Difference between revisions of "Climate change/Preparation"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎A "sustainable" world?: ===Carbon War Room===)
(Geo engineering lobby)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
 
  The decision to demonize CO2, one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, human and plant, is not random. As Prof. Richard Lindzen an MIT atmospheric physicist puts it, “CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” [http://www.williamengdahl.com/englishNEO9Jun2020.php]  
 
  The decision to demonize CO2, one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, human and plant, is not random. As Prof. Richard Lindzen an MIT atmospheric physicist puts it, “CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” [http://www.williamengdahl.com/englishNEO9Jun2020.php]  
 
===Carbon War Room===
 
===Carbon War Room===
Sir [[Richard Branson]] has frequently called for [[geoengineering]] to combat climate change. He helped fund the [[Royal Society]]'s inquiry into solar radiation management through his [[Carbon War Room]] "charity".<ref>
+
Sir [[Richard Branson]] has frequently called for [[geoengineering]] to combat climate change. He helped fund the [[Royal Society]]'s inquiry into solar radiation management through his [[Carbon War Room]] "charity".<ref name=gu>
 
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/06/bill-gates-climate-scientists-geoengineering
 
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/06/bill-gates-climate-scientists-geoengineering
 
</ref>  
 
</ref>  
 +
==Geo engineering lobby==
 +
"There are clear conflicts of interest between many of the people involved in the debate," said [[Diana Bronson]], a researcher with Montreal-based [[geoengineering]] watchdog [[ETC]].
 +
"What is really worrying is that the same small group working on high-risk technologies that will geoengineer the planet is also trying to engineer the discussion around international rules and regulations. We cannot put the fox in charge of the chicken coop."
 +
"The eco-clique are lobbying for a huge injection of [[public funds]] into [[geoengineering research]]. They dominate virtually every inquiry into geoengineering. They are present in almost all of the expert deliberations. They have been the leading advisers to parliamentary and congressional inquiries and their views will, in all likelihood, dominate the deliberations of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ([[IPCC]]) as it grapples for the first time with the scientific and ethical tangle that is climate engineering," said Clive Hamilton, professor of Public Ethics at the Australian National University, in a Guardian blog.<ref name=gu/>
 
{{SMWDocs}}
 
{{SMWDocs}}
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
{{reflist}}
 
{{reflist}}

Latest revision as of 13:25, 23 June 2020

Concept.png Climate change/Preparation
(Disaster/Preparation)Rdf-entity.pngRdf-icon.png
Interest ofBill Gates

Preparation for Climate change includes carbon taxes and certificates.

"To understand the double-speak use of sustainable, we need to go back to Maurice Strong, a billionaire Canadian oilman and close friend of David Rockefeller, the man who played a central role back in the 1970s for the idea that man-made CO2 emissions were making the world unsustainable. Strong created the UN Environment Program, and in 1988, the UN Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) to exclusively study manmade CO2." [1] 

A "sustainable" world?

The outcome of carbon taxes is likely social control and freedom for the few, slavery and limited mobility for the many:

The decision to demonize CO2, one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, human and plant, is not random. As Prof. Richard Lindzen an MIT atmospheric physicist puts it, “CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” [2] 

Carbon War Room

Sir Richard Branson has frequently called for geoengineering to combat climate change. He helped fund the Royal Society's inquiry into solar radiation management through his Carbon War Room "charity".[1]

Geo engineering lobby

"There are clear conflicts of interest between many of the people involved in the debate," said Diana Bronson, a researcher with Montreal-based geoengineering watchdog ETC.

"What is really worrying is that the same small group working on high-risk technologies that will geoengineer the planet is also trying to engineer the discussion around international rules and regulations. We cannot put the fox in charge of the chicken coop."

"The eco-clique are lobbying for a huge injection of public funds into geoengineering research. They dominate virtually every inquiry into geoengineering. They are present in almost all of the expert deliberations. They have been the leading advisers to parliamentary and congressional inquiries and their views will, in all likelihood, dominate the deliberations of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as it grapples for the first time with the scientific and ethical tangle that is climate engineering," said Clive Hamilton, professor of Public Ethics at the Australian National University, in a Guardian blog.[1]

Become a patron.png August 2020: User:Robin is aiming to crowdfund the webhosting bill. Please help keep this site online. If 1/1000 of our users donated just $1/month, that would cover our costs. Be that one in a thousand!



References