Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Frank Pastore :: Townhall.com Columnist
Carbon Offsets: Eco-Extortion, Green Guilt, and the Selling of Indulgences
by Frank Pastore
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


There are some things you just gotta do yourself. Someone else can’t lose your weight, quit your addiction, parent your kids, or confess your sins.

You have to do it.

And, just as you can’t buy indulgences that allow you to go right on sinning without any consequences, you can’t buy carbon offsets that allow you to go right on polluting without any consequences, either.

Neither God nor science works that way.

Yet, the selling of “voluntary carbon offsets”—eco-indulgences—is a $55 million per year industry, involving over three dozen companies worldwide. Total sales are anticipated to double both this year and next, and entrepreneurs are clamoring all over themselves for a piece of the action.

And it’s all a scam.

Yes, the money is very real, but the alleged benefits to the environment are fake.

Paying someone to plant a tree to “offset” the carbon footprint of your SUV is just plain silly. Yet there are thousands of people spending real money on these kind of indulgences every day. Why?

The answer is that it’s part green guilt, part eco-extortion, and part just plain novelty—like those pet rocks, mood rings, and Magic 8 Balls from the ’70s. People want to brag to their friends about how eco-sensitive they are. Which, of course, is part of the whole green guilt, eco-extortion thing.

The dictionary defines extortion as “the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.”

What is the “force” used to pressure people into wasting their money on carbon offsets?

It’s called “green guilt,” and it’s the peer pressure generated by people like Algore and The Live Earth Hystericals (see here) to “Do something!” about the “threat” of catastrophic, man-made global warming.

Of course, he and his green buddies aren’t going to stop living their giant carbon footprint lifestyles, which is why they came up with the whole scam of selling you a voluntary carbon offset—which is simply a self-imposed, guilt-motivated pollution tax.

So, you give them your money, and they tell you it’s okay to feel good about yourself because you’re “Doing something!” about global warming. It’s almost like a bad late-night infomercial slogan: “Got green guilt? Wanna do something to fight global warming? Can’t attend one of our Live Earth concerts? Buy an offset!”

See, in the liberal mind, it’s better to “care” about a problem than it is to actually solve it. Whether it’s poverty, racism, substance abuse, teen pregnancy, illegal immigration, public education, the threat from radical Islam or nearly any other problem we face, liberals would rather make the effort to convince you how much they can empathize and “feel your pain,” than they would to actually do the hard work of implementing policies to fix the problems or reduce the threats.

~~

Last week, in a great article in the Los Angeles Times entitled “Can You Buy a Greener Conscience?,” author Alan Zarembo exposed how the whole voluntary carbon offset scam works by profiling one of the leading companies in the offset business, Native Energy. It’s an exposé on the need for governmental regulation of the budding industry.

Basically, Native Energy is a middleman that buys offsets from places like wind farms and methane farms, for say $2.00 to $4.00 a ton, and then they turn around and sell those offsets to the public at “market price,” which is usually between $9.00 to $15.00 a ton. So far, so good.

The problem is, Native Energy is only buying a small portion of these alternative energy suppliers but they’re declaring a benefit as though they bought the whole thing. They buy a 1 percent piece of the action but claim 100 percent of the benefit.

That’s like buying 1 percent of a race horse and keeping 100 percent of the winnings. Not good.

Furthermore, Native Energy is buying little pieces of companies that are already designed and financed, then acting as though their investment was critical to the whole operation.

The offsets they sell aren’t making, creating, or saving anything additional. That wind farm or methane plant was going to get built anyway—with or without the sale of their offsets. So, in reality, buying offsets from Native Energy does nothing to benefit the environment—just as buying indulgences do nothing to benefit your soul.

But, none of this is about reality, anyway. It’s all about caring, and compassion, and green guilt.

Take it from someone who knows.

Zarembo includes a quote from Davis Guggenheim, director of “An Inconvenient Truth,” who says this about the selling of voluntary carbon offsets: “It’s a powerful first step … The choice of doing this rather than nothing is not a choice … All of us knew when you’re doing offsets that the theoretical and symbolic quality to doing this is as important as the practical quality.”

The symbolic is as important as the practical? That’s liberalspeak at it’s finest.

We have to “Do something!”

Since their founding, Native Energy has sold about 1 million tons of CO2 offsets. At, say, an average of $10 a ton, that’s a lot of “something.”

So, the clearest thing that has been done through the sale of offsets is the rise of a very profitable, middleman industry capitalizing on guilt.

Too bad it’s not “doing something!” to actually reduce a single carbon footprint.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
The Frank Pastore Show is heard in Los Angeles weekday afternoons on 99.5 KKLA and on the web at kkla.com, and is the winner of the 2006 National Religious Broadcasters Talk Show of the Year. Frank is a former major league pitcher with graduate degrees in both philosophy of religion and political philosophy.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Frank Pastore's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
misguided guilt
Liberals feel guilt from eating transfats, smoking cigarettes, and contributing to global warming by driving. These are all substitute sins to appease their God given conscience which must be continually being pricked over real sins in their lives. To dodge real issues of conscience...like abortion, promiscuous sex, and terrorism they employ substitute 'sins' and get hysterical about them. You have hit the bullseye, because libs use a religious formula to enforce their laws....identify sin, admission of guilt for sin, repentance and absolution (taxes).

Well, well, well ...
So that's how it works! They say if you just follow the money, you can learn a lot. The next step is to figure out who owns these companies. Anyone know?

The true cost of carbon offsets....
In a preliminary calculation that I intend to publish later I have estimated the actual cost of sequestering a ton of carbon to be about $640.00 which is markedly higher than the "underpriced" $10 to $20 per ton discussed in this article. From the point of view of the biochemistry of photosynthesis there is really only one way to sequester carbon and that is to take biomass out of the biosphere and then store it indefinitely in "dry storage." A simple means to do this is by the purchase of wood and by the purchase of a perpetual lease on dry silage into which the wood is to be stored. You can look up the price of wood and the price of silage rent and do the math yourself. You may not get the precise estimate that I calculated, but you will get something well over $100 per ton.

could work if done right, but ...
A planted tree is a joke. It's estimated that the number of trees on the planet needs to expand by a factor of 4 to offset current carbon emissions. That's for the whole world - 4 extra trees for every one already in existence. What a joke.

Credits given for 'green vehicles' etc are no less of a joke because they have such an unbelievably negligible effect. I personally believe that the credits in this regard hampers the development of viable renewables.

The most viable renewable is geothermal. You can buy a waterfurnace for your house for heating and cooling - with no rebates it will pay for itself in 8 years in energy savings. Where are the credits to accelerate the adoption and development of that technology!?

Instead money is spent on stupid stuff like PV solar which is 10X more expensive than coal, requiring 50% govt subsidies just to make it viable. Government funding for renewables is one of the most mismanaged corrupt entities in DC.

Once again he misses the point
Once again a conservative is to dumb to find the point with both hands.

The point is that the entire science and hype of human caused global warming is a fraud! That is the point! That is what must be drummed into people. That is what must be talked about. Your column should be full of the holes in the theory, the contradictory evidence the outright fabrication of the UN elitist set. The new daily findings destroying Al Gore et al. Interviews with Dr. Singer and Avery.

But no, once again its an article about liberal hypocrisy. It is true, conservatives are to stupid to live! And the golden boy for the always predictable republican shuffle is George (I'm now a global warming believer) Bush!

Either write an article with meat or get out of the tofu buiness.


Social offsets (indulgences)
The article made me wonder whether social guilt - the equivalent of green guilt but regarding social problems such as crime, economic envy, failing public schools - would induce liberals to voluntarily pay higher tax rates than the rest of us, or take up the practice of buying social indulgences.

After all, since social guilt justifies the liberal demand for sky-high taxes and welfare-state entitlements in liberal hearts, what is preventing a new market in "social offsets", whereby a limosine liberal could send a thousand dollar check to the feds, earmarked for some welfare-state program such as Medicare, in return for a certificate evidencing his social righteousness? Why must all such payments to assauge social guilt go to campaign contributions, political goons like MoveOn, or through federal goons like the IRS?

If anyone out there is interested in exploring this idea, give me a shout.

Frank says:
What is the “force” used to pressure people into wasting their money on carbon offsets?

If Pelosi gets her way that force for extortion will be the U.S. Code of Regulations or CFR (not to be confused with that great cabal furthered by the RP fanatics).

I would say that Albore falls into two categories on the AGW fanatic list,4 and 5:

4. The Liberal Politician. These are the people who chase votes and love power over other people. They believe that government is the answer to all of the world’s problems and that there is no problem that government money cannot solve. Some of them actually believe in environmentalism in the same manner as the yuppie or the limo-liberal, being educated by the “green organizations”. Most do not believe in anything other than politics and getting reelected. Where they have any emotion, it is dedicated to socialism. For them environmentalism serves many purposes. First, it provides a front to show the yuppie and the limo-liberal that the pol cares about their issues and thus is entitled to their vote. Second it provides an excuse for raising taxes that can be spent on anything they desire, as long as a little goes to enviro-causes. Most of the money will go to socialist programs, which serve the bulk of the Dem supporters. Third legislation here creates winner/loser situations that encourage political donations from groups wanting to assure that they get the “winner” category. And last, but not least, it provides that soul satisfying high that causes people to want to be politicians to begin with, power over the masses. Of course they assume they will be exempted from the any laws they pass. This is normal Washington business. This is the Democrat Party with support from some RINO Republicans who think they know a good thing when they see it.

pt 2
5. The con-man. This group of people make up a large percentage of the AGW crowd. They may or may not believe in the global warming scenario, however the one thing they do believe in is making a buck. Anytime that the government becomes engaged in a policy change it opens the way for profiteering. The conmen know this and will encourage these policy changes, whether they are based on real needs or not. This is why the initial efforts to influence the government to global warming were done by Enron and massive donations were given to Clinton and Gore to help that influence. Enron is the one who developed the Cap and .Trade swindle, as well as the carbon sink myth. Their intent was to have the government develop their standard so that they could profit. These people are usually well educated and are often trained in science. They know that CO2 is not causing the warming, but their motto is “why let facts stand in the way of profit?” These people split their vote between the parties but contribute most heavily to the “in power” party. Their aim is not to forward any political philosophy, but to forward their own financial interests.

Caring about problems rather than
solving them...

Yes, this is true about Liberals.

They are all about drama and angst. If the problem was resolved, and their lives ran smoothly, they would be too much like conservatives for their own taste.

Why, then they would have to run out and find something new to be P.O.'d about.

But fortunately for them, they would only have to wait a short time for the radical Left to come to their rescue and give them something new to fuel their discontent.

Ah, the bittersweet feeling of being perpetually upset!

craigers: the point of the article
is that the games these elitists are playing indicates that they are not really afraid that the world is coming to an end.

Sure the science is not there to prove that manmade Gore-Bull Warming is real, and in their little wrinkled Leftie hearts, they know it is a bogus scam.

The evidence of this is the way they buy these insignificant indulgances that do absolutely nothing to offset their elaborate and wasteful lifestyles.

Mountain Rose
Their are scam artists with wrinkled little hearts who know what they are peddling is bogus and do it for personal gain anyway. These folks and their motives are at least comprehensible. What baffles me is the much greater number of followers. Most of these are good folks with enough intelligence to at least function at some positive level. Why do they insist on such obviously screwed up priorities? Its not enough to say they follow their feelings rather than facts or results. This is true, but why? Serious attempts to inform are ignored, whether from left or right, as People and American Idol command the attention of huge numbers. Most of these wishful thinkers do good work when there is no choice. It is to be hoped they will respond to some sort of wakeup call before it is too late. 9/11 didn't do it. What will?

oops
there not their

Carbon Offsets
Personally, I have seen no overwhelming evidence or testable predictions that modern civilization is spurring catastrophic global waming. However, I do find the sale and purchase of 'offsets' to be marvelously educational on a variety of levels: Scientific. Moral. Philosophical. But at days end, it is just so damn funny! Couldn't Big Al help avert the looming cataclysm by dropping maybe 300 lbs. of useless fat? Think how much less fuel his personal jet would burn! And imagine the entertainments when his head has shrunk to only a dozen pounds or so (of course, Mr. Gore is so very trenchant, his logics packed so densely, that head would be preposterously tiny atop his robust frame).

If there is someone in the Townhall community with a suggestion of some peer-review papers supporting the "Global Warming Crisis," please bring a few of them to my attention. I have made way too many mistakes in my life to take either side of "Global Warming" on faith alone.

Carbon Offsets
I was buying CF lightbulbs as soon as they were available. I had to pay like $8.00 a pop and order them from a catalogue fron San Francisco, but I did. Bet you started using them much later. So, I've used some amount less carbon than you, right? So, to balance things out, I sell you my carbon savings for $150.00. Now I'm $150 richer, you're $150 poorer, but what about the environment got any better?

How much more obvious could this ridiculous scam be?

But who owns the companies? Well, Enron tried to get in on the deal by lobying for Kyoto with Mr. Gore, then called the Clintons Treasury Secretary to get the Bush administration to bail them out. Bush said "you made your bed, lie in it." By then Gore had cast his lot with another outfit; he's on the board of a company trading carbon offsets.

Carbon Offsets
That's it... I'm changing career. I'm going to become a logger, then sell carbon offsets and not go to work. For every $5 offset, half the going rate so you can buy more and feel twice as good about yourself, I'll not cut down 100 trees. Not actually owning any trees shouldn't matter, since I won't be cutting them down anyway.

Sounds like a win/win to me. What do you think?


I have a deal of a lifetime...
...for all the florescent light bulb believers out there:You send me all your incondescent light bulbs and I will send you a carbon credit!

Not only that,I will forward to you my special carbon credit for the Hummer I didn't buy!

Hurry and get yours while the supplies last!

My 2 cents...
...GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE!!!

sand castles
I say lets be practical; buy bullets for the troops. If the Libs get in power, they will try to pretty-up the planet; then the terrorists will tear it down. Like that stupid kid at the beach that kicks your sand castle down just before it’s built. Doesn't Al know that squirrels are planting millions of trees daily? Why should we bother?

More on Gore
Living near Nashville, a friend in Branson, Mo, telephoned andd asked how to get in touch with Al Gore. Her club wanted him to give a talk on global warming. Later she told me the answer she received.

Al Gore would be happy to talk on global warming in Branson. He needed a six month window of opportunity, a hundred and fifty thousand dollar fee, private jet transportation from there and return, a limosine, motel and meals.

Don't criticize old Al, as the evangelist of the green crowd, he's making millions. Bill D.

Savage99
I have to disagree with you (slightly) regarding the functionality of most deep-ecology types.

From what I have seen, the vast majority of those who support this sort of thing (think; Live Earth concert-goers, etc.)are so amazingly stupid that (as Penn & Teller showed) they will reflexively sign a petition to ban "DiHydrogen Oxide" as a dangerous chemical, because to them, any "chemical" is automatically defined as "dangerous". ("DiHydrogen Oxide", is, of course, another name for H2O- plain water.)

They are natural followers, who will rally to anyone who promises them Paradise on Earth if they just do as they're told, don't think, and scream, yell, and protest on cue.

They claim that the world is "too dangerous" today and needs a "great simplification". What they do not realize is that the world is the safest it has ever been, largely through the efforts of the scientists, engineers, and (incidentally) military personnel they spend so much of their time despising.

The proof of this is the continued existence of these "enlightened idiots", none of whom would have lived to reach their majority in any prior historical period. (Imagine them trying to survive in Europe during the Black Death.)

I'm afraid this situation will continue until such time as a sufficiently great REAL threat menaces our civilization.

At which point the "enlightened ones" will realize, terminally, that knowing how to light a bong is not really a useful skill.


cheers

eon

Nam65-66
I'm also planning on building a "dirty-coal" electricity generation facility for my house, but maybe I'll just sell offsets to not build it.

I'll let you in on the ground floor for free, there should be enough profit to go around.

Eon
You mention a third category of EEcoFreeks. The only thing i disagree with is the word "most". These stupid vapid followers get ink and air time out of all proportion to their numbers, which contributes to your phrase "I have seen". And you could be right, who's counting? Its the decent contributing members of society that vote along with these idiots, thus making their views and impact more important, that puzzle me. What are they "thinking" if any?

Carbon Offsets
Who came up with the goofy concept in the first place? Was it not the bureaucrats in Washington who ran with details of the Clean Air Act? Rather than compel reduction in pollution guided by advances in science, engineering, and economics our great environmental leaders allow corporations to trade pollution credits. Thus, a source inefficiently spewing Pollutant X can shut down and the allocation of Pollutant X used for a more efficient and profitable source spewing Pollutant X. Thus, wheeling and dealing, the stuff of Washington, is the basis for pollution non-control.

What I would like to see
is truth in advertising for these nutcases. When the news media puts a group on air they should explain that they represent a fringe element of the enviro/religeous community and are not to be taken seriously.

Of course since that represents most reporters also that will never happen.

Savage99
They don't THINK; they FEEL! You just hurt their FEELings. Shame on you. :-)

Savage99, pt. 2
I believe the people you speak of are afraid to think too much about it. They have been so inundated by the slogans and outright threats of the hard core of the "Gaiaist" crowd that they are no more willing to say "wait a minute, can you actually prove any of this?" than the average citizen in Europe in the 16th through 18th Centuries was to say to the church authorities, "Are you sure you know what you're talking about, and can you prove it?" during the "Witch Mania" of those days.

Since all they hear from the news is that The Earth Is Doomed Unless We Destroy Our Civilization And Proclaim Al Gore G-d, and all their friends hear and believe it, too, they are afraid to question it, mainly from fear of social ostracism. Or even the modern equivalent of a public stoning. Peer pressure doesn't end with adolescence, unfortunately.

And no age group has a monopoly on mass delusion and/or hysteria. Especially when it is "facilitated" by self-seeking "leaders" with their own ambitions and delusions.

Two fascinating books on this sort of thing are;

The Abduction Enigma, by Kevin D. Randle, Russ Estes, and William P. Core.(1991) They explain how the "Alien Abduction" hysteria was created by a small number of "investigators" who used hypnosis, focus groups, and peer pressure to convince large numbers of people that they had experienced something that never happened.

Memoirs of Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, by Charles MacKay. Written in 1852, but still one of the seminal works on mass-hysteria based social movements.

It's amazing how closely the "ecology" movement tracks with its forebears, especially the "UFO Believers".


cheers

eon

Oops
The full title is, "Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds", by MacKay.

Back then, authors wanted the prospective reader to be in no doubt about what they were getting for their money. Good on them, I say.

cheers

eon

Another excellent column by Pastore!!!

And, of course, he is spot on with each point.

No doubt, everyone has noticed that this whole "GloBULL Warming" thing is sooooo preposterous that the only thing we can do is laugh about it.

I know that I am, by no means, the only person who has reacted with, "What? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha..." or "No way, he didn't REALLY say THAT, did he?"

On the other hand, the sad part is just how scary the AGW folks have gotten. The out and out lies and fabrications are one thing, but when scientists/climatologists who refuse to buy into the AGW hoax are threatened with being fired or loss of credentials, and in not mention more than a few who have received death threats, we know we're dealing with some unstable folks who have pretty much lost touch with reality.



suomi78006
In the case of SOx and NOx cap & trade, emissions must actually be reduced in aggregate. The cap & trade system allows those emitters which can reduce emissions at relatively low cost to "over-reduce" and sell the excess reductions at a profit to those emitters for whom the cost of reducing emissions would be higher than the market price of the excess emissions allowances. This cap & trade system works.

This approach allowed relatively new coal plants to install control equipment which produced very high percentage reductions; and, to sell the excess reductions to help pay for the equipment. It also allowed old coal plants, nearing the end of their useful lives, to purchase allowances rather than install expensive emissions control equipment which would still retain substantial useful life when the coal plant was shut down.

Al Gore does not believe in Global
Warming. How do I know? Human nature. First, he's been talking about this for 20 years and yet he didn't change his lifestyle until he got caught 6 months ago with a carbon footprint the size of SasQuatch. Even then he only changed minor things. I do believe that his "followers" are wising up. Not the whack jobs but the 10-15% of the population that is honest in their belief. They can see through this carbon offset thing. They don't want rich people to be able to do what they want while they freeze in the dark. Kerry and Edwards are just as bad but Gore is "the worst person in the world." The other reason that I believe Gore doesn't really believe is the hyperbole in his movie. He knows the truth is not that alarming. But keeping this going gives him power and money. And to think we almost had this guy as president. the american people are smarter than they get credit for.

As a famous country singer said
You have to stand for something or you'll fall for anything. By AAron Tippin

goblue: Now that's really scary!!

To think that we almost had this reprobate as president!

That prospect is so terrible that I can't even imagine!!!



Al "P.T. Barnum" Gore

Does the phrase, "there's a sucker born every minute" ring a bell?

comment # 1 kadima
Kadima hit it on the head. They can't get rid of their guilt over real sins, and don't want to give them up. So they take up the cause of other sins du jour (usually abstract or halfway around the world to project the guilt as far away from them as possible) and and harangue others about them to silence their own consciences.

I sat next to an earnest vegetarian couple at a pro-life talk in the 80s and they were INDIGNANT that we pro-lifers weren't taking a stand on apartheid in South Africa. I asked them what they meant and they meant marching and writing letters, which shows you **care** (TM) but actually accomplishes nothing for the victims involved, as opposed to trying to help women right in front of them, which will save lives today. As I said to them, apartheid is terrible but as evil goes, it doesn't hold a candle to tearing children limb from limb.

comment # 1 kadima
Sorry if this is a double post (what is up w/ this site?)

Kadima hit it on the head. They can't get rid of their guilt over real sins, and don't want to give them up. So they take up the cause of other sins du jour (usually abstract or halfway around the world to project the guilt as far away from them as possible) and and harangue others about them to silence their own consciences.

I sat next to an earnest vegetarian couple at a pro-life talk in the 80s and they were INDIGNANT that we pro-lifers weren't taking a stand on apartheid in South Africa. I asked them what they meant and they meant marching and writing letters, which shows you **care** (TM) but actually accomplishes nothing for the victims involved, as opposed to trying to help women right in front of them, which will save lives today. As I said to them, apartheid is terrible but as evil goes, it doesn't hold a candle to tearing children limb from limb.

And you don't hear them talk
much about Kyoto anymore. Why you might ask? Because the economic disruption created would move more production to India and China--not subject to Kyoto and much less environmentally sensitive. Kyoto would have made the environment worse---but it sounded good. And it was a way to bash Bush although I guarantee that no Democratic president would have signed it either. The leadership of the environmental movement knows that but the followers just follow.
It's the same politics that call the economic stimulus package--"Tax cuts for the rich"--while ignoring the dire situation that the economy was in due to bursting of the dot com bubble, dishonesty in the board rooms in the 1990's and 9/11, and also ignoring the amazing recovery we have had in the last 5-6 years.

Politicians get most of their money from the fringes, and so cling to these viewpoints which totally divides us and gives them power and makes them rich. I'm going to write about this on several issues in my blog in the near future--how politicians try to diivide us.

violet / Apparently TH did a software

upgrade and the bugs haven't been worked out yet.

But, I agree with your post. Good point!

The truth will set you free
Thanks violet...your point is great, that they project their guilt as far away from themselves as possible.

Everyone keeps asking who benefits from selling carbon offsets. I thought it was Al Gore . Isn't he partial owner of Gerneration Investment Management LLP? http://www.generationim.com

Does anyone know how many gallons of fossil fuel it takes to produce one gallon of biofuel? Isn't like 5:1?




A bad idea
I agree that the only green that interests the operators of the carbon offset business is the greenbacks they hope to pocket. The interesting fact is that no carbon changes hands, just dollars. As Pastore and others note, the whole impetus for the AGW hysteria is liberal guilt, but that should not surprise anyone since every other big lib cause has been promoted by using guilt. The other feature of liberal strategy is to create a class of victims, unfortunate folks who did nothing to cause their peril and are dependent on govt help to extricate them because common citizens are too ignorant to help themselves.
BTW, if any of you are feeling guilty about emitting too much CO2, feel free to send your cash to:
Mordecai Jones
c/o Fly-by-Night Inc
PO Box 123
Scamtown SC

A bad idea
I agree that the only green that interests the operators of the carbon offset business is the greenbacks they hope to pocket. The interesting fact is that no carbon changes hands, just dollars. As Pastore and others note, the whole impetus for the AGW hysteria is liberal guilt, but that should not surprise anyone since every other big lib cause has been promoted by using guilt. The other feature of liberal strategy is to create a class of victims, unfortunate folks who did nothing to cause their peril and are dependent on govt help to extricate them because common citizens are too ignorant to help themselves.
BTW, if any of you are feeling guilty about emitting too much CO2, feel free to send your cash to:
Mordecai Jones
c/o Fly-by-Night Inc
PO Box 123
Scamtown SC

I am selling carbon credits as follows:
$10 buys you a promise that I won't buy a Volkswagon Beetle
$100 buys you a promise that I won't buy a Hummer
$1000 buys you a promise that I won't buy a jet
$10000 buys you a promise that I won't use my personal jet (which I won't buy) to fly around the world telling people they should leave a small carbon footprint.

I accept cash. No checks, credit cards, or money orders, please. Send it to:

Eco-Scam Carbon Credits L.L.C.,
Account #382754043B
Zurich Bank
Zurich, Switzerland.

It's worse than anyone thinks
Al Gore is indeed a huckster. Someone asked who came up with the idea of carbon offsets in the first place. I hate to tell you, Al Gore was one of the first. The carbon offsets he buys are from a C.O. Middleman company which HE founded, and on whose board he sits! He was paying money to HIMSELF! There is a very cynical side of me that thinks his entire advocacy of the Global Warming Hysteria was designed solely for the purpose of putting money in his own pockets.

The thing about planting trees is not the worst idea; the fact is that new, young, growing trees take a LOT more carbon out of the atmosphere than mature, adult trees. Want to reduce atmospheric carbon? Cut down every tree on the planet, use the wood for some non-combustion purpose (how about we go back to building furniture from wood, instead of sawdust-and-glue fiberboard?), and plant new trees in their place. That might very well do much of the trick.

But try and find a Leftist who will support actually CUTTING DOWN trees. Right now, Colorado forests are in huge danger, because a pine beetle infestation has killed huge swaths of standing trees. The solution is to allow logging to go in and harvest the dead trees, which are as good dead as alive for logging purposes. But oh my! Listen to the Greenie Leftists just SCREAM if you propose doing such a thing!

To a Leftist, intentions are everything, and theirs are the best, so they must be the best people. To a conservative, results are everything, and by that reckoning, Leftism is pure evil.

Chicken Littles
Ho hum.

Let's see, since the 1970s and the Liberal evironmental movement started, conservatives have fought tooth and nail every evironmental law by constantly stating the "economic sky will fall" if business is hampered by environmental regulations.

No such economic disaster occurred. The public caught on to the fact that the environmentalists with their recycling programs, smoke stack filters, etc. were doing good things. Cleaning up the water. Cleaning up the air. Suing corporations for dumping toxic chemicals.

In fact, a study during the late 1990s showed that environmental regulations had created market, not diminished it.

Yet to this day the Republicans cry "the economic the sky is falling" with every environmental law passed and when the sky doesn't fall they look all manner of stupid.

Same applies to minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage has never had any long term detrimental impact on the economy, Americans know it, and the Republicans always cry "The economic sky will fail if minimum wage is raised."

Right.

So the question for all you chicken littles is this: why would the public give Republicans any respect on the environment?

You chicken littles have 0 environmental credentials. And yet you mock the the public for being wrong on Global Warming. That makes you look all manner of arrogant. First you need to take your collective foot out of your mouth and be humble when talking about the environment. Second, you need to acknowledge that every city in the country has recycling containers that Americans appreciate and credit Liberals for implementing. You need to give the environmentalists their do. Then, and, only then, maybe, just maybe, the public might heed what your are saying. You people have opposed very environmentalist movement that produced results that the public now enjoys and in the public's mind Global Warming is yet just another environment issue the right wing opposes.



Government by BUNKO SCAM!
Carbon offsets?
http://www.junkscience.com/ByTheJunkman/20070412.html

Anyone remember Algore trying to sell a BTU Tax?
This AGW is nothing but a high pressure sales pitch for a Carbon Tax that is nothing but Algore's old BTU Tax in a new shade of lipstick.

Democrats have nothing to offer but harmful Bunko Scams that harm & kill, like the Freon Scam and the DDT Scam.
Make you wonder how so many Democrats are so easy to deceive? They keep being scammed by one fraud after another and there seems to be no limit to Democrat gullibility.

Constant Contrarian
I could actually easily argue that the public, at this point in history, probably assumes that if the right wing is against some environmental policy, then it must be needed given the right wing has been proven wrong on so many environmental policy decisions. In fact, it is difficult to find even one environment policy the Republicans can be credited for after Teddy Roosevelt.

You all might want to try reverse psychology, come out for Global Warming offsets. That might spook the public enough into seriously questioning it given the current standard is that the Republicans are always wrong on the environment.


driveby: Typical Leftist hyperbole
"Same applies to minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage has never had any long term detrimental impact on the economy, Americans know it, and the Republicans always cry "The economic sky will fail if minimum wage is raised." "

This displays such absolutely typical Leftist misunderstanding of how economics works, it almost beggars explanation.

No Republican says that the sky will fall if a minimum wgae is implemented, or raised. What IS said is that such will adversely affect the economy. To state that "raising the minimum wage has never had any long term detrimental impact" is to claim that you have perfect knowledge of what WOULD have happened. The fact is that we are blessed to live under an economic system with incredible resilience and strength. No conservative that you can possibly find will claim otherwise, which is why you will not find a single conservative voice who will claim that any minimum wage will destroy the economy. What you WILL find - and what, by employing your particular Straw Man, you ignore - are very persuasive arguments that minimum wages do damage to an economy, and to individual lives.

And here in Colorado, in the wake of a statewide minimum wage hike enacted almost a year ago, we are seeing that exact phenomenon: increased unemployment, lowered growth, all the usual hallmarks.

But by all means, driveby: employ as many Straw Man arguments as you like, tilt at windmills, and vanquish as many imaginary ideological foes as you can conjure. You neither do your arguments any credit, nor do ours any damage.

California Challenge
Ok, all you ant-environmentalists. Here is the California challenge.

The state with the best economy is, taa daa, California. The state with the toughtest environmental regulations, including smog control on cars, is California.

Please explain California's economic success all the while explaining how the tough environmental laws have ruined the economy.

Also, please explain how California is the best car market in the world and yet has the toughest car environment regulations.

I'm going to predict the future. Liberals are going to make billions and trillions of dollars by redefining the energy markets. Liberals will own the energy companies of the future. They will have no competition from the conservatives who will just sit on their collective oil b*tts mocking the liberals all the while.

Reminds me of a scene from "Do The Right Thing" where the two old black guys sitting on the corner are complaining about the Koreans. Why, they've been sitting on that corner for upwards of 14 years and yet the Koreans just moved in and got themselves a convienance store.

Climate Change is happening. That makes Climate Change a market opportunity. Liberals are taking advantage? Will conservatives? No. Because liberals are doing it and if liberals are doing it, woo hooo, we can't be doing it.

You people are so simple.


driveby
Your "California Challenge" has been answered before; you just never respond when anyone does so. The fact is that California has the same thing going for it that the Societ Union had going for it: vast geography, which huge amounts of natural resources on which to draw. California also has water resources from other states on which it draws, so California can scarcely be looked at as a closed system. Finally, California is blessed by near-perfect climate, which requires energy expenditures (heating, cooling) for lower than any other state in the union.

And despite all that, troubled days are a-comin': ask anyone who actually lives in the Bay Area, for example.

California also does NOT have the most regulated economy: that honor would go to Massachusetts, which is even more "liberal."

Your California Challenge is a vast red herring.

driveby
I would stay and continue to refute your idiocies, but 1) they are such lame, Leftist boilerplate that better minds thn mine have already done the job long since, and b) The Bronocs are playing now, and thus there are more important matters to attend to.

Enjoy your Leftist wank-fest.

drivebyposting
You are making a lot of very wild claims.
You Libs are noted for publishing fiction.

Nearly all the CO2 comes from our oceans, thousands of years AFTER the warming.
Algores AGW fiction is based on figures that NASA admits were not actual measurements but GUESSWORK!

Despite the rapid influx of illegals, California is the ONLY State in America with a NEGATIVE population groth mainly cause by restrictions on manufacture!

There is NO limit to Democrat gullibility!

Appearances are everything
I heard there was a study done to determine why the Prius is more frequently purchased than it's similar cousins (hybrid Camry etc).

The STYLING of the car singles it out as being "green"....so not only do environmentally conscious folks want to Be green, they want to LOOK green.

I think this is the basis for a terrific cottage industry. Remember folks, you heard it here first. I hereby copyright the following slogan "Looking Green is the wave of the future, it identifies who really Cares!"

Incidentally, I was out of the country during the Enron debacle, so don't know much about it. Surprised to hear the "environmental" connection. I went to High School with Jeff Skilling...who knew that the BORING commencement speech given at our graduation about Pollution would plant a seed for a scam.

Democrats are wrong on the Environment
If it weren't for the envirnomental lobby (largely Democrats), we might have avoided some of the damage from Katrina since shoring up the coast was not envirnomentally friendly. Lots of homes would still be standing because forest fires would have happened naturally instead of catastrophically due to over-management, we'd have more energy independence due to off-shore drilling and gas recovery in ANWR...need I continue?

Anyone who doesn't bow to the "save the planet" crowd is immediately branded as uncaring about the environment. I think this assessment is ridiculous.

If the Republican Party starts to buy Carbon offsets, would that make them more "legitimate?"

Smoke and Mirrors, folks. Al Gore is laughing all the way to the bank.

mrs. Paddy
The auto industry has invested some BIG $ in this AGW Scam. I don't expect them to just fold their cards and take the loss.

The chemical industry has been involved in past frauds and they put big money into hiring rentAmob protesters.
I hope we don't see our auto industry do the same.

MyOpine
Money screams

self-contradiction and term limits
Aren't these politicians relying on the same purchase of enviro credits that they chided power companies and others corporations for using only a decade ago. Wasn't there a democratic/lib movement to eliminate the corporate enviro credit under the premise that these companies should be forced to change their production to reduce emmissions instead of being able to buy their way into compliance.
I guess we can always rely on democrats for their "do as I say, not as I do" approach to politics. Yet one republican strays from the moral high-ground and they slam him/her for hypocrisy.
Our political system, that has put in place a group of leaders (both parties) that rule based upon the direction of the political winds instead of by moral conviction, needs to be overhauled. The contradictions inherent in each of their positions across the spectrum political concerns can only be reconciled based upon one assumption, the operate with one goal in mind getting into and staying in office.
This country needs true leaders back in the houses congress, people the make decisions based upon what is right for the country as determined by their moral judgements. I think this can only happen if term limits are put in place for both houses.

Bill
You and I are on the same page. How can we institute Term Limits when the people directly affected (the polititians) are the ones that make the rules?

I think we need to throw all the bums out!

carbon credit=mafia bribes
there is not one ounce of difference.....faux pau eco friends are no less addicted to the finer things in their life than we hard workers are of food and water...years ago the mafia used bribes to get what they want and today the hiearchy of the rich show evidence they learned well.......let me know when their butts are warming bicycles and mass transportation where they actually have to interact with real people in their town.....

Re-word my slogan (TM)
"Look Green; it shows you care." TM copyright 9/9/08

mrs. Paddy
I don't know how it can be accomplished, but absolute power corrupts absolutely. While they may enter office with the best intentions, it does not last. If any private citizen behaved as the members of congress do on a daily basis, they would sit in jail.
Our most seniored members of congress commit the equivalent of insider trading, bribery and self-dealing on a daily basis. Initiating the passage of legislation that benefits the land development deal they invested. Funneling pork and/or contracts to the companies within their districts or otherwise, that magically higher them after they retire from congress for multi-million dollars jobs.
It would only take a few changes to the laws to eliminate these issues and force congress to get back to focusing on serving the people instead of themselve, but as noted by the inability to even deal with disclousre of pork (that the democrats promised when campaigning in 2006), I don't know how we get there with term limits.
It will never happen unless the voting public (as it did with immigration reform) rises up and demands it with calls, sigantures, letters, and ultimately votes.

mrs Paddy:
"The Prius is the new ribbon."

Jimmy Carter
I like it.

Bill
I find it just astounding the the preponderance of public opinion on the illegal immigration situation is for upholding our laws and securing our border, regardless of which side of the political aisle you are on...and still the polititians ignore us and try to do an end-run.

It is very discouraging and frustrating.

us economy
As of July 2007 (the latest I can find in comparison numbers) California had an unemployment rate of 5.3% (an increase over the previous month) and created 8,600 jobs. In comparison, a low-tax, low regulation state, Texas, had an unemployment rate of 4.4% and created 29,400 jobs. I found these on two separate state websites. twc.state.tx.us for Texas and labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov for California. An overview for all states can be found at bls.gov. It shows rates, but no job creation numbers which is a real hallmark of a healthy economy.

Considering the cost of living, stifling government regulations and high tax rate, the numbers simply don't show California as the economic paradise the previous poster portends it to be.

bintexas
Look at the foreclosure rates in Sacramento and also the numbers of hospital closings due to the large illegal population too.

Two more offers
For the Socialist Democrats who feel guilty that free enterprise has given them more wealth than socialism has provided people in other countries, I will encourage a socialist to vote Democrat at $10.00 each.

At $10.00 per hour or $150.00 per day, I will reverse the warming trend on Mars by insuring that there are no SUVs on that unfortunate globe.

I know that your money will be well spent because I will personally spend it. http://www.poorgrandchildren.com


Carbon Credits Suck
Hypocrites like Al Gore and John Edwards are using as much energy as hundreds of families with their huge homes, block-long limos and private jets, yet they chastise others for driving an SUV.

They can waste energy because they can afford to buy carbon offsets.

What a farce!

poorgrandchildren.com
It'll never work. The Socialists don't care about Mars' warming trend. And there are no folks up there to vote/tax/or dictate to...sorry, you'll have to find something "local" to "act Global" about.

mrs P
Texas faces similar crises with high foreclosures and health care costs for illegals. I think it is very fair to compare the California vs. Texas economies. Both states must absorb poor,low-skilled immigrants from Mexico and agribusiness makes up a significant part of both economies. Given those similiarities, I can only attribute the large difference in growth to the difference in regulatory policies and tax rates.

Mostly, I couldn't let the statement that California has the best economy in the US stand without correction based on actual facts, not emoting. :)

Eco Extortion
An excellent term to apply toward Global Warming.

The "consensus" of science is a political term and has nothing to do with science.

If your data has the ability to be applied toward falsifiability then the result would then produce an outcome from which other scientists would agree - BASED ON THE EVIDENCE.

McIntyre and McKitrick alone proved that the "hockey stick" graph included in the IPCC report was, indeed, false.

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html

Facts not emotional opinions.

Additionally, their attempts to even garner the data in order to repeat the "experiment" from which Mann gleaned his hypothesis, was thwarted for some time until they finally received it. Now we know why.

This alone is worth noting and understanding that, although Global Warming is happening, there's no valid evidence that it's anthropomorphic. As such we have many other important priorities for our dollars.

Yes, we should conserve our resources

Yes, we should recycle when possible

Yes, we should search for alternatives

However, we should do these things responsibly toward all mankind and not through the hysteria that is Gore and his over-emotional cronies who want to thwart modernity with antiquated ideas of living for which they will not imbibe one damn bit.

scooternyc: EXCELLENT! WELL SAID!!



"However, we should do these things responsibly toward all mankind and not through the hysteria that is Gore and his over-emotional cronies who want to thwart modernity with antiquated ideas of living for which they will not imbibe one damn bit."

You are exactly right!





Liberal exculpation
Carbon indulgences are so libs. can drive their expensive Priuses,
then fly their private jets,
then go to the Oscars in 12-cylinder limos and declare the event "green."

The vast weight of guilt from discriminating against minorities in both arts and crafts in their industry,
the incredible uses of energy just to light one set (prob. more elec. there than your entire house for a year),
and burden of attracting the ire of cons. Islamists who hate the West for its virtually pornographication of all media can buy their way into lefty heaven.

Meanwhile, energy czars and radical nanny-goat enviros will be telling the rest of us peons when we can turn on the tv, heat our houses, or plan a vacation.

A good day
The Broncos won (skin of their teeth), and that idiot driveby shut his yap. These are truly golden days...

About the diff between Libs and Lefties
Lefties are the ones that are committed to shoving the United States to the Left and don't care what they have to do to accomplish their goals.

A Liberal, on the other hand, is a fuzzy headed romantic, who wears a Che T-Shirt, dutifully recycles, and drives a hybrid. They take their cues from the activist Left regarding the next cause celeb without question.

Al Gore sez "the debate is over;" and they mindlessly repeat, "the debate is over," never bothering to ask exactly when the debate took place and what were the issues.

to Myopine
I noted your comment about the C02 coming out of the ocean years after the warming occurred. This comment seems to be a reoccuring one in the climate change ramblings..
The C02 release from oceans is true for past warming events some of which were caused perhaps by earth wobbles in orbit or solar flucuations causing the warming. The warmer oceans then released the C02 into the air. Huge volcanic eruptions also caused some of the climate changes as they released huge amounts of C02 into the atmoshphere and the warming occured. But the eruptions (to the level that it took to change the climate) and the solar flucuations are missing in this current climate change. But the C02 concentrations are currently VERY high. We have put more C02 into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and has ever been put into the atmosphere before in any of the warming events.
Anyone alive on this planet knows we are burning huge amounts of oil and coal, and that puts C02 into the air. But you have to accept that C02 traps heat and I think that is a concept is something that you reject. so this discussion with you is probably pointless but maybe someone else will benefit.




drive by silence
Did anyone else notice drive by has yet to respond to the posts that prove his california theory to be a red herring?
Also, someone mentioned bio-fuels, which are now being exposed as yet another fraud perpetrated by the left. The amount of acreage needed to make any significant amount of fuel would consume most food raising activities in this country.
Another little problem never mentioned by the eco-terrorists is the amount of mercury in each and every cfr bulb produced, which by the way, are 100% made in China. You break one and you have a small environmental disaster right in your living room.
We here in California just went through the "Zaca" fire, it burned for almost 2 months,cost 100 million to fight, (and could have been totally prevented had environwhackos not thwarted efforts to properly manage that area with logging and cleaning of underbrush, but thats a whole other story) My point is, just where did all that "pollution" go as the forest burned?
Most of the USA was at one time covered by a sheet of ice, Yosemite was formed by glacial action, obviously that ice melted, and melted long before any man had anything to do with it.
Its the pure arrogance of mankind that thinks he has anything to do with weather or climate.
God help this country, and for that matter, this planet, if these deranged liberals take political control in the next elecion cycle.

chicaree: Benefit? From THAT logic...

or lack thereof?

Pa-lease! Between the eco-extortionists and the ronniepaulists, we've about had enough of delusional, unhinged people trying to cram their agenda down our collective throats.

Enough already!

P.S. Be sure to watch "Hannity's America" tonight. It might be enlightening... but then, the FACTS are something that you reject. so this P.S. is something that maybe someone else will benefit.

Cheers. :-)





Whosebone: Yes. But that's typical of

driveby.


Hey Drivebycoward
Two words:

Paul Ehrlich


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

Global warming
The only 'global warming' we have to worry about is described in Rev. 16:8 and 20:9. Think Fat Albert is going to tackle that one with 'offsets'?

Profits from Carbon Offsets
should be used to buy DDT to spray on misquitos on the continent of Africa, where millions of people die each year from Malaria, thanks to the brilliant environmentalists, who had it banned worldwide because some woman named Rachel Carsons wrote a book bemoaning the fact that it killed songbirds, which everyone knows are far more valuable than African children.

Remember
It is named Greenland for a reason. Remember the 30's was probably the hottest decade. Other than that and hundreds of other facts the debate is settled.

The Money from Carbon Offsets
should be spent on DDT to kill misquitos on the continent of Africa where millions die each year of Malaria, because it was banned worldwide by some brilliant environmenatalists who read a book by some woman who said it killed songbirds causing a silent spring. I can't remember if that book was written before or after the coming ice age.

FRANK THROWS A STRIKE DOWN THE MIDDLE...
Environmentalism is the new religion that combines socialism, earth worship and a lot of other dumb things. It is the new dogma and its followers (and users) are offering to sell you your enviro-salvation. At this point it is just ridiculous and agravating, but just wait, the enviro-star chambers and enviro-inquisitions are next unless we wake up and demand a reformation. Frank's description of the corruption of what was once a respectible conservation movement is right on. Reject the "pope" Al Gore and his minions. They are legion.

Boiling the Frog
Not only do "carbon offsets" provide cover for Al Gore & his sort' flaming hypocrisy, they are part of the strategy for this phase of the master plan.

Back in the early 1990's we were hearing absolute tripe implying controlling "global warming" would be cheap & easy. I remember reading of a stupid survey that indicated a huge majority of sheep favored doing something about AGW. However, the survey questions asked if they would be willing to pay something like $25/yr each. Heck yeah, sign me up!

We all know better than that, don't we?

A lot of people probably would like to buy "peace in their time" in the form of carbon credits at some piddly price. That's how it would start. If you get folks to agree to this form of carbon tax, it follows that they are stipulating that "climate change" is in fact caused by human carbon dioxide emissions, & it's an unqualified Bad Thing.

Once we concede that vital point, by agreeing to buy 'carbon credits,' the next ballyhooed IPCC or NAS or EPA or NOAA or whatever study will reveal, surprise, surprise, that the carbon trading system doesn't restrict CO2 nearly enough. Now that anthrogenic global warming is 'proven' by begging the question, they can spring the bait-&-switch trap on us, & have the courts order the EPA to dictate draconian energy rationing on all of us, regardless of what Congress & POTUS do or don't do.

And THAT will be ALL she wrote!

Buying indulgence
Still LMAO after reading more on the companies making money off this scam.
Responsible financial advisors have said ..NOT WITH A TEN FOOT POLE.
In the Catholic Church this practice is called simony.

Those of us with half a brain
and some common since already knew that carbon offsets were a scam.

Al Gore is just someone looking to make a quick buck off the guilt of others.

Those like him are willing to make up data and lie to everyone in order to convince them that their actions are dooming the planet, and our selves, to a horrific end if we do not take action.

I and many others knew the whole thing was a fraud when people like Al Gore preached to us about changing our lifestyle yet they continue living it up with out taking the same actions they tell us we should take.

The worst part is the "threat" aspect of Mr. Pastore's point is not just reliant on ones guilt. The same people who preach voluntary compliance also work to have government tax people and industry on their failure to comply voluntarily, thus the threat is also one of the gun (aka government power to punish and take personal property and earnings).

ugh
common sense not common since

Offset
Frank has a great article here.

The basic premise of global warming is wrong. The basis premise is that we, mere mortals, can control the weather. The premise is that we can control the weather so precisely, that if we just get the right amount of carbon offsets, we can prevent hurricanes, stop millions of years of cycles of ice ages/warming, and prevent any change in the ratio of ocean to land mass that go with the ice age/warming cycle.

The ice core data from Antarctica indicates that there have been 5 ice age/warming cycles.They all peak and then turn down at the same temperature. We have been warming since the last ice age. In every previous cycle the warming cycle had peaked (soon) and then slid back into an ice age. CO2levels do track (correlate) with the temperature change but sometimes it lags the temperature change (raise or decline) and sometimes it leads. The data can not confirm a causal relationship where CO2 changes temperature.

The idea that we can control the natural rhythms of the solar system is ludicrous (The polar ice caps on Mars are melting). The idea that we can indulge in just the right number of offsets and control those natural rhythms is about as probable as Larry Craig becoming President.


Typical Liberal-Progressive Chant...

Vote for me... or die !

"Global Warming" is a Pyramid Scheme. Only a handful get rich, and millions of people lose everything.

Remember the Albanian pyramid scheme a few years ago. Half the country lost their behinds!

Al Gore is well invested at the top of the pyramid, and will end up with all our "Carbon-offset" money.

I never-ever believe a politician is thinking of my best interests. And I haven't been wrong yet.

goblue-Kyoto
actually occurred during the Clinton administration. So it wasn't "created" to embarrass Bussh, but later was used that way. Bush gets bashed for not implementing Kyoto yet Clinton didn't when given the chance.

The senate voted on ratification of the treaty and the vote was something like 99-0. Yet, just a few years later with a Republican in office, many of these same Senators pretend they never voted against Kyoto and use it to beat up on Bush. And guess what, the MSM lets them get away with it! Big surprise.

craigers
If you are going to try and denigrate someone and call them dumb, you really need to realize you aren't the person to carry that message. You made a simple mistake TWICE so I know it was not just a slip of the keyboard. You use the word "to" two times when you should have used "too." Come on craigers, this is SECOND GRADE stuff. I probably confused you by using the word "two" too.

weather predictions
How can they expect the population to believe in global warming when the weatherman still can't accurately forcast the weather?

weather predictions
How can they expect the population to believe in global warming when the weatherman still can't accurately forecast the weather?

sorry
*forecast*

In line with the European
countries' pledge to reduce carbon emissions by 50% by the year 2050, I pledge to reduce my own carbon emissions 99% by the year 2099.

The real danger isn't AGW
It is loss of freedom and higher taxes. The real goal of the AGW advocates is:
1. Power
2. Power
3. Control over your life
4. Bigger government
5. Power
Well, you get the idea. These people will do anything, say anything or promote any scam they think will result in more power for them.
The "Environmental Movement" is the new home of the "FAR Left". It doesn't matter to them that AGW has been thoroughly debunked or that even Kyoto didn't buy Kyoto. They want...guess what?

BTW, we need MORE CO2. It makes things grow faster! We should probably work to get it up to 500 ppm from the present measly 380 ppm. NOW, don't you feel better just knowing that? Send your $25.00 and "thank you" note for "Carbon Guilt Offset" to Wally C/O Town Hall.

You're Welcome!

Of course its a scam.
But, if there is anyone foolish enough to want to buy "carbon offsets", its your lucky day! I'll sell you the carbon offsets from about 2500 trees I planted many years ago. They are all between 40 an 55 years old and at their peak absorbing carbon! And these carbon offsets have the advantage of being real and available for inspection by interested parties!

I was going to sell them for lumber or firewood, but maybe this is more lucrative, and I can sell them year after year!

The whole concept of carbon offsets is silly, but I might as well get in on it and retire early!

I wish I was crooked.
Crooked enough to have gotten in on this carbon offset thing, but I never figured anyone was stupid enough to actually buy into it. Reminds me when Red Bull "energy(caffeine) drink" came out. I was at a trade convention, before the product was actually being sold retail and reps came and gave me 4 or 5 sample Cans of it. . I took a few sips and threw the rest in the trash. I ate at the first Chipotle restaurant a few times, and agreed with a friend that it was a great burrito for someone from New Jersey Yes, I am quite an entrepreneurial genius....look how much of that garbage is selling now.
Could someone please email me with the next stupid boondoogle, I promise I will invest heavily.
Sign me, Stupid

RCB
"After all, since social guilt justifies the liberal demand for sky-high taxes and welfare-state entitlements in liberal hearts, what is preventing a new market in "social offsets", whereby a limosine liberal could send a thousand dollar check to the feds, earmarked for some welfare-state program such as Medicare, in return for a certificate evidencing his social righteousness? Why must all such payments to assauge social guilt go to campaign contributions, political goons like MoveOn, or through federal goons like the IRS?"

---
Excellent points. One major beneficiary (industry) you left out is the so called non-profit eco-groups (egs. Greenpeace, Sierra club, etc.). There are several hundred to thousands of these groups that are raking in billions of untaxed dollars - and they resist any attempt to make them disclose their contributions or how they use their funds.

It's my feeling that their major contributions come from people who have inherited big or otherwise live an existence they didn't earn (i.e. idiot heirs, rich widows, etc.). With this type of wealth comes a guilt for just living.

This is a huge resurvior of resource used primarily to finance lib/leftist political causes and liberal politicians.

This is a huge problem for conservatives in the political marketplace.

All these industries
- like sales of carbon offsets - have their roots in government spending. A Federal government, more than happy to write checks to anyone capable of a campaign contribution, started this nonsense.

This will be little more than a Kyoto-style ripoff whose end result is the modernization of some third world country so that they too can join in the pollution/overpopulation joyride.

Remember Religeous Indulgences??
Anyone remember how folks and so called church representives in the Middle Ages would sell indulgences to heaven. A tooth from John the Baptist or a lock of hair from a Pope. If you had one of those, you live the lifestyle of a modern day liberal and still make it to heaven. Striking similarity to carbon offsets!!!

This carbon offset scam
is thriving. Most travel magazines are now offering tours with lesser "carbon footprints." You walk a little more and drive a teensy shorter distance. See recent AAA mag.

Even Nat. Geog and Smithsonian have taken up how people can ease their consciences by only using the snow mobile 89 days this winter instead of 90 and 1/2.

In another few years, this argument will have gone the way of all flesh and another disaster will be the big scene.

And, Robert, constantly quoting to people what they just wrote is redundant and rather childish. I know what I wrote. Anybody else that read me knows also. If you have an argument or statement, just jump right in a make it. We are good enough readers to know what mean. As to your thinking Martian ice cap melting is both unrelated to solar system warming and silly, I refer you to 1.2 million hits on Google for SOLAR SYSTEM WARMING.

Ironic, isn't it?
The system is the same as it always has been: if you're rich enough, you don't have to live by the same standards as the 'common herd'. What is perhaps unexpected is the character of he people who support it.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Some people are bound to get wealthy; it's most often the result of hard work or innovation, so that's okay.
But we in America have created our own aristocracy! Like 15th century peasants, too many of us *expect* the rich, or the politically savvy, or the entertainment glitterati, to live outside the rules.

Where was the outcry over those infamous heated sidewalks? Absent. Over private jets? Silent. Folks will follow their opinion leaders like sheep, without ever expecting their 'gods' to be held accountable.

Reminds me of a cartoon. Haven't found a link yet, but it's titled something like "Why terrorist rallies never have a Q&A session". It shows a terrorist leader haranguing a crowd. In the back row, a guy has his hand up. He asks "If suicide bombing is so great, how come you never volunteer?"

This is the sort of question that eco True Believers will never ask their opinion leaders.

I love it
How Robert manages to throw iraq and WMD into this.

It's got nothing to do with AGW, but a liberal still manages to throw this administration under the bus.

But about AGW, the whole "movement" was shady from the beginning. When Al Gore sat in front of Sen. Inhofe and refused to pledge that he would get his own gluttonous energy consumption under control, I knew he was full of it.

When he sat there and declared that "the debate is over", it felt like a total Pearl Harbor job. Since when, as Americans, are we not allowed to debate something?

Whenever Hollywood gets involved in something like this, I have to believe that not an ounce of intelligent thinking was involved to come to their conclusions. Hollywood is all about style and no substance. They are all so wealthy that nothing Al Gore and his Eco-Naziism could do would effect them anyway.

This is all just another scam to fleece the middle class.

blind faith
Robert:

The issue of believing in WMD's can't be a position of faith. The warning came from experts in the field of intelligence gathering from countries all over the world....all in agreement that there was a threat that Saddam had WMD's. If I believe based on past experience (the Kurds), intelligence gathering from countries all over the world desiring to protect THEIR OWN interests, combined with 9/11/01(actual attack on American soil) wouldn't I be considered ignorant not to draw some conclusion about the safety of my nation using reason and the brain God gave me?

Liberals can forgo the use of their brains (combining reason and fact, knowledge and wisdom) and believe the words of a man who has no credentials in the field. He shows you a few polar bears floating on a piece of ice and you're passing the kleenex box around and starting a crusade. How do you know someone didn't blast that piece of ice with dynamite 10 minutes before the filming started? How can you criticize Christians for blind faith in Jesus when you yourself are just as guilty of following a spiritual guide?

If a person buys into global warming their belief is a position of faith based on opinions of celebrities and non-experts like al gore....that's real faith!!!

I will say that I want to be a good steward of the environment. I think most Americans, liberal and conservative, love nature and want to use resources wisely by conserving. It's not a spiritual matter, it has to be empirical. Al Gore and one-square-Sheryl Crow aren't experts they are spiritual guides. Global warming is a discussion that should be based on facts, knowledge, and wisdom, not blind faith.

AlGore® exposed his REAL motives!
When AlGore® was slammed by people by bringing up the fact that his house consumes more power in one month than anyone else's house consumes in a year, AlGore® inadvertantly exposed to the world his TRUE motivations behind concocting the "human induced global warming" myth.

AlGore® responded to these criticisms by saying "I'm rich! I can afford carbon offsets!"

In that little slip of the tongue, AlGore® is exposed as the Hitlarian fascist he really is.

AlGore® is rich. He enjoys his wealth with eco-unfriendly transcontinental jet rides on a daily basis and an inefficient house. He owns stock in Occidental Petrolium, and owns various environment-polluting mineral mines. AlGore® DOES NOT care one bit about the environment.

What AlGore® DOES care about is solidifying his wealth and power, and preventing that wealth and power from being dilluted when other people become rich and powerful. His enviro-fascism is his means of preventing the non-rich and the non-powerful from gaining wealth and power. He and his rich buddies can afford their lavish life style, and he seeks every day to make sure nobody else can.

AlGore® is, IN FACT, an evil human being. Don't ever forget that.

Money & Power
A few examples of how Algore works this scam:

1. He buys carbon offsets. (probably tax deductible.) From a company he owns. That company then invests his money and money from anyone else buying offsets from his company, in "green" companies, in which Algore is a major stockholder. If any of them ever show a profit, Algore gets the profit. The other offset buyers get to feel good.

2. Algore's big concert deducted expenses and the sent the rest of the proceeds to a non-profit company where Algore is a director (and on the payroll). That company then invested the concert profits (after deducting their own expenses) in carbon offsets (from Algore's company) and other "green" projects, many owned or controlled by Algore. Most of the concert profits ended up in Algore's pockets.

Meanwhile he demonstrates that he doesn't really believe all that crap by: 1. Building his new mansion in the south (Tennessee) rather than in some cooler climate. 2. Flying only in private jets when he could get there just as fast flying commercial with a much lower "carbon footprint". 3. His electric bill at his new mansion is reported to be around $30,000 a year! So much for is committment to conservation. 4. He travels in a caravan of SUV's. Even when he is only going 3 block, in nice weather! 5. etc. etc.

Don't Forget the Trial Lawyers
Just got a flier in the mail today for a seminar titled "Positioning Yourself for Opportunities in Emerging Carbon Markets". The synopsis tells me about this great new "carbon credit market" that is projected to be worth $2 trillion in 5 years, with "new legislation, potential litigation, as well as new business opportunities on the horizon"!

That sounds just great. Potential litigation is always sounds good to the ambulance-chasing crowd. Maybe if that president thing doesn't work out for Silky...

Two Houses
If this is old news I apologize.

Today I saw for the first time the comparison between Gore's mansion in TN and Bush's ranch house in TX. Which is the most resource efficient. Bush blew Gore out of the water. (Comparison in on Snopes "Two Houses".) I then did a search on Google, and every lib website insulted Bush for being environmentalist in his personal life, but not pushing programs they think important. While Gore is adored for pushing programs, but NOT living the life.

Lefties make my head hurt!

Global Worming
Since global-warming advocates generally regard the democrats as more Earth-conscious than the Republicans, perhaps these carbon-offset proceeds should be allocated towards democrats' political campaigns. After all, lawmakers can legislate controls that force all Americans to reduce their carbon footprints. Certainly, this would be a more efficient use of liberals' money. Don't be surprised if this concept is soon implemented in the offset business.

If Dems. control the pres. and Cong.,
energy taxes and fees will be leg.'d up the whazoo.

Will they affect GW, for whatever reason its caused?

ONLY if we all (every single person in the world) get out of our cars, stop using oil and nat gas to heat and cool, and we use one lightbulb per room for our total elec. use. And maybe not then.

Because altho' humans contribute billions of tons of water vapor and CO2 to the atmosphere, the earth itself produces tens of trillions of tons of these "pollutants"--all perfectly naturally--and for the most part deals with them itself.

And because the actual source of all global warming and cooling is the sun and its effect on our own solar system, prob. NOTHING will change wherever the climate is going. Should we conserve energy and protect the environment? Surely we should, as general principles of good living and considering what the future needs.

Remember the "Ozone Hole"?
It was a SCAM, JUST LIKE AWG but it cost the citizens of the US BILLIONS of dollars to convert over to new refrigerants that are also less efficient and harder on the refrigeration equipment.

The "ozone hole" which really isn't a hole at all, but just thinning out of the ozone, is caused by solar flares, not refrigerants. The refrigerants that were blamed can't even get up that high because of their very high molecular weight.

Who pushed the Ozone scare? Some of the same wackos that are pushing the global warming scare and for the same reason!

Even though many knew it was a scam, R-12 (the best automobile refrigerant)is off the market and R-22 (the best air conditioning refrigerant) will be gone soon.

DON'T LOT THEM DO IT TO US AGAIN!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.