Archive for the ‘climate change’ Category

Winds Turbines and Health

September 28, 2009

Editor:

Fairchild Television contacted me in June and in July their film crew came to the Ripley wind farm to shoot a feature about the negative affects of living near wind turbines.

Originally over 12 minutes I edited it so only the English parts remain. If I can get it translated I will post more of the video.

I wish to thank Sherona and her crew for making the trip from Toronto, also Fairchild Television for the original production.

Advertisements

Wind Turbine Conference in Owen Sound and Walkerton

September 26, 2009

Editor:

Plan to attend one or both meetings and listen to the Propaganda from various Ministries as they attempt to explain the lies that the wind industry is built upon.

Come and listen to Dr. Copes who Hazel Lynn (Medical Officer of Health) describes as a world- renown expert in the field.

A search of google turns up no information connecting Dr. Copes to any information about wind turbines and health.

I have called and left a message for Dr. Copes to provide me with information that would verify that he is an expert on wind turbines and health.

No Reply yet.

I will update when and if I get the information requested.

The entire wind industry is based on smoke and mirrors just like any other well delivered con.

Your community is at risk, as is your health, if you are unlucky enough to end up living near an Industrial Wind Turbine

Note- Shortly after posting this I received an interesting e-mail from a reader regarding Dr. Copes

This Doctor who will be giving the presentation Dr. Ray Copes is nothing more than a Industrialists’ hack who backs up Industry that is accused of pollution….he’s an expert on lead in lipstick…………he’s an expert on noxious fumes from smokestacks………………..all in favour of the Industry who pollutes…..so in essence he is perfect for Smitherman and company who hire nothing but the best “lap dogs” in their smoke and mirrors propaganda run on TV and publicly called “information meetings”……………..every single WCO member down that way should welcome this idiot to their township on behalf of Hazel Lynn who is touting that he is an “expert”…………..he is an expert in BS!

read his press comments form B.C. http://www.zoominfo.com/Search/ReferencesView.aspx?PersonID=68973884&lastName=Copes&firstName=Ray&searchSource=page&page=2

Please take the time to attend these meetings.


Grey Bruce
by Ken Hashizume

The health effects from wind turbines will be discussed at an upcoming forum.

The Grey Bruce Health Unit is organizing two conferences — one on October 1st in Owen Sound and another at Walkerton’s Jubilee Hall on October 6th.

Medical Officer of Health Doctor Hazel Lynn says they will have Ray Copes — Head of the environmental division of the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion — to speak at the conferences.

She says Copes held a similar position in British Columbia where he collected evidence on wind turbines and is a world-renown expert in that field.

She says Copes is a medical doctor with an environmental background in public health.

Doctor Lynn says they will also have someone from the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure at the conference.

She says they will talk about the Certificates of Approval that are required before construction and the government’s Green Energy Act.

Doctor Lynn says the forum will be set up where they will be a panel of experts delivering the information on their topic.

She says it won’t be a debate — rather an information session for municipal officials and residents.

Doctor Lynn says the health unit has no position on the wind turbine debate.

She says some people are more sensitive to environmental impacts than others.

She says she is not in a position to say whether wind turbines cause health problems because there hasn’t been a lot of scientific evidence that can prove it.

News Center

Enbridge Wind Farm Kincardine

Enbridge Wind Farm Kincardine

The Green Movement is After Your Children

July 27, 2009

Don't let the Greens Steal Your Child

Children die in harsh Peru winter

July 12, 2009

Editor:

Let me get this straight. The  global warming nonsense started as a fight against CO2 emissions which left unchecked would cause the earth to warm to the point of threatening the very existence of man. The ice caps would melt and the oceans would rise. The fertile farm lands would become parched from lack of rain and the top soil would blow away. People would starve to death.

We were told we must shut down fossil fuel generation of electricity and replace it with intermittent, expensive renewable energy. If we did not do this right away man would surely be doomed.

For the last three years I have said  global warming was just another fraud by the elite to push their  NEW WORLD ORDER SCAM  on the unsuspecting public.

Since I first wrote about the Global Warming Scam, it has been renamed Climate Change.

Welcome to reality folks. The CO2 emissions have continued to rise while at the same time temperatures have continued to  fall.

Read the story below and then start asking some hard questions. I put some links at the end to help you understand the fraud and who is behind it.

Almost 250 children under the age of five have died in a wave of intensely cold weather in Peru.

Children die from pneumonia and other respiratory infections every year during the winter months particularly in Peru’s southern Andes.

But this year freezing temperatures arrived almost three months earlier than usual.

Experts blame climate change for the early arrival of intense cold which began in March.

Winter in the region does not usually begin until June.

The extreme cold, which has brought snow, hail, freezing temperatures and strong winds, has killed more children than recorded annually for the past four years.

Full Story at  the BBC

Below are a few links to posts on my blog. Please look around as there are many other stories on global warming to be found here.

Global Warming the Big LIE!

THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX

Playing politics with global warming

I Was Fired by Al Gore!


Canada dead last on climate change

July 12, 2009

Editor: Read this post and then please leave a comment explaining it’s importance and the ramifications for Canada

Canada dead last on climate change

We can no longer use the U.S. as an excuse for inaction

By GERALD BUTTS, FreelanceJuly 8, 2009

Here is a sobering thought to consider as Canada prepares to assume the presidency of the G8 following this week’s meeting in Italy: Canada has for the first time replaced the United States as the worst performer on tackling climate change among G8 nations. This was revealed in the recent G8 Climate Scorecard, released jointly by WWF, the global conservation organization, and the global insurance company Allianz.

The report confirms recent events in North America: There is a new worldview in the U.S. as it rejoins the global community, while Canada continues with the “No, we can’t” approach adopted by successive Canadian governments.

The fact that the U.S. is rapidly leaving Canada in its wake on climate change is particularly important, as Canada’s political leaders have repeatedly claimed that Canada couldn’t afford to move faster or further than our major trading partner.

If that argument ever had merit, it certainly doesn’t now as we see the difference that political leadership can make.

More has been done in the U.S. in the last six months than in the last 30 years. We have seen tough new standards for greenhouse-gas emissions from cars introduced by the Obama administration. There have been massive investments in energy efficiency, green power and public transit. A renewed respect for science, backed by new funding. Climate legislation that would cap emissions from large industrial polluters has been passed by the House of Representatives, and could become law before the international negotiations over a new global deal on climate action in Copenhagen later this year.

As we prepare to participate in the Copenhagen climate summit in December and to play host to next year’s G8 meeting in Huntsville, Ont., we should be taking the longer view and building a legacy of a green economy that will make Canadians proud. The good news is that progress in the U.S. shows how much can change, and how quickly, with a simple change in mindset, from “No we can’t” to “Yes we can.”

Full Story at the Gazette

Al Gore Global Governance London July 7 2009

July 11, 2009

Al Gore speaking in London on July 7 2009 talks about the need for Global Governance.

Enron was the start point for the carbon scam  along with the UN Global Warming Scam

Maurice Strong and Al Gore

Find the typo and get a free carbon credit- LOL! Al makes his own maybe he’ll send you one

The Green Energy Act – Tom Adams

July 5, 2009

Tom Adams talks about new powers in the Green Energy Act that allows the govt. to impose unlimited energy taxes.  Fascism has arrived in Ontario!

David Suzuki Speaks in 1972 People = Maggots

July 3, 2009

Suzuki has been spinning the same crap for a very long time.  The man makes his living by instilling fear, mostly in young minds. Global warming is a fraud and Suzuki knows it. Or, he’s a complete fool and should be banned from the media. Meet David Suzuki – 1972 at the age of 32

Playing politics with global warming

June 12, 2009

Editor:

One more reason to question global warming.

We are being manipulated into accepting a global carbon tax propagated by dubious science.

If they succeed in their “EVIL” scheme, your life and the lives of your children will be negatively impacted forever.

Think about it!  A tax on ever aspect of your life because without carbon NOTHING exists.

Playing politics with global warming

Mark W. Hendrickson

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is widely regarded in the media as the ultimate authority on climate change. Created by two divisions of the United Nations, and recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, its pronouncements are received as if they come down from Mount Olympus or Mount Sinai. The common presumption is that the IPCC has assembled the best scientific knowledge.

Let’s take a closer look at this organization to see whether it merits such uncritical deference.

The IPCC’s Feb. 2007 report stated: It is “very likely” that human activity is causing global warming. Why then, just two months later, did the vice chair of the IPCC, Yuri Izrael, write, “the panic over global warming is totally unjustified;” “there is no serious threat to the climate;” and humanity is “hypothetically … more threatened by cold than by global warming?”

IPCC press releases have warned about increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere, yet Dr. Vincent Gray, a member of the IPCC’s expert reviewers’ panel asserts, “There is no relationship between warming and [the] level of gases in the atmosphere.”

A 2001 IPCC report presented 245 potential scenarios. The media publicity that followed focused on the most extreme scenario, prompting the report’s lead author, atmospheric scientist Dr. John Christy, to rebuke media sensationalism and affirm, “The world is in much better shape than this doomsday scenario paints … the worst-case scenario [is] not going to happen.”

Clearly, the IPCC does not speak as one voice when leading scientists on its panel contradict its official position. The solution to this apparent riddle lies in the structure of the IPCC itself.

What the media report are the policymakers’ summaries, not the far lengthier reports prepared by scientists. The policymakers’ summaries are produced by a committee of 51 government appointees, many of whom are not scientists.

The policymakers’ summaries are presented as the “consensus” of 2,500 scientists who have contributed input to the IPCC’s scientific reports. “Consensus” does NOT mean that all of the scientists endorse the policymakers’ summaries.

In fact, some of the 2,500 scientists have resigned in protest against those summaries. Other contributing scientists, such as the individuals quoted above, publicly contradict the assertions of the policymakers’ summaries.

To better understand the “consensus” presented in the policymakers’ summaries, it is helpful to be aware of the structure of the IPCC. Those who compose the summaries are given considerable latitude to modify the scientific reports.

Page four of Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work states: “Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group of the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter.”

In other words, when there is a discrepancy between what the scientists say and what the authors of the policymakers’ summaries want to say, the latter prevails.

Here is a specific example: One policymakers’ summary omitted several important unequivocal conclusions contained in the scientists’ report, including, “No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of observed climate change] to anthropogenic [i.e., man-made] causes,” and “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.”

These significant revisions were made, according to IPCC officials quoted in Nature magazine, “to ensure that it [the report] conformed to a policymakers’ summary.”

Elsewhere, Rule 3 of IPCC procedures states: “Documents should involve both peer review by experts and review by governments.”

In practice, IPCC sometimes bypasses scientific peer review, and the policymakers’ summaries reflect only governmental (political) review.

This shouldn’t be surprising. After all, the IPCC is a political, not a scientific, entity. It is the “Inter-GOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change,” not a “global SCIENTISTS’ panel.”

Also, “consensus” is a political phenomenon, a compromise, whereas scientific truth is not subject to obtaining a political majority.

(Actually, 31,000 scientists have signed a petition protesting the “consensus” that human activity is dangerously altering the Earth’s climate. Consider that against the 2,500 scientists cited by IPCC — many of whom publicly refute IPCC’s press releases.)

To its credit, the IPCC debunks many of the alarmist exaggerations of radical greens. However, its scientific authority remains irreparably compromised by political tampering.

When a U.S. State Department official writes to the co-chair of the IPCC that “it is essential that … chapter authors be prevailed upon to modify their text in an appropriate manner,” the political character of IPCC is plain.

The sponsors of the IPCC, the United Nations, and liberal American politicians all share the goal of reducing Americans’ wealth by capping our consumption of energy with a binding international climate change treaty. They are willing to resort to scientific fraud to further their goal.

In the words of Al Gore’s ally, former Under-Secretary of State Tim Wirth, “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing” by reducing Americans’ consumption of fossil fuels. Keep that in mind whenever the IPCC is cited in support of a climate treaty.

[Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is an adjunct faculty member, economist, and contributing scholar with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City (Penn.) College.]

The Citizen

Ontario Goes Green – Green Homes

June 8, 2009

The McGuinty govt. of Ontario has gone all the way in an attempt to save the planet by introducing the “Green Homes Plan”

In order to be truly Green, no manufactured building materials will be allowed in new homes.

Here are just a couple of the new models that will be available soon.

This home will be of interest  to the first time home buyer or those looking to downsize after retirement.

Below is a new complex and will be of special interest to those with a busy lifestyle. Besides all the other benefits of living in a MUD HUT you can see the community clothes drying facilities in the center courtyard.

Thank you Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Smitherman for your help in making Ontario a “Green Province” we can be all proud of.

Sorry if we questioned your vision.  Some thought you were an idiot.

Well, you proved us wrong!

In only a couple of weeks our new Green Homes will be powered  intermittently by Majestic wind turbines and we will have light and electricity………………sometimes.