Homestead mailing list

[Leslie <cayadopi AT yahoo.com>]

In your another post, you indicated that the research was destroyed a couple 
of decades ago and if I understand you correctly, maybe we shouldn't put so 
much weight on the fact the source material for conclusions was destroyed, 
just because it was before the global warming issue wasn't as much of a hot 
topic a couple decades ago as it is today. 
 
I can not help but think that there are some people who plan things out 
decades in advance.  Certainly at a minimum, there are CEOs who have a 
certain vision for a new technology, technologies that take decades to solve 
the science behind the new technology.  There are others who plan things in 
terms of decades also.
 
 Niccolo Machiavelli once said, "There is nothing more difficult to plan, 
more doubtful of success, more dangerous to manage, than the creation of a 
new system."   The planners of the world don't necessarily let on their 
behind the scenes goals, including telling those they use to further their 
goals. Especially if the goal is the creation of a new system.  The 
importance, imo, of the hacked emails reveals a behind the scenes game, once 
which suppresses the voices of objectors to the conclusions reached by some 
of the climatologist, the ones who's voices and conclusions are paraded by 
the likes of Gore.  Some of these scientists may not have any clue 
what-so-ever of the puppet dance of the puppet masters - others may - or 
there would be no scandal in the emails to supress the voices of opposition.  
I will repeat again, a really good scam needs truth woven in.  If a new 
system has been planned, it was worked out over decades - and there is a lot
 of evidence around that supports this is in the works.


Vladimir Lenin once said, “The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them 
between the millstones of taxation and inflation."  If the planners want to 
crush freedom and create a new system, they would use the millstones of 
taxation and inflation - something that is happening right before your eyes.  
The importance, imo, of the Copenhagen Agreement is the taxation element, the 
wealth transfer element, from the developed nations to the undeveloped 
nations.  The "mitigation" tax provisions is one large component that will 
crush the bourgeoisie of the developed nations....  

I will repeat for clarification, I do not dispute that global temperatures 
are X degree(s) warmer.  What I dispute is that sending tax money to 
developing nations will stop temperature change.  I object to the governments 
and individual people complaining about "global warming" and then doing 
nothing of significance at the personal or government level.

If I understand the arguments on the CO2 rise, the issues are (more or less, 
and certainly simplified here):

1) CO2 levels are rising faster than plants and the oceans can absorb CO2 
produced by plants and emmissions, 

2) O2 levels have decreased ~.095% since the beginning of the industrial 
revolution,

3) O2 makes up 20% of the atmosphere and a reduction of O2 levels to 19.5% of 
the atmosphere can lead to unconsciousness or death,

(Therefore, 20% - .095% = ~19.905 current O2 levels)

4) the incease is CO2 is increasing out of whack to O2 decrease (but I'm not 
clear if that means that O2 disappears faster.)



It seems the me that part off the CO2 problem is somewhat self-limiting.

1)  "IEA-gate".   IMO what is really important in the "IEA-gate" is that they 
have been significantly under-reporting oil reserves for a very long time.... 
Oil is a source of CO2 emmissions.  A lot of very bright people in the 
industry believe that widespread oil availability in the not so distant 
future is going to be limited to the wealthy and possibly only the very 
wealthy (due to extraction costs, depletion rates and lack of finding 
significant new sources).  As that occurs - CO2 emmissions will reduce - 
whallah CO2 becomes self-limiting.

2)  If the timeframe extends beyond current projections for widespread 
UNavailability of oil - then CO2 levels continue to rise and we hit another 
self-limiting wall.... as O2 levels drop the population declines from being 
killed off by a lack of O2 - something which the powerful supporters of world 
depopulation will welcome with arms open.


3)  Another self-limiting tactic unfolding before our eyes is Lenin's "crush 
between inflation and taxation" on the world's developed nations; the result 
may manifest in both a reduction in population, reduced food production, and 
very limited funds to purchase fuel to burn. 

I question - if this is such a threat to humanity, why hasn't the government 
completely outlawed emmssions?  Or limited everyone to say 5 gallong of gas a 
week, with a reduction to 2 gallons a week in 5 years, or some version 
thereof.... and made it mandatory to install consumption meters in all 
businesses, that automatically shut off electrical consumption at X KWH per 
day or per month?  By doing that the government cuts off a huge source of 
revenue - taxes on energy consumption.... back to Lenin and Machiavelli - 
crush the people with taxes - while creating a new system.  By stopping or 
significantly slowing the consumption of energy, the governments eliminate a 
huge source of tax - a huge source of wealth transfer from "us" to "they", 
the puppet masters.

I think there is a lot more going on behind closed doors than just the 
destruction of some of the source material.

As to polar caps..... On land we can see evidence of retreating glaciers.  
What about in the oceans?  Is there any evidence that the north or south 
poles were ever as thin or thinner than they are now?  Just curious.  I was 
standing on a mountain a couple weeks ago looking over the remains of a 
glacier field that took thousands and thousands of years to receed.  Your 
post below prompted the question.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
They have always been researchers who will cheat.  Yes, there is money 
involved here (research grants).  However, I really DO NOT think that it is 
so systemic that even ONE completely corrupts group (which I cannot say that 
this one actually is...) is enough to taint the overall conclusion.

For me, the proverbial straw was the release of the nuclear sub North Pole 
ice measurements from the late 50's, compared to modern ice measurements. 
Of course, Larson A, Larson B, North slope land changes didn't hurt the 
cause.

Chris


________________________________

From: Chris Clarke hstead AT nc.rr.com




>From RayZentz AT aim.com  Mon Dec 14 16:54:29 2009
Return-Path: <RayZentz AT aim.com>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 166914C00D; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:54:29 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from imr-da04.mx.aol.com (imr-da04.mx.aol.com [205.188.105.146])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A4B4C00B
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:54:16 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from imo-ma04.mx.aol.com (imo-ma04.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.139])
        by imr-da04.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id nBELsAwP001615
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:54:10 -0500
Received: from RayZentz AT aim.com
        by imo-ma04.mx.aol.com  (mail_out_v42.5.) id 3.c35.6baab15b (55738)
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:54:06 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from smtprly-de02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-de02.mx.aol.com
        [205.188.249.169]) by cia-md04.mx.aol.com (v126.13) with ESMTP
        id MAILCIAMD045-b2374b26b3f1363; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:54:06 -0500
Received: from webmail-d055 (webmail-d055.sim.aol.com [205.188.91.204]) by
        smtprly-de02.mx.aol.com (v126.13) with ESMTP id
        MAILSMTPRLYDE024-b2374b26b3f1363; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:53:53 -0500
References: <820d.24ceb99a.3857c034 AT wmconnect.com>
To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:53:52 -0500
X-AOL-IP: 158.91.25.125
In-Reply-To: <820d.24ceb99a.3857c034 AT wmconnect.com>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: rayzentz AT aim.com
X-MB-Message-Type: User
X-Mailer: AIM WebMail 29970-STANDARD
Received: from 158.91.25.125 by webmail-d055.sysops.aol.com (205.188.91.204)
        with HTTP (WebMailUI); Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:53:52 -0500
Message-Id: <8CC4B1F0F8289C8-48C8-DD29 AT webmail-d055.sysops.aol.com>
X-AOL-SENDER: RayZentz AT aim.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [Homestead] Climate-Gate
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:54:29 -0000


 Sorry, James. I misunderstood your intent. My apologies.

Anything followed blindly, unquestioned, and with no thought to alternative 
possibilities is going to be abused...

Religion, science, or any other ideology

 


Dr. Raymond Zentz
 
It is better to die a free man, than to live, a slave.

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: clansgian AT wmconnect.com
To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Mon, Dec 14, 2009 9:22 am
Subject: Re: [Homestead] Climate-Gate





> 
> >I take issue with only one part of your explanation, James. Reason alone, 
> is not sufficient to elevate to "Godhood". That reason must be tempered by 
> morals, or, if you will, ethics.

Ray, I'm not talking about  what 'must' or 'should' but rather what is.  

The fact is 'reason' and 'science' are treated as God.  People might harbor 
some doubts about their morals, some misgivings about their religion, but 
in the common mindset to doubt science is deemed to be the equivalent of 
madness.

This unmoving, uncompromising, unquestioned faith in it elevates it to the 
status of Godhood.


James</HTML>
_______________________________________________
Homestead list and subscription:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
Change your homestead list member options:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/rayzentz%40aim.com
View the archives at:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead