Hmm, does this look familiar? Here’s Mark Landsbaum writing in the OC Register
Expect global warming rhetoric to heat up
Let’s be blunt. Forty years of global warming hysteria never has been about the globe getting warmer, or saving the planet. It’s always been about control and money. Their control. Your money. If you need to be told who “they†are, you haven’t been paying attention.
They are a cabal of intertwined common interests that include government regulators who stand to gain power, financial opportunists who stand to profit and ideologues whose mission is to separate you from your money, and from control over your lives. They are socialists or progressives. They like to be called “environmentalists,†tarring the reputation of an otherwise well-intentioned group. (snip)
A compliant mainstream media, which never views a progressive movement with a critical eye, is about to treat us to another furious round of headlines as the real alarmists gather this month in Paris to concoct a scheme to “save†you from global warming. Scratch the surface of this international divide-up-the-booty gathering, and you will see that, even if all their schemes, regulations, taxes, penalties and wealth redistributions are enacted, there’s no guarantee the Earth’s temperature will be affected at all. That’s a pretty costly gamble.
It’s good to see that more and more people are recognizing what the ‘climate change’ movement is all about, and writing about it.
As Christopher Booker of the U.K.’s Sunday Telegraph reports, schemers convening in Paris have three goals: 1) to collectively reduce emissions worldwide by imposing costly regulations and banning cost-effective alternatives (aka big government); 2) to take money from some to give to others to pay for this (aka socialism); and 3) to impose costs on those unwilling to pay up, which is to say, big government and socialism. (I assume Landsbaum is referring to this piece)
People often ask me why I do not focus that much on the actual science of climate change. Well, I actually do: it’s just a different type of science. Political science. Sociology. What are referred to as ‘soft sciences”. Because that’s what this is really all about. Every policy prescription to “solve” anthropogenic global warming/climate change matches perfectly with every other far left policy prescription, those which are noted in the cited article, so I won’t repeat them again (at least in this post. You can bet you’ll see them again and again, lather, rinse, repeat).
[…] It isn’t about the globe getting warmer or saving the planet. […]
Teach how can solar on your roof top be giving control to the government ??
How could charging your hybrid or electric car using your own solar panels give the government. Control over your life ??
Teach do you want to have all your energy sources controlled by corporations and the government? Because. Thst is the wsy it is right now
Well maybe you do you seemed to want keystone xl which would have meant shipping North American oil to the world msrjet and would have raised the costs for American consumers but would have further enriched GOP donors
I am pretty sure that I have never seen Teach say that he wants what john is saying.
“I’ll have “Strawman Arguments for $400, Alex.”
And of course every study – even by the government – has shown this to be false. Keep on rockin’ the lies, john.
But one should consider john’s apparent new belief that the government should stay out of energy production and usage.
Here are some questions for john that he will not answer:
1) Since you want the government out of solar panels, should the government stop subsidizing their production and installation?
2) Should the EPA stop monitoring other forms of energy production as well?
3) Should there be standards for solar panel output such as there are for mileage requirements for vehicles?
4) Should the government end its “energy rating” program that is mandated?
5) Should governments have the ability to set standards on the installation of solar panels?
6) Should historic districts be able to deny solar panels for aesthetic reasons as they do other for other equipment?
7) Should the government require that panels be hooked into the grid by a licensed electrician?
8) Should the government be allowed to require permits for installations?
9) Should companies that make solar panels be exempt from health and safety regulations?
10) Should companies be forced to disclose the fact that the power output rating of solar panels as stated now is false and misleading?
11) Should the government encourage and support the theft of intellectual property as it has done in other energy related businesses?
C’mon john. Stop making stupid comments and step up to the plate. These are all questions that if were related to coal or nukes, you would scream the government should enforce and increase regulations.
With solar, you want the government to stay away.
Typical.
[…] Let’s be blunt. Forty years of global warming hysteria never has been about the globe getting warmer, or saving the planet. It’s always been about control and money. Their control. Your money. If you need to be told who “they†are, you haven’t been paying attention. Read more at Pirate’s Cove. […]