• Not Overheard In Copenhagen . . .

As the deceit of the limo-jet-caviar congestion of Copenhagen grinds that city into the forefront of an international tragedy, there will be no mention of humanity’s biggest challenge. Political correctness amongst the 15,000 attendees and the attendant fawning media will ignore the irony of this self-serving and bloated spectacle. They will be excused their extravagance and their obscene carbon footprint, culminated with the arrival of President Obama on Air Force One, and his unsparing entourage. Economic forces along with the political correctness will prevent discussion on the root cause of stress on the earth’s oceans, air, forests, rivers, and lakes. No one in Copenhagen will breathe a word about the world’s population.

The Copenhagen conference is a United Nations gambit using fear of global warming as the apocalyptic Armageddon that will squeeze hundreds of billions of dollars from the United States and Canada, and will redistribute the cash as it sees fit. Copenhagen is not a conference intended to clean up our environment.

Obviously all third world countries run by dictators, as well as the very few who aren’t, will clamor for consensus. Why wouldn’t they? More cash means more Bentleys and Escalades, another mansion or two, as well as a shipload of arms to maintain power. When you don’t care about your own people, but strive to retain absolute power over them with brute force, the least of your concerns is a distraction from foreign fanatics with a cause, but if it’s going to fill your coffers, . . . bring it on. Countries such as China and Russia with a wink and a nod will continue on course, unrattled or swayed by anything the international community has to say, yet surprisingly, they are the only two who’s populations are shrinking.

The only world leader who seems to have kept his wits about him is Canada’s Steven Harper. He is the only leader who has remained cool to jumping onto the Copenhagen climate change boondoggle. He appears to be the only one cognizant of the fact that Copenhagen will not clean up the air, and will only drag his taxpayers into deeper taxation. Obama, on the other hand seems oblivious. Obama’s Cap And Trade program should remain right where it is, … nowhere, and taxpayers should remain skeptical, unlike too many scientists who appear to be closing the books on the supposedly “settled science” of climate change. Absolute certainty, . . . um, is that another term for scientific stupidity? Does that not grate on the “scientific method?” Is this an example of progress toward truth?

Attention should be brought to addressing the world’s continuing population explosion. The Earth’s population has now crossed over 6.8 billion, rapidly getting to 7 billion in 2011. Let’s note that there were only 2.5 billion of us in 1950.

It is reasonable for each individual to have the right to enjoy a positive and fruitful life. Unfortunately, there is a reality that comes with each life here on Earth - each of us requires sustenance and each of us “processes” more or less of the abundance nature makes available. There is only so much we can process in the aggregate before nature’s support system stresses beyond its ability to sustain our needs, never mind our wants. The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is one of thousands of examples around the globe of the overburden we have imposed. Technology does not hold the magical answer to sustenance for our ever-burgeoning numbers, and technology will not bring an end to our abundant polluting. Even if we all lived in an Amazon of windmill trees, we would still choke the life out of nature around us.

Beyond the domain of political correctness, lives the game of economics, and the simple fact that the greater the number of people, the more there are consumers. Consumption supplies the fuel for economic growth - growth in products, goods, services and above all growth in the money supply. Growth in global population accelerates the concentration of wealth at the top of the economic food chain. Don’t expect the political or economic leadership to touch the population concern.

The only answer lies in the dissemination of as much education as possible, which will bring positive affect so that a bigger percentage of the earth’s population can exist beyond just the daily struggle to minimally survive. We should call for a World Population Conference, instead of a Copenhagen Climate Change conference, to be convened within a couple of years before the population trend irreversibly crashes into the brick wall of ignorance.

.... Read more!

• The Obama Nobel Is Not About Peace

We have suffered a week of apoplexy having endured a bombardment of reasons offered to justify a Nobel Prize awarded for expectations and promises rather than results. Our rationality has been addled as all corners of the MSM meandered through fantastic rationalizations. All appear to have missed the mark. The ideologically motivated radicals dominating the Norwegian Nobel Committee, are not seeking peace in the world, but are making a down payment on fortification for their own agenda. The United States and Canada will pay dearly if this agenda materializes.

Let’s first dispel any doubt that the offered reasons for awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace prize were ungenuine. He hadn’t warmed the king sized bed in the White House when he was nominated, which means that any real evaluation of his authentication as a Nobel awardee, other than the oratory of his campaign, was impossible. In the end, the Nobel Committee stated that it, “… attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.” Reality and common sense in both Norway and the White House seem to have vacated the premises.

Promises made by politicians are for electioneering, and they rarely see daylight. Remember when Obama made a bold and firm commitment that he would pull out of Iraq if he were made President? That was a defining and differentiating moment in the race to the Oval Office. Did he do what he committed to do? Are some of his phantasmagorical promises also the delusions of the Norwegian Nobel Committee? We will find an answer in the upcoming Copenhagen climate summit to be held in early December.

140 nations will meet in Copenhagen to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which runs out in 2012, with a global deal supposedly intended to limit CO2 emissions, reduce the destruction of rainforests, and help developing countries to become low-carbon economies. On the surface, the publicly claimed intentions of cleaning up our emissions from our air, our garbage from the oceans, and our toxins from the soil are lofty objectives very deserving of acclamation. The reality that will arise from the United Nations Copenhagen Climate Change Conference will prove to be something altogether different. What is to become the “Copenhagen Agreement,” will in fact be the largest international redistribution of wealth ever undertaken. The Earth and our environment will enjoy no benefit.

On December 10, Obama will receive his award in Oslo, just in time to energize the “Copenhagen” agenda. Whether or not he shows up at the UN meeting, the ideological intensions and expectations have been air freighted in the form a Nobel Prize. The Nobel awarded to Obama is a very personal stimulation to procure his support and therefore the financial commitment of the U.S. to a blueprint claiming to save the world.

The Copenhagen meeting in December will require that the United States and Canada annually transfer billions of dollars to the developing world as “climate debt” for past transgressions in their emissions of CO2. A key element in the penalization process will be the degree to which a developed country meets an allocated allowable emission schedule. Countries like the U.S. and Canada will have a tougher time than most, since it is always the last 10% or 20% that is the most difficult and most expensive to “scrub” from your emissions when you have already done more than most to clean up your own mess.

Developing countries will be using starting points with disastrous emission levels, comparable to that of the U.S. and Canada over a century ago. Minor improvements will give poor countries a leg-up on developed countries. Industrialized countries will in effect be penalized for already having well equipped, technologically advanced infrastructures. Canada in particular will very likely incur the highest penalties per capita since it is a net energy producer with production requiring extensive energy consumption, and it endures cold winters and hot, humid summers. This is not to say that every industrial sector should not strive to reduce its carbon footprint. We all should. The conundrum rests in what methodology to apply to the process and to enforcement given the reality that much has already been done by developed countries, and more is planned since all levels of society have become conscious of the need to reduce pollution.

The transfer payments from developed nations to poor ones will be made through purchases of unused “credits,” as well as through outright payments which will be made over and above the current billions distributed as foreign aid. Developing countries will be compensated for “lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity,” and the funds are to be divinely distributed by the United Nations. The UN will also be the arbiter of good taste in all things CO2 emissionable, including all approvals of emission scrubbing plans and the ensuing allocations of emission credits. The agreement also leaves room for developing countries to do absolutely nothing on emissions should they feel they are not receiving enough technological and financial support from developed countries. How is that for a backdoor to escape adaptation?

An invigorated and supremely powerful United Nations is in the offing. The principal justification for turning the UN into a true world power is this: The most advanced industrialized countries are responsible for global warming which in turn is responsible for the drought and famine being suffered by the poorest nations, ergo, the most developed countries owe cash to the undeveloped ones. How more obvious can the planners be than allowing rich countries to buy offsets rather than make emission cuts at home?

Kyoto’s good intensions have mutated into a politically charged Copenhagen draft agreement for a global plan to redistribute wealth to the tune of an estimated $1.4 trillion over the coming decade, which in and of itself will have little or no impact on pollution. The agreement’s impact on climate change will be even more amorphic, nevertheless, we can expect an abundance of fear mongering on the road to ratification.

Obama’s upcoming acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize and the invisible strings attached to it, while he is quite entitled to claim it, along with his plans for Cap and Trade, may prove to be an enormously expensive exercise for all taxpayers on this continent. The “Copenhagen” supporters on the Nobel Committee, on the other hand, are counting on it.

.... Read more!