Global Warming Scam-The Reverse Midas Touch
Global Warming Scam Bringing Big Trouble to Agriculture and Food
A global pattern has developed. It goes like this. The liberals have a host of reasons for developing faith in global warming; that it is man-caused, and that by imposing restrictions on masses of people they can save the planet.
Most political types want the power to regulate, the power to tax, and the political power. Some (like the corn growers), see personal gain. Yet others fall in that "catch all" of what Stalin called the “useful idiots” who supported communist goals around the world without understanding its nature.
Today’s useful idiots are the uneducated people lacking faith in God, who flock to causes to make them feel they have some use, some purpose. The Hollywood types fall in this category. They, in turn, generate great numbers of people who just want to be “in” and follow like sheep. Finally, there are the scientists who have been corrupted by the grants and programs and the unbelievable flow of research dollars to those who will support the faithful with dubious science.
But, as pointed out in the article cited below, there is no free lunch. One reverse Midas touch is the negative economic impacts of substituting bio-fuels for gasoline from oil.
Comments on the bio-fuels disaster building here.
A similar parallel is occurring with respect to the U.S. subsidization of the bio-fuels market. The theory states that without government subsidization of the industry, the technology will never develop. Therefore, the government must subsidize the bio-fuels business in order to help the industry gain the necessary efficiencies. Once these efficiencies have been gained, the bio-fuels industry will be ready to successfully contribute an important carbon fuel substitute. The problem is that the bio-fuels industry has been subsidized for years and there is still no end to the industry’s largess in sight – even with oil at $80 a barrel.
Bio-fuel subsidies result from excessive lobbying from the bio-fuels industry just as much, if not more, than the true scientific merit of the technology. Consequently, we are missing out on the opportunity to judge whether bio-fuels are actually a viable future alternative fuel, and if so, to what extent. As such, society may be missing out on a more appropriate energy source in the future
Perhaps more importantly, the subsidization of bio-fuels is imposing a real and direct cost on people and the global economy in the here and now. When people’s demand for a product increases by more than its supply, prices rise. The growing subsidies and encouragement of bio-fuels use is increasing the demand for the source materials of bio-fuels: corn, sugar, soybeans and other crops at a faster pace than supply. Greater demand for agricultural goods is driving up food costs around the world. For instance, the price of corn is up 40% this year. The price of soybeans is up 75%. The price of wheat is up 70%. And, it is not just the prices of agricultural commodities. Higher prices for crops are increasing the prices of beef, pork, and chicken. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (the arbiter or consumer prices in the United States), while overall prices were rising 2.0% in August of this year, the prices of food and beverages were rising twice as quickly, at a rate of 4.2%. Rising food and grain costs are also squeezing many businesses, which can lead to lower profits, slower wage growth, more unemployment or a combination of these impacts should the squeeze continue.
Once these costs are recognized, it is difficult to describe bio-fuels subsidization as a win-win proposition. Instead, like everything else, encouraging the use of bio-fuels comes with a cost. Recognizing these costs is critical because in life, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
There are also, grave, perhaps irreversible, environmental impacts that rival even the wildest global warming believer’s dire predictions. The facts surrounding these threats will be discussed in a subsequent post.
I will close with a personal note. As a child, I was raised to believe it was a sin to waste food. The impacts of these teachings remain strong today. It troubles me to see food wasted so we can roar down the highway. Especially when we are burning food (bio-fuels) based on dubious and fraudulent science.


4 Comments:
I fully agree that the food prices have gone up. Even in India, the government is importing wheat at a highe cost than that paid to the indian farmers while procuring wheat from them.
Money saved is money earned. this dictum holds for "Fuel saved is fuel earned". So why not save fuel that is gas/diesel etc.
I understand all cars/three wheelers/two wheelers can save fuel 20% plus if the cylinder heads of engines are grooved as per the patented invention of Mr Somender Singh(details can be seen in his web site www.somender-singh.com). More than 150 cars and a number of two wheelers modified by him are on indian roads and some have done upwards of 100,000Km. Many car enthusiasts in USA an other countries have carried out this modification in their cars. Self made modification costs about US$100.
If the car industry adopts this technology in their cars, the new cars will save gas.
Subsidy can be provided to existing car owners to get their cars modified instead of subsidizing bio diesel and bio alchol for a substantial reduction in crude cosumption.
A 20% reduction in crude consumption can eliminate the dependence of USA on import of crude oil.
http://francks.blogspot.com/2007/03/debunking-global-warming-scam.html
AS THE PLANET HEATS UP, YOU DON’T HAVE TO!
AP – Al Gore has for a long time been full of hot air. He has a vivid imagination about the world. His mistrust of the seasons seems to stem from an episode of the Twilight Zone, in which the Earth gets too close to the Sun. Al is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures needed to create a more effective global antiperspirant.
If college roommate Tommy Lee Jones, could save the City of Los Angeles from errant magma (Volcano), and the world entire from an extraterrestrial cockroach (Men In Black), then Al Gore deserves a prize for his initiative to combat global wetness. The same trusted formula that kept our leaders dry during the Cold War. Clinton tested: guaranteed to leave no trace.
The committee that awarded Al Gore the Nobel Prize included a university president, a theologian, and a consultant. Moe, Larry, and Curly could not be reached for comment. And, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with whom Gore shares the prize, does not carry out research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena. Given the newfound legitimacy for Global Warming, a “private group” out of Monterey, California, vies to seed the North Atlantic with iron oxide to help plankton absorb carbon dioxide (greenhouse gasses). Strategy: “cleanup the planet and make a buck on the side.”
So, to whom did Al Gore donate the $1.8 million dollar Nobel purse? Who is the Alliance for Climate Protection? Perhaps not coincidentally, Al Gore is the founder and chairman of the § 501(c)(3) alliance. Three guesses who the IPCC are. But why should science be immune from grasping politicians? Aren’t they doing “good” for the collective? Aren’t their distortions justified, because they’re better than? Isn’t this the psychology of the left? After all, when it came to pirating the “Peace Dividend” to create that new cultural paradigm, didn’t the ends justify the means: http://theseedsof9-11.com
When you do a Google search for “Climate change,” one of the top results that always appears is the Wikipedia entry for this subject. Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Unfortunately, most of the people that sign up to edit this article are pro-global warming evangelists who exhibit a clear pro-global warming agenda. This means that everyone from school children to the media are getting this highly biased view of climate change, when they research this topic via a Google search. Fortunately, however, ANYONE can sign up on Wikipedia free of charge in less than one minute and edit this article. I would encourage everyone to sign up and contribute to this article, to ensure it presents the correct view of global warming. Simply go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change (or just go to Google and search “Climate Change” to find the Wikipedia entry right near the top) and start editing! Then you can help to provide the proper balance that is needed in this highly biased article.
-S. Khratzinski
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home