• http://lulu.com/uspace USpace

    .
    If 10s of millions are made jobless and starving for practically nothing, I would say that it is not at all worth it.

    People talk about 2010 but I don’t see the evidence as to why 2010 should be so hot, besides, a .6 increase in warming hardly seems alarming anyway. Also, if CO2 is 50% heavier than the air how can it rise all the way high up in the atmosphere and then stay there?

    http://petitionproject.org

    absurd thought -
    God of the Universe says
    ignore Sun’s activity

    fire thousands of scientists
    who say warming comes first

    .
    absurd thought -
    God of the Universe says
    create a HUGE industry

    only employ those millions
    who perpetuate its lies
    .

    • Big Jim McBob

      6 degrees don’t sound like much to you? Well, then it must be okay! Good luck with that.

      Absurd thought: What if you’re wrong about what God says? When’s the last time you two talked? He wants you to take care of what He gave you.

      Absurd thought: If God gives you a nest, do you defecate in it? If he gives you a world, do you consider it yours to do whatever makes you wealthy if it destroys the gift?

    • steve

      10s of millions jobless?!!! Where does # that come from…. ??!! Its like the old argument that we have to cut the old growth forests to save jobs…. and when they are all cut down, what then? Energy independence is a very patriotic goal. Green energy is a proven job creator. Of course its not a great business plan reduce our oil dependence and buy our windmills from China, but we can be smart about that I hope. This is a win-win proposition. Of course I know we will ultimately pump and dig every carbon atom out of the earth for the cheap energy it is…. we’re human and weak. In the meantime, why not shoot for a loftier goal.

  • Joe Melnick

    Reducing carbon output to Kyoto or Copenhagen levels would result in tens or scores of millions out of work. That might have some collateral effects…

    We don’t even know if higher carbon dioxide levels would be a net benefit with increased arable land, longer growing seasons and increased food production in the third world. It’s still not as warm now as it was 800 years ago.

  • Dave McK

    On the plus side, carbon trading will make a flock of new energy billionaires and create a derivatives bubble as big as the whole world GDP!
    Guess who’s at the head of the line-

    http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/busy-man.html

    A confluence of interest.

  • Anon

    I think the author and artist both miss the point.

    Regardless of whether or not Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant or not, or whether that big yellow thing in the sky affects the climate the whole agenda is to establish Global Governance (BTW this is the new buzz word replacement for Global Government). And how do you ask do they intend to fund said governance .. simple they say , it will be funded by implementing CO2 taxation.

    The poorer countries will not be able to meet their financial obligations for their carbon emissions. The UN will then take assets of the debtor countries as collateral. Power grab anyone.

    And then there are people like Al Gore who are nothing more than useful idiots with vested interests.

    • http://greenupgrader.com Matt Embrey

      But it goes deeper than that. Do you really think humans would be able to come up with that on their own? The govenrment is working with the aliens on Galactic Governence! Actually, come to think of it, I would be suprised if God was involved in the conspiracy too.

      • lizzie

        No, mainly Al Gore, Obama, the UN, and millions of well meaning idiot sheeple. + that Rothschild and Rockefeller. CO2 is a byproduct of life and production. What better way to weaken the peasantry than by convincing them that if they produce anything it needs to be heavily taxed because otherwise the earth will die. Please watch the great global warming swindle.

        • http://liveoakmedia.net Matt Embrey

          Sooo, these omnipotent scammers were somehow able to convince the vast majority of the scientific community to go along with this scam? And they were savvy enough to start this hoax 50 years ago ensuring scientists would pervert their lives’ work to help perpetrate this massive fraud? Yeah, that sounds pretty reasonable. Btw, what taxes have been proposed by this elite cabal? Cap and trade in its proposed form doesnt involve a tax. Furthermore, it doesn’t regulate the “Peasantry” unless you consider multi-billion dollar corporations the peasantry.

          As far as the “Great Global Warming Swindle” movie is concerned, I have seen it, and it’s entertaining self-indulgent fiction. The assertions and assumptions they made in the movie have been and can still be indisputably proven to be erroneous. Even scientists that they cited came out afterwords and said that they were grossly misrepresented. Citing that movie is like citing a Michael Moore movie as “evidence.”

  • Adam

    You guys are pretty stupid eh? Copenhagen reduced their carbon footprint by – I forget how much but check the stats for yourself (but I know it was ALOT) – and since then their economy has grown by 30%!
    Also, – I’m canadian so this matters to me, but – Canada hardly reduced their carbon since Kyoto because Stephen Harper said – like you people are saying – that it would be bad for the economy in a time of recession. But wait! Now Canada has to pay a fine for that – THAT COMES OUT OF TAX PAYER DOLLARS! How good is THAT for the economy?

  • susanrally

    I have always been one to reuse and recycle, I treasure nature, animals, the earth, and I work at a thrift store where we try to repair and reuse all we can. But, the earth has gone through climate changes since the beginning of time. Several ice ages have come and gone without man’s pollutants interferring. Obama thinks HE can control the weather now? People who are buying into this farce will someday realize it’s another way to control people and destroy democracy. It’s a PLOY, people! Wake up!

    • http://greenupgrader.com Matt Embrey

      I realize I’m not going to convince you otherwise but let me just make a few points…

      1. This has nothing to do with Obama. Climate science has leaned this way before he came on the scene and it will after. Don’t allow your distaste for him or his politics to sway your opinion on global warming.
      2. Even if it turns out that that MAJORITY of scientists were wrong the unintended consequences of taking meaningful action against carbon will result in energy independence, renewable energy (there’s only so much oil and coal), and much less pollution (there’s a lot of other particulates and gases that will be reduced consequently when we reduce C02).

      I understand your argument and your position, the problem is that its based on pseudo-science that flys in the face of scientific consensus.