Sydney Morning Herald Suggests Some Outrageous Ways to Reduce CO2 Emissions

genesAn article published in Sydney Morning Herald claims that we should consider human engineering in a bid to decrease the amount of carbon dioxide we produce annually.

The options surrounding human engineering include:

  • The use of drugs so that humans can consume less red meat.
  • Hormone treatment therapy on fetuses still in the womb so they are born small in height.
  • The lowering of birth rates so that each family is limited to two children.
  • Use of drugs to create empathy and altruism within humans so that they can “do the right thing.”

You can read their full story here:

Global Warming From Chlorofluorocarbons, Not CO2

global-warmingNow we have a cheaper alternative to fix so-called man-made global warming as a new study suggests your aerosol  cans are to blame for global warming.

Remember back in the 80’s when the ozone layer had a hole in it supposedly from aerosol cans.

We all tried to do better but then the issue seemed to go away along with the large predicted hole.

Now the ever-increasing carbon taxes, renewable energy push at tax payer expense, etc. has created this global frenzy to rid the earth of any man-made causes of CO2.

If this meant feeding your cows something that causes them to have less gas even this was on the table.

In Germany this renewable energy push because of the man-made global warming disaster caused electricity prices to exceed 24 eurocents per kilowatt-hour.

People over there are paying as much for electricity as they do for their mortgage payment all over an issue not unlike the ozone layer issue in the 80’s that the world conveniently forgot about.

This recent study out of Waterloo shows how Chlorofluorocarbons are the cause of global warming since the 1970s and not carbon dioxide.

If the scientists can all back this new study I will quietly go along with it if just to stop the ridiculous expenses imposed on tax payers for a non-existent issue.

Based on the scientific research out of the University of Waterloo which has been published in the International Journal of Modern Physics B this week the graph shows a continuous decline of world-wide temperatures because of the depletion of CFC’s in the atmosphere.

ozoneMost people in their 30’s know and remember hearing how CFC’s are known to deplete the ozone but looking further into this based on statistical studies it has shown that CFCs are a key driver in global climate change rather than CO2.

So wow! The study suggests global warming rises are not solely because of CO2 or even the key reason for it which is what plants and the ocean, animals, and virtually every living thing releases into the atmosphere naturally.

I for one am not shocked at all by this new study suggesting CO2 is not to blame for global warming which is predictably to be buried deep in an archived area of the New York Times, AP, and Reuters news sources.

This study looked at data going back to the Industrial Revolution that convincingly makes plain that conventional Al Gore persuaded thinking is very wrong.

Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, biology and chemistry in Waterloo’s Faculty of Science said, “In fact, the data shows that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays caused both the polar ozone hole and global warming.”

Conventional theories forecast that global temps will be on the rise as CO2 levels keep going up which has been the case since 1850.

The interesting thing that keeps being swept under the rug by mainstream media channels is that since 2002 global temps have been declining which just so happens to match a decline in CFC’s in the atmosphere.

The CFC greenhouse effect shows a global warming of about 0.6 °C from 1950 to 2002 and a cooling effect on the earth since 2002, according to Prof Lu.

Prof Lu expects a cooling effect on the earth to continue anywhere from 50 – 70 years as the amount of CFCs continues to go down.

These new findings about man-made global warming are based on in-depth statistical analyses of observed scientific data from 1850 to the present, Prof Lu’s cosmic-ray driven electron-reaction (CRE) theory of ozone depletion and research he did regarding Antarctic ozone depletion and world-wide surface temperatures.

By proving the link between CFCs, ozone depletion and temperature changes in the Antarctic, Professor Lu was able to prove an almost perfect correlation between rising global surface temperatures and CFCs in the atmosphere.

In summary, we have a breath of fresh air here with a different take on man-made global warming instead of the same old propaganda put out by the Al Gore IPCC funded scientists who are on the UN payroll for putting out studies in support of man-made global warming caused by CO2.

The biggest challenge with CO2 reductions in the atmosphere is that it is virtually impossible to make any of the meaningful reductions in CO2 that are required based on IPCC UN requirements. Solar and wind energy investments don’t even come close to solving the perceived CO2 problem and it isn’t expected that they ever will.

Let’s get real for a moment, the whole purpose of the CO2 UN studies is to further the efforts in a global redistribution of wealth in the name of reducing CO2 in order to spread wealth evenly among all countries in some type of overarching communistic Utopian one world government ideal.

What has really happened with these carbon tax funds in places like Australia where their citizens voted for the tax is a slush fund for politicians to use for everything but a reduction in CO2. We have seen carbon taxes go to government health care, inferior renewable energy projects and other such diversions.

Diverting carbon taxes to national budgetary concerns is still better than the ultimate goal of the UN. They want to create a “green world order” which will be enforced by a structure of global governance and funded by an insane $45 trillion transfer of wealth from richer countries, as the globalists’ evil plan to centralize power, crush sovereignty while destroying the economy.

Let’s pray that Texans will see man-made CO2 global warming tax schemes for what they are. It’s not the bright rosey save the planet plan that it seems but an egregious wasting of tax payer dollars, inflationary increase in energy costs, and all the while enriching politicians friends and family that insider trade in many of the companies that the government gave money to that are now bankrupt.


Recent Global Warming Consensus Study a Marketing Ploy

consensusThere have been two viral consensus surveys that received notable publicity over the last few years and one these just recently became popular.

In both cases there was a very impressive upper 90 percentile consensus among scientists or scientific papers that man-made global warming was real.

When you look at these numbers that say 97 % consensus you have to ask yourself if that number is real because that is overwhelmingly high.

Seriously, there will never be a consensus so high for something that has shown to be impossible to predict even a decade or two out into the future.

The analysis involved warmest, John Cook, offering the public a 97 % consensus study to devour and re-tweet like mad which they did.

These studies that masquerade as a scientific fact often get devoured by liberal artist types who want to appear smart themselves in the scientific realm.

I’m not saying liberal artists are not smart they just aren’t scientists and so they should make sure what they are so happy to believe in is in fact true.

According to Cook’s study 66% of papers didn’t endorse man-made global warming. Cook calls this ‘an overwhelming consensus’ but I’m sorry I am not seeing how this is overwhelming or even a consensus?

His study confuses a consensus of climate scientists for a scientific consensus, not that a consensus proves anything anyway, especially considering they receive excessive government grant money for continuing to promote man-mad global warming studies.

consensusThe absolute monopolistic grants given to climate science in the last 20 years makes any consensus looking results entirely predictable.

When you look at the number of papers on global warming this is simply evidence in itself where all the government grants are going to.

Had there been more money given to skeptical scientists to question the IPCC you would see more papers coming from this group.

The level of government grants to these global warming climate scientists is unbelievably high and it’s not a conspiracy.

The IPCC has admitted the real overall purpose is to create a global carbon tax to fundamentally change global wealth by redistributing the wealth of the world across all nations.

Over $79 billion has been invested into climate science research and technology from 1989 to 2009 so of course you will have many papers showing proof of man-made global warming even though the facts are quite the contrary.

The papers listed as endorsing man-made global warming includes “implicit endorsement”, which makes this study more an example of funding instead of any so-called evidence.

Consider that money paid to believers is 3500 times larger than that paid to skeptics. Of these researchers many are studying carbon sequestion which is quite different that the study of outgoing radiation from the upper troposphere.

These scientists have probably never looked into the obvious assumptions about relative humidity in climate simulations because that is not their niche.

Many scientists concentrate on such things as changes in lemurs, polar bears, etc. as it relates to climate change but have no idea about ocean heat content calculations.

What you end up with are a bunch of “me too” scientists which works really well into the whole consensus idea which the public just eats up.

In summary Cook’s study is nothing more than activist propaganda which is needed to fund the $79 billion in research already given in the name of global warming, and the $70 billion spent annually subsidizing renewables. Carbon markets go through about $170 billion annually, and renewables investment amounts to 1/4 of a trillion dollars. Why do you think these consensus studies come out? Do you think it’s the truth or simply propaganda to influence public opinion so we continue to see man-made global warming science in a positive light?


Just so ya’ll know I write about this topic because a large carbon tax is coming down the pike for the US like it has in other countries if they are able to persuade public opinion in the US that doomsday really is just around the corner because of man-made global warming. It just isn’t true and their agenda is something completely different than what they claim it will be for. This is a large power grab the world has never experienced before and it’s not about saving the earth. Do you really want your electric bill to increase 100 % in the name of this bogus science?

Eats Up CO2 and Creates Useful Energy All At The Same Time

A materials scientists has recently disclosed some startling findings after an experiment where he discovered a way through chemical reactions to eat up carbon dioxide and at the same time create a solid very useful material full of energy.

Now creating a solid from carbon dioxide is nothing new but here is the important aspect to this: What usually happens when creating a solid from fossil fuels like oil and natural gas is the release of more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere then you started with.

This release of even more CO2 into the atmosphere defeats the purpose of creating the solid filled with energy if it is creating more of a CO2 hazard. The governments at this point will not approve of anything that will result in more unwanted CO2 then is necessary.

What Michigan Technological University was able to do is to develop a heat releasing reaction between carbon dioxide and Li3N that forms two chemicals: amorphous carbon nitride (C3N4), a semiconductor; and lithium cyanamide (Li2CN2), a precursor to fertilizers.

The team of scientists led by professor Hu found that the reaction converts CO2 to a solid material which is useful in and of itself.

The really exciting part is that the solid CO2 material is full of energy and when adding CO2 to less than a gram of Li3N at 330 degrees Celsius you get surrounding temperatures of energy that is 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,832 degrees Fahrenheit, which is about the same temperature of lava exiting a volcano. The publication is available at The Journal of Physical Chemistry

Now I am yet to be concerned that man is creating a horrible global warming scenario that will kill the earth of all living things in the next 20 years as some alarmists keep reporting.

This latest scientific breakthrough however, is a great thing in helping the environmental activists and their causes as there is a meaningful practical value this latest carbon capture experiment offers the world.

If the activists would spend more time on creating solutions like these I think their cause would be accepted a lot easier. Think about it, let’s spend money capturing CO2 emissions and at the same time use that physical carbon dioxide solid created through the process to create tons of cheap affordable energy. Both industry and environmentalists seem to win in this situation regardless of what extreme ideas they might hold to.

Electricity Bid helps you find an electric rate and provider to save you money and keep life simple.

Get in touch with us!