I am an environmentalist and founder member of the Greens but I bow my head in shame at the thought that our original good intentions should have been so misunderstood. We never intended a fundamentalist Green movement that rejected all energy sources other than renewable, nor did we expect the Greens to cast aside our priceless ecological heritage because of their failure to understand that the needs of the Earth are not separable from human needs. … Although well-intentioned it is an erosion of our freedom and draws near to what I see as fascism.
Comment:
Like a lot of things, the fight against global warming isn't what it is claimed to be. It's not about saving the planet, it's about control. It's about politics.
One more thing that I thought about with regard to this supposed problem.
Whenever you burn fossil fuels, you also create water. Water is as much a byproduct of combustion as carbon dioxide. So, why not regulate water in the same way as you would regulate carbon dioxide?
Could it be because there's no way that you could get people to believe that water is going to create more global warming risk? After all, we need water to survive. Water covers 3/4ths of the planet. How could water be a problem?
But water vapor is also a greenhouse gas. It's a more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, for heaven's sake.
No comments:
Post a Comment