Watch CPAC 2012 Live
Get our free daily email!
-

Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV? by Kenneth R. Timmerman
The Case of CH2M HILL: $2 Billion in Crony Stimulation by Rusty Weiss
The Truth about George Soros by AIM Staff
Lifting the Veil on WikiLeaks by AIM Staff
The Truth about Al-Jazeera English by Cliff Kincaid
Reaganomics and Obamanomics in the Media and in Reality by Malcolm A. Kline, Don Irvine and Spencer Irvine
How State Budget Battles Could Mean More Criminals Back on the Streets by Michael Tremoglie
Radical Muslims, Environmentalists and the Green Jihad by Mark Musser
Russian-Backed Propaganda Networks Claim Obama is a CIA Agent by Cliff Kincaid
Media Conceal True Nature of Flash Mob Racial Violence by John T. Bennett
NBC’s Mitchell Should Resign Over Telling Gaddafi’s Lies (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) by Cliff Kincaid
CASA de Maryland: The Illegals’ ACORN by James Simpson
Follow AIM on Facebook
Special Report
-
Recent Articles and Posts
The Newswire
Take AIM Podcast








In the beginning, I was alarmed simply for reasons that Big Business will ultimately benefit from the cap-and-trade program, which I oppose. Do you actually think a mandatory cap on emissions will stop large corporations who abuse GHG emissions? They’ll CONTINUE to abuse it and the Auction Permits will not give them incentives to reduce the emissions. They’ll simply buy more permits and if they do that, where’s the reduction? The reduction will be the poor small ranchers who have to pay taxes on farting animals, not to mention you and I having to pay higher fuel taxes to keep warm when the companies we deal with pass the costs on to us. There Scenarios, apparently, were the key factors that introduced this cap and trade system, I guess at one of their Geneva meetings. The Scenarios are alarming on their suggestions in different Scenarios.
The many scientists/professors use different systems in the same regions of the world and they seem to have major conflictions in their reporting. Some reports give conflicting material because none of them can decide whether to include certain demographics, amount of decades to use, or how many tree rings there really are on the giant Antarctica sapsucker (sarcasm), so ultimately, they report two systems within a region, which confuses even the scientists. One person, apparently still believes in the bogus hockey stick scheme which, apparently shows all testing as hockey stick graphs, because he didn’t us the proper testing beforehand, which I’m lost on.
There are also some members in different countries who try to outdo others by overriding them and going “to the top” with accusations. I think their problems are attempting is use too many justifications within the skeptic forums rather than ignoring skeptics; hence, the geo-political conflictions. They make the global warming issue fit their graphs. How else do you think they would get grants from international corporations, and world governments? Certainly they would like to continue with their calculations because they’re scientists with money coming in and many don’t so much care about the money as much as they care about the exposure/prestige when their article appears in a Scientific magazine. This gives them giant credibility (with the aid of mainstream media) and we all know the power of them and certain universities.
Their conflictions in reporting mechanizations suck and I think most of them are full of condensed owl crap. In the meantime better hit the lottery because the only ones that’ll be benefiting from “global warming” will be clipping Al Gore’s toenails.