Archive for the ‘london’ Category

Kyoto supporters have no idea

April 3, 2008

 Editor
Happy to see Mr. Goldstein finally taking the gloves off. He should have been saying this a long time ago. Better late than never I guess.

The National Post has been telling it’s readers for quite some time that global warming is a fraud, and it is.

 The Toronto Star- enough said.

I would hope by now these papers would have some understanding of the wind energy situation. It is part of the global warming – Kyoto fraud. 

The govt. says it must put up wind farms to save the environment from global warming and to meet our Kyoto commitments. 

What they are doing, is running over the rights of the citizens of Ont. 

It’s ironic that the very people that say the windmills must be installed to save the environment, have no problem trashing the environment of the people already living there.

Global warming is a fraud as is Kyoto and the wind farms.

It’s time the papers got on board and starting stating the truth about wind farms. 

 l

Lorrie Goldstein

Thu, April 3, 2008
Kyoto supporters have no idea
It’s time for an adult discussion about our continued participation in the Kyoto Accord and it’s not the one we’ve been having.

Our politicians have been talking to us as if we were children. It’s time we put a stop to it.

Kyoto isn’t about turning off the lights during Earth Hour.

It’s not about buying hybrid cars, or installing solar panels on your roof or replacing your incandescent lightbulbs with fluorescents.

Those are all environmentally worthy activities on their own merits.

fctAdTag(“bigbox“,MyGenericTagVar,1);

But they are insignificant compared to what is required for Canada to comply with Kyoto.

This isn’t about David Suzuki making cutesy commercials with children, while calling for politicians he disagrees with to be jailed.

It’s not about Liberal Leader Stephane Dion’s empty boast we can make megatonnes of money by cutting megatonnes of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

It’s not about Prime Minister Stephen Harper paying lip service to Kyoto, while his actions suggest he doesn’t believe a word he’s saying.

It’s about this. Are you willing to dramatically lower your standard of living, and that of your children and grandchildren, to comply with Kyoto?

Are you willing to pay much more, directly in carbon taxes and indirectly for almost everything you do, use or consume, to effect a sudden, dramatic drop in Canada’s GHG emissions?

BILLIONS LATER

Are you willing to have Canada ship billions of dollars every year to the Third World for GHG mitigation projects, the success of which won’t be known until you’re dead?

Finally, if we do all that, do you trust every other country, from China to the United States, to do the same?

This isn’t about vilifying Alberta for developing the oilsands — just as every province wants to develop its natural resources.

It’s about realizing if we comply with Kyoto, our standard of living will fall.

It’s not going to be easy. People who suggest it is are making long-range predictions about our economy they cannot possibly know. What their studies actually suggest is that it’s easy to pretend to comply with Kyoto.

Finally, if you publicly nod your head in agreement when environmentalists preach we have no choice because the alternative is the Earth’s destruction — but privately don’t believe it, or don’t believe we should make enormous sacrifices now for something that may or may not happen decades or centuries from now — then get off the Kyoto train, because you won’t have the stomach for it once it really gets rolling.

My view is the previous Liberal government of Jean Chretien irresponsibly ratified Kyoto in 2002, at a time when even his top aide, Eddie Goldenberg, has since acknowledged the Liberals knew Canadians weren’t ready for the sacrifices it would require.

NORTHERN NATION

I’d go further. I’d argue Chretien and the Liberals had no idea what they were signing, no idea of its implications for a huge, cold, northern country like our own that relies on using fossil fuels for its standard of living.

For all their self-righteous rhetoric now, if implementing Kyoto was easy, why didn’t the Liberals do it when they had the chance?

As for Harper and the Conservatives, they should stop telling us they agree with Kyoto, while doing nothing to implement it.

The adult question is: Are we in, or are we out?

My vote’s out. What’s yours?

Is Nimby the new "N" Word

March 19, 2008

Editor
Over the last year and a half I have had the opportunity to attend many council meetings dealing with wind farms. I have been called a Nimby several times, even though I am not directly affected, nor will I be, by any wind turbine installation. So, why was I called a Nimby? Could it be that I asked questions the govt. and the wind industry don’t want to answer, or can’t answer, without exposing the fraud.

The word Nimby was chosen to effectively remove the voice of, and belittle, a segment of society.

The word Nimby is being used in the same context and for the same purpose as the word “Nigger’ was used in the past. To marginalize people.

Years ago, Blacks were run off their land without compensation. The same thing is happening today. People who can no longer deal with the negative health affects of living near wind turbines are being forced to move, without compensation.

In most cases the people who are, or will be affected by a wind farm have no one to turn to for help. Not their council, upper levels of govt. or the media. They are alone in their misery, just as the Blacks were years ago. I know how these people feel because I have met many of them and they deserve better.

Sure, I have talked to people in the govt., the media and people on the street who agree with me and the other “Nimby’s” but are afraid to, or not allowed to speak out. Kind of reminds me of Black history.
When I was twelve, I’m 53 now, I got to experience “Nigger” first hand. A black family moved into my town, I believe they were the first. They had a son the same age as me and we became friends.

I remember walking down the street with him when some older guys started calling him “Nigger” and to go back where he came from. You could see the hurt in my friends eyes. What did he do wrong? Nothing. Did he do something to those calling him names? No. So, why did they call him names, because that is what Sheeple do.

Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaCite This Source

Sheeple is a term of disparagement, a portmanteau created by combining the words “sheep” and “people“; a reference to herd mentality. It is often used to denote persons who acquiesce to authority, and thus undermine their own human individuality. The implication of sheeple is that as a collective, people believe whatever they are told, especially if told so by authority figures, without processing it to be sure that it is an accurate representation of the real world around them.

Ignorant people, with lazy minds is what allows govt. and media to continue to use propaganda instead of truth. Both govt. and marketing firms know this and use Sheeple to their advantage.

Sheeple let others think for them. So when the media and govt. tags someone or some group with a derogatory label, like Nimby, the Sheeple not only accept the tag, they use it.

The same thing has happened with “Global Warming”. Anyone, and that includes some of the best scientists in the world, are called Skeptics and Deniers.

These names are used to discredit and marginalize anyone who would dare question or attempt to engage in debate.

The way I see it, you are either a Sheeple or a Nigger.

Call me a Nigger.

They fought for their rights.

Instead of joining the Sheeple on Earth Day and turning out your lights. I suggest we turn on the lights, the music and celebrate the fact that

Nimby’s, Skeptics and Deniers still roam the earth.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)Cite This SourceShare This nig·ger <img nigger is now probably the most offensive word in English. Its degree of offensiveness has increased markedly in recent years, although it has been used in a derogatory manner since at least the Revolutionary War. Definitions 1a, 1b, and 2 represent meanings that are deeply disparaging and are used when the speaker deliberately wishes to cause great offense. Definition 1a, however, is sometimes used among African-Americans in a neutral or familiar way.
Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive. a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.
a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised.

Please spend some time educating yourself about renewable energy, the Green Movement and the New World Order. They are all connected.

Give your mind a well deserved workout, spend some time with a Nimby, Skeptic or a Denier. They won’t bite

Global Warming – Settled Science?

February 24, 2008

Usually a scientific theory takes many decades to become established, and only after the most rigorous testing under many different scenarios, does it achieve ‘scientific consensus’. However, when it comes to Global Warming its proponents claim that there is no argument or debate to be had. Their current crusade is to turn Global Warming into something that supposedly no honest and decent person can disagree about, as they have already done with ‘environmental sustainability’. Al Gore often says “Climate change is a moral issue.” In other words it is all about you, and your destructive behaviour.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has confidently announced ‘the science is settled’ on man-made Global Warming. Their most recent set of reports declares that “the debate over the science of climate change is well and truly over. Unified international political commitment is now urgently required to take action to avoid dangerous climate change.

However, the science is not settled. Many renowned climatologists strongly disagree with the IPCC’s conclusions about the cause and potential magnitude of Global Warming. More than 20,000 scientists have now signed the Oregon Petition which criticises it as ‘flawed’ research and states that “any human contribution to climate change has not yet been demonstrated.” Dr Chris Landsea resigned from the IPCC because he “personally could not in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.”

The IPCC claims that more than 2,500 respected scientists and policy makers collaborate to write its climate change assessments but less than a tenth of these ‘experts’ actually hold qualifications in climatology, most were in fact educated in the political and social sciences. The panel that edits and approves the reports are appointed by the United Nations, and more than half are actually UN officials. Dr Richard Lindzen, who is a genuine climate expert, resigned from the IPCC process after his contributions were completely rewritten by the panel.

It’s not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else. They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policymakers has the input of a handful of scientists, but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, and of environmental organizations, each pushing their own agenda.” – MIT’s Professor of Atmospheric Science Dr. Richard Lindzen on the IPCC report.

Czech President Klaus stated “It is not fair to refer to the UN panel as a group of scientists. The IPCC is not a scientific institution. It’s a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavour. It’s neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists, and UN bureaucrats, who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.”

Asserting ‘the science is settled’ ignores the debate that still rages, and the constant shrieking by alarmists like Al Gore reveals that Global Warming is being used to push a hidden agenda. They are not really interested in the science at all. Proclaiming that “climate change is real” ignores the Earth’s constant, natural warming and cooling cycles.

Vikings settled in Greenland and raised crops and cattle 1000 years ago, while Britons grew grapes in England. Four hundred years later, Greenland froze and the Vikings starved. Europe was gripped in a Little Ice Age. The Thames froze all the way up to London. Another surge in temperatures saw widespread global droughts in the mid-1600s. Temperatures plunged again around 1700’s. The globe warmed in 1800-1940, cooled for the next 35 years, then warmed again. The 1940-1975 cooling period occurred despite the fact that industrial production and release of CO2 vastly accelerated during this time. This led to political and media scaremongering about Global Cooling, and the threat of a new ice age.

Again, this arose out of a misunderstanding of long term temperature fluctuations. Scientists have discovered that the sun not only has a regular 11 year cycle of sunspot activity. They have now discovered a significant 200 year cycle. Sunspot and solar radiation activity almost exactly parallel temperature changes on the Earth. It correlates well with the anomalous post-war temperature dip, when global carbon dioxide levels were rising very fast. The increase in solar radiation prevents the formation of clouds, which have a cooling effect on the planet, therefore the temperature rises.

Full Article 

Wind Power is an Illusion

September 2, 2007

From the Editor

The Govt. is just as bad as the wind industry. They know wind power is an illusion. The illusion is going to cost the Ontario taxpayer big time. Make sure no one gets a majority on Oct. the 1oth. A majority govt. is nothing more than a four year dictatorship of which you can’t do anything about.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

Monday 10 April 2006

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North)

My concern is that we’re creating this illusion out there that we’re doing all these wonderful things in power.

One of the things that really was amazing is that the government is counting on the total capacity of the wind power generation as fact. This all ties in to our need for power, so we don’t have another blackout, another natural disaster. To date: Melancthon Grey wind project, which is 67.5; the Kingsbridge wind project, 39.6 megawatts; Erie Shore’s wind farm, 99 megawatts; the Prince wind farm, 99 megawatts; and the Blue Highlands wind farm, 49.5. That’s a total of 354.6 megawatts. The minister keeps saying that’s how many megawatts she has coming on-stream.1730

The reality is that in this book put out by the Independent Electricity System Operator — which I think is a government body, part of the old Ontario Hydro — it says, under an asterisk at the bottom, “For capacity planning purposes, wind generation has a dependable capacity contribution of 10% of the listed figures.” So of the 354.6 megawatts that Minister Cansfield talked about today, according to our own Independent Electricity System Operator, we really only have 35 megawatts, if you consider 10%.

The rest of the story