Med COIN-Bloggen kommenteres løbende på dagsaktuelle emner. Vi vil søge at præge debatten, sådan at de skjulte konsekvenser ved nye former for indgreb, afgifter, skatter, forbud bliver gjort mere synlige.
| Man | Tir | Ons | Tor | Fre | lør | Søn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
A new film [ called “3 Billion and Counting” ] challenges DDT myths and lies that have caused millions of needless deaths. [...]
Paul Driessen: - Three billion humans dead so far from malaria … and counting. And green ideologues work tirelessly to ensure that the callous, needless global death toll continues to rise. See this film. Tell your friends about it. Bring it to your college, club and local theater. It will make your blood boil, and change your perspectives forever about DDT and the radical environmental movement.
The only people who will gain from penalizing energy use and over-regulating our economy are: Emission traders like Al Gore, who hope to make billions of dollars from cap and trade; Companies that get favored treatment (low-cost emission permits) under cap-and-trade laws, and can make big profits from selling their excess permits; Government bureaucrats who will regulate our economy, and police the trillion-dollar cap-and-trade market to prevent fraud and price gouging; Universities, scientists, environmental activists and renewable energy companies, which will continue to share $6-10 billion per year in taxpayer money, to conduct climate research (mostly warning about imminent global warming disasters), and build wind, solar and other projects; and Third World dictators, who will get carbon offset and cap-and-trade money to deposit in private bank accounts, for selling their people’s right to build hydrocarbon-fueled electrical generating plants. Everyone else will pay dearly.
All Pain No Gain by Paul Driessen
VISIT:
Hvem er det, der er ekstrem i klimaspørgsmål? Er det dem, som forvolder skade på andre mennesker gennem deres ødelæggende politik? Eller er det dem, som beskriver de negative konsekvenser, som følger af førstnævnte politik?
Takket være et sammenfald af flere negative og markedsskadelige politiske initiativer kan man nu, allerede tre år efter at Copenhagen Institute begyndte at advare om de negative konsekvenser af klimapolitikken, iagttage disse i virkeligheden.
Imidlertid kan man være ret sikker på, at de miljøekstremister som har magten i dag vil fortsætte ud af samme spor, mens de vil kalde deres destruktive politik for moderat; og mens de vil hævde at de med deres sultskabende adfærd på en eller anden måde bidrager til at frelse verden.
Konsekvenser i Danmark: Største prisstigninger på mad i 24 år
(I andre lande rammes man naturligvis langt hårdere af klimapolitikken end vi gør det herhjemme, se link i billede nedenfor).
Aktuel kommentar: Grøn skade
Mere af det samme: Global warming tax hikes heading your way
Deficient computer models drive policies that destroy jobs, profits and family budgets by Paul Driessen
Den nye rapport [fra Verdensbanken] vurderer, at den stigende produktion af bioetanol har fået de globale fødevarepriser til at stige 75 pct., og dermed er hovedårsagen til den globale fødevarekrise. Børsen.
Rapport: Biobrændstof skyld i 30 mio. fattige - Børsen
World Bank: rocketing food prices have put fight against poverty back 7 years - The Guardian
Over 2 billion of the Earth’s citizens – including 95% of Africans – still do not have electricity. That means no lights, refrigerators, stoves, radios, televisions or computers; no modern homes, hospitals, schools, offices or factories. Instead, people breathe polluted smoke from wood and dung fires, and die by the millions from lung diseases.
The world should be rushing to their aid. Instead, in the name of preventing hypothetical climate change, environmentalists and rich countries oppose fossil fuel power plants in poor countries. To “protect wild rivers,” they obstruct hydroelectric projects. They resist nuclear power, on the ground that it is “inherently dangerous.” In short, they are telling a third of the world’s people:
“You cannot have modern, healthy, industrialized societies. Your only option is piddling amounts of expensive, unreliable electricity from wind and solar. To safeguard the world from speculative risks that we are concerned about, you must endure life-threatening dangers that perpetuate poverty, disease and childhood death in your destitute nations.” [egen fremhævelse]
Læs mere i - The real climate change catastrophe af Paul Driessen.
[A]larmists now say we must slash total global emissions by 60-80% by 2050, to keep CO2 at a “safe” level and “stabilize” a climate that has never been stable. If poor developing nations remain exempt (as they should), developed countries will have to go virtually carbon-free to reach this goal.
The impact would be catastrophic. Such actions would change life as we know it. They would give alarmist politicians, bureaucrats and activists a leading role in every housing, heating, cooling, transportation, manufacturing, agricultural, business and consumer decision.
They would terminate millions of jobs, cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and send living standards tumbling, while giving every US citizen a “carbon allowance” akin to what other parts of the world now “enjoy” (2.3 tons of CO2 per year in Cuba or 1.2 in India, versus our current 19.8 or Canada’s 17.9).
[...]
It’s a classic bait-and-switch tactic, repeated endlessly in a well-coordinated propaganda campaign by activists, scientists, journalists, bureaucrats, celebrities and politicians. They used similar tactics 30 years ago to excise DDT and other insecticides from disease control programs. Tens of millions died from malaria – and not one of the perpetrators has ever apologized, admitted error, or been penalized or otherwise held accountable for the unconscionable disease, brain damage and death they perpetuated.
Now they say we should trust them on climate change.
- Det skriver Paul K. Driessen i artiklen An economic suicide pact for Europe and the US.
"Vi har ikke ret til blot at være forbrugere af det, Gud skabte. Det er ikke længere et frivilligt valg, om vi ønsker at være grønne. Det er et spørgsmål om økologisk retfærdighed; om lige rettigheder for alle", skriver ærkebiskoppen Rowan Williams i forordet til "Sharing God's Planet" - ifølge Kristeligt Dagblad.
En følge af ovenstående synspunkt er, at flere religiøse i England nu bakker op om Kyoto-protokollen og målsætningerne om at reducere udledningen af menneskefrembragt CO2 - først lidt og så noget mere.
Fra Copenhagen Institutes side har vi en række artikler derimod peget på de negative økonomiske og socialt katastrofale konsekvenser ved Kyoto-protokollen.
- Men hvordan forholder det sig overordnet set med den "grønne filosofi", og forholdet til - eksempelvis - Afrika?
Dette spørgsmål søges besvaret af forfatteren Paul Driessen i bogen Eco-Imperialism - Green Power Black Death. En af dem, der giver bogen positive anmeldelser, er selveste medstifteren af Greenpeace Patrick Moore, der i forbindelse med omtale af Driessens bog er citeret for følgende: