Cameron driving the climate change money train

The redistribution of money from ordinary people to the big corporations, enforced by government legislation, will continue apace under the Cameron Coalition.

The Huskie-loving huckster has signalled his determination to ignore flawed and questionable arguments about mankind changing the climate and to press ahead with the enrichment of the parasite class and their corporate sponsors. The Guardian reports Cameron as saying the coalition’s ambition is to be the greenest government ever formed:

“I passionately believe that by recasting the argument for action on climate change away from the language of threats and punishments and into positive, profit-making terms, we can have a much wider impact,”

However, the profit making will be the preserve of the corporates with poor old Joe Public footing the bill. Cameron wants his fellow parasites to make the economic case for action and points out that the low-carbon market is worth up to £3.2 trillion and forecast to grow by 4% annually. This isn’t money going into our pockets – it is money being taken from them to fund the global climate change scam that will impoverish hundreds of millions of people while making members of the elite even more wealthy.

It has already been happening as shown in a Sunday Telegraph article today. But as usual with that Barclay Brothers comic, the ability to join the dots, spell out the true nature of the scam and make the direct connection all the way back to Cameron and the parasite class, is missing.

A fraud of unfathomably immense proportions is being committed against ordinary people. Taxpayers’ money continues to be poured into scientific ‘research’ departments that can be relied upon to produce the necessary predictions of catastophic climate change, which in turn spawn legislation and new forms of taxation, that in turn is channelled to the corporates to provide ‘zero carbon solutions’ that have zero effect on the climate because the changes are overwhelmingly driven by nature.

The media spins the given lines without question despite physical observation conflicting with the doomesday predictions. Meanwhile the destruction of natural resources and genuine pollution are ignored and continue to worsen because there is no profit in it for the corporates. This is without doubt the biggest scam in history and people are allowing it to happen because of a misplaced belief that all these ‘experts’ and ‘leaders’ couldn’t possibly hatch such a plot. For God’s sake people, wake up.

About these ads

14 Responses to “Cameron driving the climate change money train”


  1. 1 Tufty 28/11/2010 at 5:28 pm

    “For God’s sake people, wake up.”

    I think many have woken up, but the tragedy is it doesn’t seem to matter. There is too much going for it if you have no principles.

    Climate ‘science’ is a cloak for a UN policy of wealth redistribution. It also has other ‘benefits’ for those with a desire to punish or a desire to control other people. It offers hard-line socialism for those politically inclined towards hard-line socialism. It offers an easy route to civic virtue and numerous opportunities to make money. It offers climate ‘scientists’ a soft option, good funding and prestige.

  2. 2 rogerthesurf 28/11/2010 at 9:29 pm

    Right on! Great Blog! In future years we are going to look back and wonder why we even fell for this baloney.

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

  3. 3 drewski 29/11/2010 at 5:01 am

    It appears that here are actually 3 fools born every minute — the author of this idiocy and the 2 bloggers above who chose to comment.

  4. 4 Derek Reynolds 29/11/2010 at 8:28 am

    Sadly ‘falling’ for it, and being constructively able to ‘do’ something about it, are two different items.

    It is vital that people get to know about these scams – and they are all driven by the common desire amongst the ‘elite’ to rid the planet of masses of people – but with voting yet another ‘scam’, and MP’s who ignore or refute a constituents claims, short of giving up everything that the vast majority of workers and families strive for like heat, clothing, food, transport to live off the grid under a haystack, precisely what are we to do?

    Before any semblance of mass rebellion arises, it will get to the point where the nations shuts down economically, people are forced out on the streets, schools close as do hospitals, transport systems cease to function, scraps are salvaged from food waste, and fights arise over sticks and pallets for fuel. Guess who will be immune from all this?

    As Farage has stated – they are very dangerous people. We’ve been in the pot a long time, and the gas has been on. It’s about to get hotter.

  5. 5 Edward Spalton 29/11/2010 at 8:40 am

    The scam has been apparent since a Professor Seitz exposed the manipulation of the 1995 IPCC report (“the worst corruption of the peer review process I have ever seen” – or words to that effect).
    He was denounced as being in the pay of “Big Oil”. That is standard procedure.

    The trouble is that the environmental correspondents and analysts of the mainstream media are part of the problem, drawing the reason for their salaries and excpenses from the official scare machine. If the scare stops, the political will for the huge funding of climate research will stop too and there will be no more stage managed stories to present and no more jollies to important conferences in far away places with strange-sounding names. . It is said that the amount of US funding alone is more in real terms than they spent on developing the atomic bomb – and the effects, if unchecked, will be far more devastating to mankind at large.

    Then there is the expansion of officialdom. Our nearby, medium-sized, English, county town now employs three officials to “monitor the carbon footprint”. Multiplied up over the country that is a large vested interest in “keeping up the scare” (to borrow an expression from the redoubtable General Nathan Bedford Forrest CSA). We will still be paying their pensions in forty years time.

    The indoctrination in schools is massive. Conventional geography teaching appears to have been replaced with “Climate Change Studies”. I know three sets of grandparents with young teenage grandchildren. They tell me that children are all “sold” on the AGW theory. If they try to put a sceptical point of view, they are told that shows that they “don’t care”. The young families concerned are being educated/indoctrinated in Scotland and England . In one case, a private school is following exactly the same agenda as the state sector.

    SO I fear this whole massive fraud will be a long time a-dying.

  6. 6 Agincourt 29/11/2010 at 10:08 am

    In 1641 Black Tom Strafford was accused of treason against the English people. He was first impeached, & then attainted – with fatal results for him. This historic solution to national problems is beginning to look relevant for today!

  7. 7 Autonomous Mind 29/11/2010 at 10:12 am

    Why thank you ‘drewski’. Like all ‘green’ fanatics and ‘warmists’ you have clearly put a lot of thought into your response and have countered with evidence that undermines the premise of my argument. Not.

  8. 8 Derek Reynolds 29/11/2010 at 11:11 am

    Edward Spalton touches on an important point, that of the education system being impregnated with ‘climatitis’. Deny at your peril and exam results, not to mention peer ridicule.

    But with conscientious parenting this can be scotched. There is a need for vigilance from all parents on school curriculum, homework, and all that is spoken of in debates. Exposure to many erudite scientific websites may be one guide, but also impress the understanding that school is a product of the government complying to government policy, and whilst not all is detrimental, objective analysis is required.

    Young minds should not be moulded. They should be shown the clay, and what can be done with it.

  9. 9 rogerthesurf 29/11/2010 at 10:22 pm

    The truth is in my mind that the British (and other governments) should step back and read Milton Friedman and Adam Smith and realise that governments, more often than not, make things worse.

    Here is a speech by an ex labour MP who years later admits his efforts simply made thing worse for our country.

    http://www.michaelbassett.co.nz/articles.htm

    Cheers

    Roger

  10. 10 rogerthesurf 30/11/2010 at 6:39 am

    Clive,

    With your permission, I would like to include your letter to the Chancellor as a link in my blog.

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

  11. 11 Andy Hunt 12/12/2010 at 7:34 pm

    I haven’t read anything at all here which negates the validity of climate science, just the usual paranoid finger-waving and accusations of some world-encompassing scam involving the supposed buying off of the vast majority of the world’s scientists.

    The link to the interview with the IPCC member actually reinforces the science, as he expressly confirms his belief in its validity. He is simply making the point that tackling carbon emissions is inseparable from economic development and fairness with developing economies who need energy to pull their populations out of poverty. To frame it as some kind of admission of a global conspiracy to defraud is disingenuous and typically hysterical of the “sceptic” (denier) contingent wishing to imprint their paranoid fantasies on reality.

    Unfortunately it seems to be true that most people are not motivated by a sense of the greater good, but by greed and personal interest. Cameron’s Tories are, unsurprisingly, of the opinion that success is far more likely to be achieved by appealing to people’s self interest, and whilst it is certainly true that large corporations undoubtedly stand to profit from the provision of clean energy infrastructure, ordinary people stand to save money on their bills through the reduction in the energy they use as a result of installing insulation etc. Plus of course, there is no evidence to suggest that energy provision at the scale we need (or want) it can be provided by anything other than large companies. And at the end of the day it is you and I who desire to use electricity, we are welcome to do without or even generate our own with our own solar panels and wind turbines if we wish. So who is really to blame for the money we pay to utilities?

    Not forgetting of course the obvious fact that fossil fuels are a finite resource and we need a way of replacing them, which means clean, renewable energy infrastructure which at present is not cheap. But hey – breaking news: energy is not cheap. We in the UK have been utterly spoiled with our North Sea resources over the last few decades, resources which are now mostly gone, a fact which the myopic conspiracy theorists here happily ignore. If we don’t develop some sustainable indigenous energy supplies we are likely to end up as another pipeline-dependent Russian province, something which the hapless anti-clean energy brigade would presumably be very happy to see.

    So please spare me the bug-eyed histrionics about climate change being an invention of the New World Order – it has barely got over its image of being the domain of sandal-wearing tree huggers. Anthropogenic climate change is real, and even if it were not, the need to transition away from nonrenewable fossil fuels remains.

  12. 12 Autonomous Mind 12/12/2010 at 8:46 pm

    Oh Andy, spare me. The science is worse than flawed.

    From the Yamal tree cores to the missing CRU data sets to the urban heat islands to the private admission that warming has stopped and the scientists could not explain why, the whole thing is a sham. Nothing you have said validates what passes for climate science.

    Just to underline the lunacy, to combat ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions scientists proposed a solution that would increase water vapour in the atmosphere. You don’t need me to tell you that is the most volumous greenhouse gas of the lot.

    And spare me the denier rubbish. Climate changes naturally and in cycles. Man’s influence on climate is ludicrously overstated. Anyone who believes the nonsense that reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by a fraction of a percentage point can make a 4C difference in temperature needs their head tested.

  13. 13 Edward Spalton 12/12/2010 at 9:11 pm

    Andy,

    The articles on CLIMATE DEPOT and WATTSUPWITHTHAT might be useful. Since the “Climategate” leaked documents showed some very sharp practice to adjust evidence, suppress unfavourable reviews and deny freedom of information requests, over 130 other “gates” have been brought to light. I have been following this On and off since around 1995 and there was clear evidence then that the IPCC report was doctored.

  14. 14 Edward Spalton 12/12/2010 at 9:21 pm

    Andy,

    The articles on CLIMATE DEPOT and WATTSUPWITHTHAT might be useful. Since the “Climategate” leaked documents showed some very sharp practice to adjust evidence, suppress unfavourable reviews and deny freedom of information requests, over 130 other “gates” have been brought to light- glaciers which aren’t melting, forests that are not going up in smoke etc. I have been following this on and off since around 1995 and there was clear evidence then that the IPCC report was doctored to fit the conclusions required by the policy makers.

    I wrote a series of five articles, tied in with my personal and business experiences over the years. They were published early this year on the SUBROSA blog, showing (amongst other things) how the climate alarmists changed the hymn sheet from global cooling to global warming in the mid Seventies. Some of those who were keenest to freeze us then are the keenest to frighten us with frying now- and are in positions of great political influence. If anyone would like copies I would be pleased to supply them


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive