Welcome! Jesus Christ is my LORD and Savior! Romans 10:9-10,13; John 3:16

[For EU visitors, I do not personally use cookies, but Google or any clickable link (if you choose to click on it) might. This is in compliance with mandatory EU notification]

I am a Natural Born United States Citizen with NO allegiance or citizenship to any nation but my own, and will use this site as a hobby place of sorts to present my own political and religious viewpoints, as a genuine Constitutional Conservative and a genuine Christian Conservative.

Thank you for coming.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Year of our LORD Jesus Christ
2019
-- As of January 20, 2017
A Sigh Of Relief With The Inauguration Of Donald John Trump as President of the United States of America, And Hope For A Prosperous Future For All United States Citizens (we who are a nation called "the melting pot of the world"). We shall be great and exceptionally great again.

It is likely that the entries to this blog will be less frequent than in years past. I do intend to keep this blog active, and to offer insightful information and/or opinion (and sometimes humor and/or entertainment on occasion) when I do post.


Peace and Liberty. Semper Fidelis.










Friday, December 11, 2009

December 11, 2009 Copenhagen Climate Treaty: Day 5

http://www.breitbart.tv/1700-british-scientists-sign-statement-defending-integrity-of-global-warming-research/

On December 10, it was reported in Britain that 1,700 Scientists have signed a petition saying that Global Warming is a viable conclusion of Scientific Data. In contrast to the 31,000 scientists of the same or greater caliber who have signed a petition against their conclusion, a percentage of the 32,700 who have signed for or against Global Warming Science now stands at:



94.9% of Scientists against Global Warming Hysteria

5.1% of Scientists advocating Global Warming Hysteria



In other words, the lunatic fringe of Science is attempting to dictate to the super-majority of scientists what is or is not the correct interpretation of the scientific data? Even after they altered that same data to 6 times the greater negative intensity, and went alarmist because to offer the original data was not morally acceptable…because no one should have to tell the truth except EVERYBODY ELSE?!? Uh huh.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091211/sc_afp/unclimatewarmingdraft

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2938



As of Friday, December 11, 2009, the first Climate Deal “draft states that emissions should be halved worldwide by 2050 compared to 1990 levels, but it also suggests 80 percent and 95 percent reductions by that year as possible alternative options.

… Throughout 2009, a number of scientific and political conferences have called for global warming to be kept below two degrees Celsius. Still, the new draft mentions 1.5 degrees Celsius as a possible alternative goal.”

States: “Erwin Jackson of the Australian Climate Institute: “It would be a huge backwards step if this is adopted. There is no mandate for a legally binding treaty that would take in the US or the big developing countries like China and India,”






http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2932

The G-77 represents 130 small countries, and their delegation leader, Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aiping, feeling frustrated, on Friday staged a walk-out. We do not know if the Soros offer of 100 billion to their demand for 300 billion was part of the controversy that caused a temporary loss of temper. This seems more likely than a failure to lower the Carbon Emission goal, because that has already been de facto accomplished here on Day 5 of Copenhagen’s Farce.





The notion of limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius means that the Climate negotiators would allow an average daily increase of Global Temperatures to rise some 2.7 or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are currently. They were claiming a 6.7 - 7.2 degree increase, or something to that effect, before. But short of a nuclear war, which if in force near simultaneously striking a nation, could conceivably tempoarily wobble the Earth off its axis or solar revolution nearer or farther from the sun (if done in either 5 hour day or night window of the Mutual Assured Destruction times that the Earth is most vulnerable to being offset from her orbit)...other than that, such numbers are utterly ridiculous



Apparently, with a decrease of only 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, a disastrous climb of daily Earth Temperatures of 3.6 to 4.5 degrees over the course of a century where Glacial caps are melting and in 30 years could submerge coastlines to 40% of the Earth’s population by 2040 is seen as “acceptable”? Only a fraud and con-artist, or someone with such a low morality, would attempt to pass this onto us.



We are given the choice to choose, Great Evil or Super Great Evil…and are disallowed other options, be they the status quo or answers that will SOLVE the crisis.



Again, the quickest fix starts with reforestation and more intensive eco-friendly (instead of eco-stupid) recycling. Burning brand new food (such as corn) instead of feeding people, or wasting one fossil fuel at an equal or greater rate than the new bio-fuel one produces (such as the comparison from just outside Gustrow, Germany) is just plain stupidity.

How much fuel and emissions can we save RIGHT NOW by buying or drilling domestically, rather than creating all those tanker and super-tanker emissions from shipping the same fossil fuels from halfway around the world? We have the answers, but instead, like the politicians in Congress...the only voices and answers that THEY want to hear, are THEIR OWN.

To cede US Sovereignty, be it by a permanent Treaty or a rest of term Presidency, to a bunch of foudroyantly vacuate or corrupt One World bureaucrats for the sake of the man-caused disaster of emotional drivel and pseudo-hysteria, is just totally UNACCEPTABLE.

No comments:

Post a Comment