there is a Tyrannosaurus in the room that is being virtually ignored. That monster is the EPA.

The EPA is today the primary enemy of economic growth in the United States, and through it the world. The damage that it has done, is doing, and threatens to do in the future is immense. Virtually since its birth in 1970, the agency has committed one atrocity after another. As one of its first acts after coming into existence, the EPA banned the vital pesticide DDT. (This was done is direct defiance of the investigatory court findings of federal judge Edmund Sweeney, which showed that DDT was not a danger to humans or wildlife.) As a result, large regions of Africa and Asia were given over to malaria-spreading mosquitoes, killing tens of millions of people and aborting economic development.

From 1859 to 1971, the U.S. oil industry grew virtually continuously, in the process serving mightily to drive our economy and win our wars. But that growth was stopped dead in 1971, and sent into decline thereafter as the advent of the EPA and the accompanying National Environmental Policy Act made it increasingly difficult to drill. The global economic and strategic catastrophe this has caused can be seen in the graph below, where I show U.S. oil production, OPEC oil production, and non-U.S., non-OPEC oil production from 1960 to the present. The graph shows that U.S. oil production grew at an average rate of 3.2 percent per year during the 1960s, peaking at 9.6 million barrels per day (mpd) in 1970. The growth of OPEC production, meanwhile, which had been extremely rapid during the 1960s, came to a screeching halt in 1973, when the OPEC powers replaced the previously dominant Seven Sisters’ policy of expanding production to fuel the world economy with an alternative policy of constricting production to loot the world economy. As a result, OPEC production, after plummeting and then slowly rebounding, is still where it was in 1973. Thus the entirety of the increase of world oil production over the past four decades — during which time the world economy has doubled in size — has come from non-OPEC, non-U.S. sources. As the graph shows, this has increased at a rate of 3.4 percent per year since 1970, essentially the same as the average U.S. growth rate from 1960 to 1970. With the green line on the graph, I show how U.S. production would have developed had it matched other non-OPEC sources and continued to grow at its pre-EPA rate. In that case, instead of producing 5.7 mpd today, we would now be producing 35 mpd. Together with other non-OPEC production, this would have totally marginalized OPEC and constrained oil prices below $30 a barrel today, with associated gasoline prices of $1 to $1.50 per gallon. Just as they did in the 1950s and 1960s, such low oil prices would fuel dramatic U.S. and global economic growth.

Instead, however, because of the de facto collusion of the EPA — which has sabotaged America’s oil industry and prevented the use of clean-burning methanol fuel, which we could readily and cheaply make from abundant natural gas or coal — OPEC has been able to operate as a highly effective cartel, imposing a massive and extremely regressive tax not only on America, but on the entire world economy, and using the proceeds to fund the promotion of terrorist movements and the development of nuclear weapons intended for our annihilation.

More