1) Nothing posted from Fox Skews is real, valid, or credible... even if they say it's quoted.

Moving on...
"plans to toughen up emissions standards for vehicles and large-scale pollution sources"

Are you prepared to say "greenhouse gasses" produced by vehicles, isn't pollution?


We need to upgrade our energy grids, very small and targeted attacks could bring down grids all over the Country. We now have the technology that can store AC power, the old energy grids aren't needed, producing power when it isn't needed, will soon stop.

I think some people don't understand what progress is.

Nothing you posted here proves a conspiracy theory of any kind, or even suggests one. What it does show is the right/republicans are willing to bitch at 100% everything Obama and crew do.

I did answer the question. More and more won't be able to afford to eat. Food is a weapon. It won't just be those countries though. Everywhere.

Interesting. I have also heard Schwarzenegger's speech on fighting global warming, too.

i asked where the more poor countries sit in regards to the nwo's plan being implemented via the UN. are they part of it all?

not about food or the cost of food or who can eat it. that doesn't apply.

again, what is the role under-developed nations have in the nwo and the un?

another way- what are the views of the leaders orchestrating the nwo takeover re: poor countries?

Use your own source.

You will not be progressing.

There is no left or right.

Obama can choke on a fried chicken wing, my car has full length race headers, a 3 inch catless midpipe and a 3 inch race exhaust with resonators.

The majority of the heads of state are just puppets. They all want the same thing. Power, money and control. This plan is only about that so they are obviously on board. They just want more than they have now. The people of those countries won't benefit. Just like we won't.

90% of EU Carbon Credits trading is fraudulent

Silent on widespread fraud

European police Europol reveals that there is fraud with 90 percent of CO2 credits traded. Revelations come after Ekstra Bladet has reported on the matter.

According to the European police force Europol, the European market for trading CO2 is permeated with fraud. In some countries up to 90 percent of sales related to fraud, reports Europol.

In total it is estimated that in the past 18 months companies have been defrauded out of more than 37 billion dollars. Europol said in a press release on the Danish CO2 market. In May this year the Danish quota system registered a massive increase in turnover of CO2 allowances, with 'several hundred million' allowances traded on the exchange.

At the time, a single quota cost 12.5 Euro - just over 90 pounds.

Europol is now a working group with representatives from six countries to combat widespread fraud.

Ekstra Bladet has a series of articles documenting that the Danish quota registry - registering trade allowances - are leaky as a sieve. Several accounts are registered under a false name or by companies that are under compulsory bankruptcy.

The Energy Ministry responded to Ekstra Bladet's criticism by saying that 'it is under control."

Until a few weeks ago, the former Climate and Energy Minister Connie Hedegaard had responsibility for running the register. Now it lies with her successor Lykke Friis.

Connie Hedegaard (head of COP15 and new EU Climate Commissar) will not speak to Ekstra Bladet on the matter.

http://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/viden...cle1267245.ece

*$7.4 Billion Dollars or 37 Billion Krone not $37 billion dollars

How much more do I need to read? I have read up on this, from what you posted to what I have heard in the media. The "actual printed facts" do not support anything you guys are saying.

You may say there is no left or right, but it's only the right spewing out this bad information and lies, with no actual facts to back them up.

The EPA guidelines you're talking about, is directly related to: "plans to toughen up emissions standards for vehicles and large-scale pollution sources"

It's a very extreme reach, very conspiracy theory, to relate this to monitoring of our home energy uses or any type of world government control or taxing.

i cant stand these dipshits...

You have to read shitloads. I spend probably 14 hours a day reading. What the media is telling you is tailored. Pretty much everything they tell you is fed to them via one or two sources. Have you not figured out they are controlled? I mean come on man.. Nearly every one of them has ignored the climategate fraud. The only way the news has been getting out is via alternative news. Even fox news is controlled. Hell they want this carbon scheme just as much as the others. They've been selling it for years and still are now.. They just want to capture that audience so they can steer them in the direction the powers that be want them to go..

and your still ignorant? WTF! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_385712.html

"The basic facts are incontrovertible. What do they think happens when we put 90 million tons up there every day? Is there some magic wand they can wave on it and presto!--physics is overturned and carbon dioxide doesn't trap heat anymore?" Gore asked, and pressed his point harder: "And when we see all these things happening on the Earth itself, what in the hell do they think is causing it?"

Fox faking first Iraq war broadcast

Your source is the king of lies himself.

Carbon Dioxide is a basic element of life. I would be like signing a petition to ban water

We all know the media lies, ratings make or break them. They faked a news broadcast of real things going on.... I'm not really surprised.

That doesn't mean the World or U.S. Government is actually controlling them. It means they screwed up and didn't have a man on the ground, so they faked it. It's not like the gulf war was fake.

Nah they aren't controlled. They just all ignored climategate and fed you Tiger Woods and Obama's 5 year friends crashing his dinner harmoniously.

I use what the media says and go look it up... otherwise I never know what 'they' are saying or even if they are saying anything. It's not like the media is always wrong or always hides the truths.

Of course they haven't exposed the UN Climate stuff (but they have reported on it), they have nothing to expose other than Internet conspiracy theories with no actual proof.

I posted the link to the interview and a quote by Al Gore... I don't see Karl Rove mentioned anywhere in that quote or interview.

Karl Rove is the king of dirt. He likes to sling mud and dirty up the truth. Al Gore is the king of lies. You know inventor of the internet?

I think you are delusional... Karl Rove helped cover up the outing of a CIA agent, used his office to setup political opponents for criminal investigations and helped manufacture the "WMD" lie. All of these things are common knowledge... show me how Al Gore lied... you can't without using outrageous conspiracy theories and ignoring pure science and common sense. A perfect example would be your thread title... you are taking what really happened and twisting it to fit your outrageous theories. Carbon Dioxide is only one of many greenhouse gases that Obama declared as a public danger...

The problem with you anti-Climate Change idiots is that you are just like the idiots that said the earth was flat and persecuted those who said it wasn't. You are just like a christian that claims that noone can have morals without christianity... or a politician that claims that their opponents are playing politics.

No proof? All of the "conspiracy theories" were proved. That those people were working in collusion. The code itself has explanation in it itself explaining how the data manipulation was done. They talk about how they are manipulating the data. They discuss breaking the law and ignoring and/or dumping emails so they can't be given up via FOI requests. The FDA regulations are directly from that research center. It ALL derives from there.. If they did nothing wrong then why is he no longer working there? It's a scam and a cover up. Many heads will eventually roll in all of this.. You can bank on that. Maybe we can put their own creation of a "World Court" to use and broadcast the head rolling live in HD.

It isn't called "greenhouse gas credits" it's called "carbon credits" based around carbon dioxide because they want to tax a basic element of life itself not pollutants..

You can't discuss with some people get use to it, because they can't bring You legitimate arguments.

what they are capable is only throwing insults and trying to down who opposed there stupid arguments :2 cents:

Al Gore is a fraud... Straight the hell up. His "ideas and theories" have been proven false.

Nobody declared co2 was a public danger, the EPA said Green House Gasses related to pollution, is a danger, just happens co2 is a green house gas as well. The EPA has admitted co2 is a building block of life, that forests have grown faster with increased co2, and so on.

They aren't trying to regulate co2 unless you're spewing toxic levels of it, which at mass levels is a danger, it can every type of plant life, it removes salt from water and so on.

Did you read what I posted any further than "Al Gore"? Obviously not... because you repeated what I said.

No... they weren't proven... only alot of speculation. Noone has proven that any of these scientists have done anything that you or the "Climate Gate" idiots are saying they did. There are just alot of emails taken out of context and selectively chosen to support a smear... one that was carefully orchestrated... I have no doubt that investigations will discover that a russian "hacker for hire" was hired to hack into the university email and plant the smear.

How is discussing ruining other scientists lives and careers because they are disproving your "theory" taken out of context? How is discussing dumping emails to avoid FOI requests taken out of context? How is the comments within the code explaining how the data is manipulated taken out of context? How is the BBC not reporting on the emails since they had them 6 weeks before they were put on the internet anything other than them withholding the information and acting in collusion themselves. AND then saying they were "hacked" rather than "leaked."

Moot issue - it won't be long before the main sources of energy are ones that won't emit carbon dioxide. Of course if the oil etc. companies let it happen instead of continuing to hang on to their dinosauric old forms of energy.

Moot issue - it won't be long before the main sources of energy are ones that won't emit carbon dioxide. Of course if the oil etc. companies let it happen instead of continuing to hang on to their antique forms of energy.

From what I understand of it, the whole "data manipulation" had to do with how different data bases were used to fill research gaps and does not indicate that data was fabricated. Also, I have yet to see any emails that say that data should be destroyed to avoid FOIA requests. Rather, some data had been discarded as it wasn't necessary to keep it for the research being done at that institution and that particular data was also available from the National Meteorological Service.

There's all sorts of decapitating stuff in there.

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emai...=889554019.txt

"As President Obama was busily traveling by greenhouse gas-emitting jumbo jet to Copenhagen for an international conference on the weather, Lisa Jackson, his administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, was busy telling the world that the United States government now officially believes carbon dioxide is a threat to public health and welfare."

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-ro...he-econom.html

“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.”
- Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation

“Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
- Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University

Once again, the people behind this agenda.

You typed out the opinion part of the article. The only actual quote of information I saw on the page was this....

"The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and now motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare."

Actually, in that article the word carbon only appears twice, both written by the author.

I copied the first Paragraph. Carbon monoxide is a pollutant. Not carbon dioxide, it is an element of all life. Most areas already have emissions testing. Carbon trading is trading carbon dioxide credits not greenhouse gas credits. Cows fart carbon dioxide, you exhale carbon dioxide. This is a tax on life... How many times does a person have to explain this??

http://www.nation-x.com/thestupiditburns.jpg

The primary health dangers of carbon dioxide are:
- Asphyxiation. Caused by the release of carbon dioxide in a confined or unventilated area. This can lower the concentration of oxygen to a level that is immediately dangerous for human health.
- Frostbite. Solid carbon dioxide is always below -78 oC at regular atmospheric pressure, regardless of the air temperature. Handling this material for more than a second or two without proper protection can cause serious blisters, and other unwanted effects. Carbon dioxide gas released from a steel cylinder, such as a fire extinguisher, causes similar effects.
- Kidney damage or coma. This is caused by a disturbance in chemical equilibrium of the carbonate buffer. When carbon dioxide concentrations increase or decrease, causing the equilibrium to be disturbed, a life threatening situation may occur.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

"Carbon dioxide is used by plants during photosynthesis to make sugars, which may either be consumed in respiration or used as the raw material to produce other organic compounds needed for plant growth and development. It is produced during respiration by plants, and by all animals, fungi and microorganisms that depend either directly or indirectly on plants for food. It is thus a major component of the carbon cycle.

As of March 2009[update], carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere is at a concentration of 387 ppm by volume"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide


There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Ca...s_climate.html