Internet Articles (2017)
ormer Vice President Al Gore, Jr. became a billionaire by fanning the social progressive fabrication that sweating men, flatulating cows and CO2 are responsible for global warming. To curb global warming according to Gore in his Nobel Prize winning "Inconvenient Truth," it's only necessary to curtail carbon dioxide emissions. The more you reduce carbon dioxide the more you reduce global warming. The problem is, as you reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere you also proportionately reduce the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere since carbon dioxide is the "food" green plants consume to produce oxygen through photosynthesis. Let's look at the cycle, because once you realize the impact of what you are reading, you will also realize that Al Gore, Jr. and his ilk are some of the most dangerous people on Earth. Because if they succeed in outlawing carbon dioxide, they will also outlaw God's nature from manufacturing both oxygen and water. And quite literally, the far left's environmental agenda to enrich themselves at your expense will kill you.
The anti-fossil fuel "save the world" from people ecowackos have correctly gauged that one gallon of gasoline (which weighs about 6.3 lbs) produces about 20 lbs of CO2. They base that on the fact that when gasoline burns carbon and hydrogen atoms separate. Hydrogen then combines with oxygen to become water and the carbon atoms combine with oxygen to become carbon dioxide. To calculate the amount of CO2 produced from a gallon of gas, the weight of the carbon atom (12) is added to the weight of two oxygen atoms (32) for a total weight of 44/12 or 3.7. Since gasoline is about 87% carbon and 13% hydrogen by weight, if we multiple the weight of carbon (5.5 lbs) by 3.7 we have about 20 lbs of CO2.
Okay, now that I fed you the boring stuff, here's the interesting stuff. A single mature tree absorbs carbon dioxide at a rate of about 48 lbs per year, and releases enough oxygen back into the atmosphere to support two human beings. One acre of trees annually consumes about the same amount of carbon dioxide produced by driving a car 26,000 miles. That same acre produces enough oxygen to keep 18 people alive for a year. A normal yard foliage tree consumes about 48 lbs of carbon dioxide and produces a minimum of 260 pounds of oxygen. Two such trees will support a family of four. A 100' tree with an 18" diameter at its base produces about 6,000 pounds of oxygen per year as it consumes 8,251,875 lbs of carbon dioxide. Do you have the picture now? Good. Now, here's the question.
What would happen if the environmentalists were able to convince the US Supreme Court to allow the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon dioxide, and give them the power to dramatically reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere? Oops. The Obama Administration has already done that. On June 21, 2011 the Supreme Court, in an 8-0 vote in American Electric Power Co. v Connecticut, ruled that the federal Clean Air Act gives the sole authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (i.e., CO2 emissions) to the EPA (Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not vote since it was her decision in the 2nd Circuit Court that was being appealed. Connecticut vs American Electric [a party to an action joined by New York, California, Iowa, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin sued America Electric, Southern Electric Company, Cinergy, Xcel Energy and the Tennessee Valley Authority). Connecticut sued to force American Electric to curb the amount of CO2 its power plants emitted. American Electric argued that under the "political question doctrine," the judiciary had no right to hear the action. The US District Court agreed. On appeal to the 2nd Circuit, Sotomayor reversed the lower court, because in her world, "law is made at the appellate level." The 2nd Circuit argued that the political question doctrine did not apply, and the federal courts did have jurisdiction. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court and upheld the 2004 US District Court decision.
The unfettered control of carbon dioxide emissions was important to a whole host of Watermelons (leftists who are green on the outside and communist red in the inside) who got together and dreamed up Cap & TradeThe American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, the Waxman-Markey Bill (passed by the Obama Democratic super majoritya scheme to make all of them billionaires at the expense of the taxpayers in every nation on Earth who will be obligated to pay exorbitant carbon taxes for being the root cause of global warmingjust for being alive and for consuming fossil fuels to power their cars and light their homes. The Waxman-Markey Bill became the guideline of the draft of an international treaty to cap carbon emissions in the industrialized nations while providing flexibility in the emerging nations, letting the industrialized nations buy "carbon credits" from undeveloped nations who are not yet developed enough to use their allocation of carbon emissions credits.
While conservatives viewed the Supreme Court decision as a victory, the Watermelons who are trying to force the use of what they call "Earth Renewables"also viewed it as a victory since, as long as the Watermelons controlled the legal limits of carbon dioxide in the United States and the other industrialized nations, they could legally reduce the legal limits of carbon emissions by virtually banning the use of carbon fuels to such a degree that the industrialized world would be forced to use ultra-expensive and sadly inefficient wind and solar power as the third world, where the princes of industry had transferred the world's technology, could safely spew tons of toxins into the heavens while also buying and selling selling carbon credits to the industrialists in the now impoverished industrialized world.
Note: as you read this, remember why it is that we need carbon dioxide emissions. And, remember this as well: windmills and solar panels don't replenish the carbon dioxide we need to create oxygen. Nor do they create enough real electrical power to adequately replace carbon fuel generated electrical power, either; but that's not the point. The point is that the Watermelons are advocates of reducing man's greenhouse gas footprints because they stand to make obscene profits buying and selling carbon credits in the make believe parallel world of saving the planet by reducing carbon emissions when in reality, we are slowly killing the planet by dramatically reducing the levels of oxygen in the atmosphere, and expanding the world's deserts by greatly reducing the amount of rainfall that will reduce the amount of arable land in the worldand the amount of water there is to drink. Whew. That was a mouthful. Particularly if you hold your breathe while you talk. That would be hard to do if you don't have enough oxygen to breathe when you start talking.
Think of this as the latest reality game fad: a Monopoly-type reality board game called Climate Change where the players win by getting the most carbon credits, and by reducing the carbon footprints of their opponents as their land dries up and the opponents die of thirst, starvation or from being oxygen-deprived. Our reality, if this insanity is allowed to prevail, is that the areas around every major urban center in every nation on Earth will slowly become a dustbowl. Oxygen and water will have to be artificially produced in carbon dioxide factories and pumped into what will then become controlled human environments. Large numbers of humans will attempt to survive in wastelands devoid of grass and water, struggling to breathe an atmosphere with lessened amounts of oxygen. Denied access to water, food and oxygen-rich air, millions will die. The environmentalists will get their wishthe world's population will shrink to what the Watermelons believe is a sustainable level.
The Global Warming Myth