I am an interested victim of the man-made global warming hoax
Science by majority vote
Global Warming must succumb to science by majority vote, say some university researchers. Just as in the time of Galileo, when he faced a sentence of death for suggesting that the earth moved.
Surely you have come across these people.
Men who dreamed of becoming eccentric scientists with long, unkept hair, living on government research funds. Men who pined away in hopes of tax-based bottomless purses of gold, which would enable them to rise late and with which to maintain a brace of mistresses who would adore them for their brain. Since they had nothing else going for them.
They were destined to become the property of the first willing wallet with specific requirements, but in which direction it layeth? That was the only dilemma they faced. Which branch of the sciences they would devote themselves to.
And suddenly, like Columbus, sailing westwards for India after losing a bet with his aunt Amorosa who was sick of supporting him, they suddenly trip over Globalist Greed and discover American gold. The annihilating consequences of Global Weather Change.
The need for more taxes
During one of their annual meetings, Globalists were giving vent to their distress about ‘how times had changed’. In the good old days, the Ruler had the right of ‘prima nocta’. For those without a classical education, that was the legal right of a monarch to have sex with any female subject, particularly on her wedding night. If the peasant, the aspiring groom, was unsporting and objected to the honor, he could pay a tax to avoid any unpleasantness. If he had the money to pay the tax, of course. Otherwise, the couple were both screwed.
‘Yes, those were the days’ said one of the members, looking like a dentist with a toothache. ‘We used to tax urine, for God’s sake. Do forgive me, I am so stressed, I am taking the Lord’s name in vain. We even taxed soap! Not that the Great Unwashed would notice, but it’s the principle of the thing. The Brits, taking advantage of their excellent weather, taxed fireplaces. The French royals taxed salt. And what do we do today? We throw money away by giving $50 tax DISCOUNTS, to double amputees. This insanity has to stop I tell you!’.
The other Globalists nodded in agreement and attempted to drown their sorrows, like kittens, in magnums of Champaign.
‘I know what,’ said one of the younger octogenarians. ‘Let’s tax the weather’.
Everyone perked up.
‘I read a letter in the Times today by some nut scientist who claims the weather is getting colder and in 50 years’ time we shall all starve to death because crops will fail. Let’s find more idiots like him to pay to do “research” to prove the point. The peasants will insist that we tax them so that we can do something about it’.
That was in the 1970s.
(Page 64 of Newsweek's April 28, 1975, issue. Titled "The Cooling World," it argued that global temperatures were falling—and terrible consequences for food production were on the horizon. Meteorologists "are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century," …... "The resulting famines could be catastrophic.")
There was ‘almost unanimous’ scientific consensus on the impending cooling disaster then, as there is now for the exact opposite position: ‘The Consensus On Global Cooling’ https://wmbriggs.com/post/8189/
Regrettably for the collage of philanthropists at that meeting, things went the other way and climate, as it always has done, changed. It became warmer, instead.
All research grants now arrived with new instructions to the same scientists who were warning us of Global Cooling. ‘Prove that CO2 is causing global warming, which will destroy the planet.’
In fairness, honorable scientists refused to accept the base coin and did not play along, but since the Globalists owned all the media (Newsweek being a case in point) and scientific publications, dissenting voices were erased from global platforms.
That left us with access only to the opinion of the ‘eccentric scientists with long hair’ mentioned earlier.
Since higher solvency was their only life ambition, they were singularly and persistently tireless in their efforts to achieve it. The males by selling their souls and the female version, better equipped, selling whatever was available.
How times and Newsweek have changed.
It is now 2019.
Global cooling was a bust, so Newsweek tries to patch things up: https://www.newsweek.com/newsweek-rewind-debunking-global-cooling-252326
According to Newsweek some silly people, not Newsweek obviously, made silly claims in the 70s
Now, if you read this far, you are probably a deplorable unbeliever like me, so be warned!
If you do things like breathing or if you eat beef, you are the scum of the earth and you are destroying the planet by adding ‘greenhouse gases’ to an atmosphere already too difficult to sustain life on earth.
It is therefore in the interest of your offspring to INSIST on paying Carbon Tax, to offset this calamity.
Fortunately for us, one of these fraud scientists made a booboo. He believed his own nonsense and so filed a legal claim in a Canadian court of law for libel, against a real scientist, who had publicly called him a fraud.
Oh, the joy!
It turns out that Canadian courts, not known for their conservative views, have not yet been bought by the owners of Newsweek.
- Michael Mann, a climatologist at Penn State University, sued climatologist Dr Tim Ball for libel. Dr Ball called Mann and his theories a fraud.
- Mann’s theories were prominently featured in the 2001 U.N. Climate Report, and formed part of Al Gore’s 2006 movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’.
- The court has ruled that when Dr Ball called Mann a fraud, Dr Ball was not committing libel.
Ergo, Mann and his theories are a fraud.
‘Not only did the court grant Ball’s application for dismissal of the nine-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit, it also took the additional step of awarding full legal costs to Ball.’