Letters to the Editor and other People SpeakFROM-HALEAKALA TIMES
Global warming is a scam
Reality is finally setting in on the global warming hoax. As expected, the mainstream media is avoiding anything that might affect preconceived notions about global warming.
On May 12, 2009, in a nine-page memo the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) marked “Deliberative–Attorney Client Privilege” warned Congress that an EPA finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health is based on dubious assumptions and could have very large negative impacts on our already suffering economy.
The memo states that EPA did not thoroughly examine the relationship between greenhouse gases and human health, and challenged the notion that the EPA or anyone else had proven CO2 or other greenhouse gases to be harmful to humans.
This statement illustrates the global warming scam for what it is. Congress wants to regulate CO2 by passing the Climate Security Act, based on this scam. The result would be a carbon tax applied on anything with carbon in it, which includes all fossil fuels used in power plants, transportation, heating oil, manufactured goods... you name it.
It is estimated that this act will cost every taxpayer $2,000-$3000 more in taxes each and every year after implementation. This increased tax is supposed to give us incentive to find a way to decrease our CO2 emissions by 50 percent between 2000 and 2030. Try turning off your lights and TV for six months.
Scientific measurements show that CO2 is about 0.038%, or 380 parts per million — not even 1 percent of our atmosphere by volume. Real climate scientists, not Al Gore, have calculated that currently only 2.75 percent of this 0.038 percent atmospheric CO2 is from human sources.
Let’s see now. We must reduce our consumption of CO2 by 50 percent because we are contributing 0.00104 percent of the atmospheric CO2. Can anyone tell me just how much warming will be reduced with a 0.00104% percent reduction in our atmospheric CO2 contribution?
And just what reductions are planned in China, Russia, India and Africa? This is why regulating CO2 in the U.S. is so ridiculous.
May 20, 2009
DON GERBIG, Lahaina
More...
Global warming is a scam
Reality is finally setting in on the global warming hoax. As expected, the mainstream media is avoiding anything that might affect preconceived notions about global warming.
On May 12, 2009, in a nine-page memo the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) marked “Deliberative–Attorney Client Privilege” warned Congress that an EPA finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health is based on dubious assumptions and could have very large negative impacts on our already suffering economy.
The memo states that EPA did not thoroughly examine the relationship between greenhouse gases and human health, and challenged the notion that the EPA or anyone else had proven CO2 or other greenhouse gases to be harmful to humans.
This statement illustrates the global warming scam for what it is. Congress wants to regulate CO2 by passing the Climate Security Act, based on this scam. The result would be a carbon tax applied on anything with carbon in it, which includes all fossil fuels used in power plants, transportation, heating oil, manufactured goods... you name it.
It is estimated that this act will cost every taxpayer $2,000-$3000 more in taxes each and every year after implementation. This increased tax is supposed to give us incentive to find a way to decrease our CO2 emissions by 50 percent between 2000 and 2030. Try turning off your lights and TV for six months.
Scientific measurements show that CO2 is about 0.038%, or 380 parts per million — not even 1 percent of our atmosphere by volume. Real climate scientists, not Al Gore, have calculated that currently only 2.75 percent of this 0.038 percent atmospheric CO2 is from human sources.
Let’s see now. We must reduce our consumption of CO2 by 50 percent because we are contributing 0.00104 percent of the atmospheric CO2. Can anyone tell me just how much warming will be reduced with a 0.00104% percent reduction in our atmospheric CO2 contribution?
And just what reductions are planned in China, Russia, India and Africa? This is why regulating CO2 in the U.S. is so ridiculous.
May 20, 2009
DON GERBIG, Lahaina
More...
No comments:
Post a Comment