[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Whitney Webb: Foreign Intelligence Affiliated CTI League Poses Major National Security Risk

Paul Joseph Watson: What Fresh Hell Is This?

Watch: 50 Kids Loot 7-Eleven In Beverly Hills For Candy & Snacks

"No Americans": Insider Of Alleged Trafficking Network Reveals How Migrants Ended Up At Charleroi, PA Factory

Ford scraps its SUV electric vehicle; the US consumer decides what should be produced, not the Government

The Doctor is In the House [Two and a half hours early?]

Trump Walks Into Gun Store & The Owner Says This... His Reaction Gets Everyone Talking!

Here’s How Explosive—and Short-Lived—Silver Spikes Have Been

This Popeyes Fired All the Blacks And Hired ALL Latinos

‘He’s setting us up’: Jewish leaders express alarm at Trump’s blaming Jews if he loses

Asia Not Nearly Gay Enough Yet, CNN Laments

Undecided Black Voters In Georgia Deliver Brutal Responses on Harris (VIDEO)

Biden-Harris Admin Sued For Records On Trans Surgeries On Minors

Rasmussen Poll Numbers: Kamala's 'Bounce' Didn't Faze Trump

Trump BREAKS Internet With Hysterical Ad TORCHING Kamala | 'She is For They/Them!'

45 Funny Cybertruck Memes So Good, Even Elon Might Crack A Smile

Possible Trump Rally Attack - Serious Injuries Reported

BULLETIN: ISRAEL IS ENTERING **** UKRAINE **** WAR ! Missile Defenses in Kiev !

ATF TO USE 2ND TRUMP ATTACK TO JUSTIFY NEW GUN CONTROL...

An EMP Attack on the U.S. Power Grids and Critical National Infrastructure

New York Residents Beg Trump to Come Back, Solve Out-of-Control Illegal Immigration

Chicago Teachers Confess They Were told to Give Illegals Passing Grades

Am I Racist? Reviewed by a BLACK MAN

Ukraine and Israel Following the Same Playbook, But Uncle Sam Doesn't Want to Play

"The Diddy indictment is PROTECTING the highest people in power" Ian Carroll

The White House just held its first cabinet meeting in almost a year. Guess who was running it.

The Democrats' War On America, Part One: What "Saving Our Democracy" Really Means

New York's MTA Proposes $65.4 Billion In Upgrades With Cash It Doesn't Have

More than 100 killed or missing as Sinaloa Cartel war rages in Mexico

New York state reports 1st human case of EEE in nearly a decade


World News
See other World News Articles

Title: Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About 'Global Governance'
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1893/ ... -Bring-About-Global-Governance
Published: Jul 11, 2009
Author: Marc Morano
Post Date: 2009-07-11 09:29:02 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 1118
Comments: 135

Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times.

“Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” (Editor's Note: Gore makes the “global governance” comment at the 1min. 10 sec. mark in this UK Times video.)

Gore's call for “global governance” echoes former French President Jacques Chirac's call in 2000.

On November 20, 2000, then French President Chirac said during a speech at The Hague that the UN's Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance."

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance,” Chirac explained. “From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace,” Chirac added.

Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said, "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide." Canadian Prime Minster Stephen Harper once dismissed UN's Kyoto Protocol as a “socialist scheme.”

'Global Carbon Tax' Urged at UN Meeting

In addition, calls for a global carbon tax have been urged at recent UN global warming conferences. In December 2007, the UN climate conference in Bali, urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, said at the 2007 UN conference after a panel titled “A Global CO2 Tax.”

Schwank noted that wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.” The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The 2007 UN conference was presented with a report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.

Schwank said a global carbon dioxide tax is an idea long overdue that is urgently needed to establish “a funding scheme which generates the resources required to address the dimension of challenge with regard to climate change costs.”

'Redistribution of wealth'

The environmental group Friends of the Earth advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations during the 2007 UN climate conference.

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 96.

#1. To: christine (#0)

IT was this AGW mess that made me realize people were right about the shadow government and NWO.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   12:05:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: farmfriend (#1)

So Al Gore is the single mantra, drum beater dancing in the streets that made you realize that something was wrong in America?

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   12:14:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#2)

So Al Gore is the single mantra, drum beater dancing in the streets that made you realize that something was wrong in America?

Smart ass. No, it was the over all global push, and who was pushing, with no supporting science.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   12:19:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: farmfriend (#4)

No, it was the over all global push, and who was pushing, with no supporting science.

Actually, there is a lot of data to support global warming trends. I don't necessarily believe the major contributor based upon carbon emissions from human technology though. It there is a large number of inputs to the phenomena and human technology is easily modified to change our contributions without government intervention, much less some fantastic boon-dongle bureaucratic mess that is far removed from local geographical areas.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   12:30:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#8)

Actually, there is a lot of data to support global warming trends. I don't necessarily believe the major contributor based upon carbon emissions from human technology though. It there is a large number of inputs to the phenomena and human technology is easily modified to change our contributions without government intervention, much less some fantastic boon-dongle bureaucratic mess that is far removed from local geographical areas.

Except that the science doesn't support that either. First, man's contributions are a drop in the bucket and thus irrelevant. That said, the assumption that an increase in carbon emission, anthropogenic or natural, is bad is also a false notion created by the global elite who wish to garner more control and establish the NWO. CO2 is at historic lows for the planet. An increase in CO2 is actually desired, not only for man's benefit but for plants which are a main driving factor in the food chain. There is some anecdotal evidence that the increase in world food production is due to the increase in atmospheric CO2. History has proven that warm periods are beneficial to human culture and growth. The scientific evidence also shows that CO2 increases follow warming.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   14:15:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: farmfriend (#15)

CO2 is at historic lows for the planet.

Cough, spit and BS. Ever see the amazing benefits about American industry (uses about 25% of all non renewable energy from around the world) hoovering over major population centers? Smog was rampant through the 40s - 70s in America.

Today, smog is decreasing but it is still prevalent in the atmosphere. It is composed largely of CO2 which is a major by-product of energy use, particularly with carbon based fuels such as oil and gasoline. Smog pollution has been identified by most as particulate matter suspended in the release of CO2 emissions; but smog is really CO2.

Ever since the belching plumbs, as by the Iron Horses, of smoke during the early days of the industrial revolution since the mid 1800s, CO2 has been steadily increasing.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   14:50:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#19)

Cough, spit and BS. Ever see the amazing benefits about American industry (uses about 25% of all non renewable energy from around the world) hoovering over major population centers? Smog was rampant through the 40s - 70s in America.

Today, smog is decreasing but it is still prevalent in the atmosphere. It is composed largely of CO2 which is a major by-product of energy use, particularly with carbon based fuels such as oil and gasoline. Smog pollution has been identified by most as particulate matter suspended in the release of CO2 emissions; but smog is really CO2.

Ever since the belching plumbs, as by the Iron Horses, of smoke during the early days of the industrial revolution since the mid 1800s, CO2 has been steadily increasing.

Ah my dear, you need to stop drinking that Kool-Aide and learn the real facts and history of CO2. BTW, there is one country that has bypassed the US in CO2 production and the US had less growth in emissions than all the countries who signed and implemented Kyoto.

I'll get you hooked up with the science if you wish. My knowledge and access has grown since our days of posting at LP.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   16:07:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: farmfriend (#25)

Ah my dear

I am flattered by your personal compliment hugging me.

The rates of human consumption stripping the environment for energy and food and other resources is unsustainable. Governments can't sustain the lack of resources around the world by legislation. And believing in an infinite playground unfettered by 6.7Bn people on the planet isn't either.

For America to get back on track about the nation is to diminish personal energy consumption and forget this crazy idea of unsustainable growth rates which has destroyed America's quality of life.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   16:45:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#29)

For America to get back on track about the nation is to diminish personal energy consumption

Why? What is it about diminishing personal energy consumption do you think would help the situation? CO2 production is a benefit to both humans AND the environment. How is changing that going to help?

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   16:50:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: farmfriend (#30)

I thought OXYGEN was a benefit to mankind. What makes you think CARBON_DIOXIDE is? When you breathe the in the aire around you take in OXYGEN. When you exhale, you remove CARBON_DIOXIDE.

And there is only a limited amount of resources; certainly natural ones such as food and the environment around us. CO2 has shown on a consistent basis to make agricultural products low in vitamins and nutrients; yet within oxygenated environments agricultural products have shown large manifestations of the same nutrients in wheat, corn and certainly fruits and other vegetables.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   17:02:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#32) (Edited)

What makes you think CARBON_DIOXIDE is?

The human mind works better at higher CO2 concentrations thus our military subs keep the concentrations higher for performance reasons. Greenhouses keep CO2 at 1000 ppmv.

CO2 has shown on a consistent basis to make agricultural products low in vitamins and nutrients; yet within oxygenated environments agricultural products have shown large manifestations of the same nutrients in wheat, corn and certainly fruits and other vegetables.

I think you'll have to back that one up, please.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   17:13:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: farmfriend (#33)

Here is five: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/12/021206075233.htm

Climate Change Surprise: High Carbon Dioxide Levels Can Retard Plant Growth, Study Reveals

ScienceDaily (Dec. 6, 2002) — The prevailing view among scientists is that global climate change may prove beneficial to many farmers and foresters – at least in the short term. The logic is straightforward: Plants need atmospheric carbon dioxide to produce food, and by emitting more CO2 into the air, our cars and factories create new sources of plant nutrition that will cause some crops and trees to grow bigger and faster. But an unprecedented three-year experiment conducted at Stanford University is raising questions about that long-held assumption. Writing in the journal Science, researchers concluded that elevated atmospheric CO2 actually reduces plant growth when combined with other likely consequences of climate change – namely, higher temperatures, increased precipitation or increased nitrogen deposits in the soil. See also: Plants & Animals

* Nature * Endangered Plants * Ecology Research

Earth & Climate

* Global Warming * Climate * Environmental Issues

Reference

* Consensus of scientists regarding global warming * Scientific opinion on climate change * Ocean acidification * Fossil fuel

The results of the study may prompt researchers and policymakers to re-think one of the standard arguments against taking action to prevent global warming: that natural ecosystems will minimize the problem of fossil fuel emissions by transferring large amounts of carbon in the atmosphere to plants and soils.

"Perhaps we won't get as much help with the carbon problem as we thought we could, and we will need to put more emphasis on both managing vegetation and reducing emissions," said Harold A. Mooney, the Paul S. Achilles Professor of Environmental Biology at Stanford and co-author of the Dec. 6 Science study.

He noted that the Stanford study is the first ecosystem-scale experiment to apply four climate change factors across several generations of plants.

"To understand complex ecological systems, the traditional approach of isolating one factor and looking at that response, then extrapolating to the whole system, is often not correct," Mooney said. "On an ecosystem scale, many interacting factors may be involved."

Jasper Ridge Global Change Project

The findings published in Science are among the first results of the Jasper Ridge Global Change Project – a multi-year experiment designed to demonstrate how a typical California grassland ecosystem will respond to future global environmental changes.

Located in a fenced off section of Stanford's 1,189-acre Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, the novel experiment was designed to simulate environmental conditions that climate experts predict may exist 100 years from now: a doubling of atmospheric CO2; a temperature rise of 2 degrees F; a 50 percent increase in precipitation; and increased nitrogen deposition – largely a byproduct of fossil fuel burning.

Launched in 1997, the Jasper Ridge experiment was conceived by Mooney and Christopher B. Field, a professor by courtesy in Stanford's Department of Biological Sciences and director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, also located on the Stanford campus.

"Most studies have looked at the effects of CO2 on plants in pots or on very simple ecosystems and concluded that plants are going to grow faster in the future," said Field, co-author of the Science study. "We got exactly the same results when we applied CO2 alone, but when we factored in realistic treatments – warming, changes in nitrogen deposition, changes in precipitation – growth was actually suppressed."

To mimic future climate conditions, Field, Mooney and their colleagues mapped out 36 circular plots of land, each about six feet in diameter. Four plots are virtually untouched, receiving no additional water, nitrogen, carbon dioxide or heat. Each of the remaining 32 circles is divided into four equal quadrants separated by underground partitions to prevent roots in one section from invading neighboring tracts. In these smaller quadrants, researchers study all 16 possible combinations of elevated and normal CO2, heat, water and nitrogen.

The plots thicken

The biggest surprise from the study was the discovery that elevated carbon dioxide only stimulated plant growth when nitrogen, water and temperature were kept at normal levels.

"Based on earlier single-treatment studies with elevated CO2, we initially hypothesized that, with the combination of all four treatments together, the response would be additional growth," said W. Rebecca Shaw, a researcher with the Nature Conservancy of California and lead author of the Science study.

But results from the third year of the experiment revealed a more complex scenario. While treatments involving increased temperature, nitrogen deposition or precipitation – alone or in combination – promoted plant growth, the addition of elevated CO2 consistently dampened those increases.

"The three-factor combination of increased temperature, precipitation and nitrogen deposition produced the largest stimulation [an 84 percent increase], but adding CO2 reduced this to 40 percent," Shaw and her colleagues wrote.

The mean net plant growth for all treatment combinations with elevated CO2 was about 4.9 tons per acre – compared to roughly 5.5 tons per acre for all treatment combinations in which CO2 levels were kept normal. However, when higher amounts of CO2 gas were added to plots with normal temperature, moisture and nitrogen levels, aboveground plant growth increased by nearly a third.

Why would elevated CO2 in combination with other factors have a suppressive effect on plant growth? The researchers aren't sure, but one possibility is that excess carbon in the soil is allowing microbes to outcompete plants for one or more limiting nutrients.

"By applying all four treatments, we may be repositioning the ecosystem so that another environmental factor becomes limiting to growth," Field observed. "For example, by increasing plant growth as a result of adding water or nitrogen, the ecosystem may become more sensitive to limitation by another mineral nutrient such as phosphorous, potassium or something else we hadn't been measuring."

A new five-year experiment is underway at the Jasper Ridge site to analyze potential limiting nutrients in the soil along with microbial-plant interactions and the molecular biology of the vegetation.

Policy implications

Field and his colleagues say that their ultimate goal is to use the results of the Jasper Ridge study to forecast what will happen to other ecosystems – from alpine tundra to tropical rainforests.

"In the past, people have argued that perhaps we don't really need to worry about fossil fuel emissions, because increased plant growth will effectively pull elevated CO2 concentrations out of the atmosphere and keep the world at the appropriate equilibrium," he added. "But our experiment shows that we can't count on the natural world, the unmanaged world, to save us by pulling down all the atmospheric CO2."

Added Mooney: "Our study demonstrates that there is still a lot to learn about the factors that regulate global climate change. But we also know a lot already, more than enough to engage in a serious discussion about action to reduce CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels and clearing forests."

###

Other coauthors of the Science study are former Stanford doctoral student Erika S. Zavaleta, now a Nature Conservancy post-doctoral fellow at the University of California-Berkeley; Nona R. Chiariello, research coordinator of Stanford's Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve; and Elsa E. Cleland, a graduate student in the Stanford Department of Biological Sciences.

The study was supported by the National Science Foundation, the Morgan Family Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, the Carnegie Institution of Washington, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Switzer Foundation and the A.W. Mellon Foundation.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-11   17:54:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: grace_is_by_our_lord, all (#39)

You're posting garbage.

wudidiz  posted on  2009-07-11   19:45:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: wudidiz, farmfriend (#57)

You're posting garbage.

Call farmfriend in here. She and grace can offtopic the thread into oblivion!

Clitora  posted on  2009-07-11   19:50:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: Clitora, wudidiz, grace_is_by_our_lord (#58)

Call farmfriend in here. She and grace can offtopic the thread into oblivion!

I know how you love to rag on me. It actually reminds of a guy on another forum who was jealous that I would flirt with everyone but him.

Anyway, if you will take the time to notice, grace and I were the only ones actually having a scientific discussion on CO2 which is very much in keeping with the topic at hand. The discussion is not done so you are welcome to take part if you wish.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-11   20:05:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: farmfriend, Clitora, wudidiz (#66)

Anyway, if you will take the time to notice, grace and I were the only ones actually having a scientific discussion on CO2 which is very much in keeping with the topic at hand. The discussion is not done so you are welcome to take part if you wish.

That's why I love your posts. You are about objective discussion and bearing and considerate thinking even though we may have diametrical points of view. And we may never agree. Farmfriend, you know how to carry debate. Wudidiz can't carry a tune for discussion; he is too busy chewing gum and tying his own tennis shoe laces from time to time as he attempts to run around the playground with his pants falling down.

As for Clitora (this thread only) very good perspectives. How long have you been researching your personal opinions on unsustainable capabilities?

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-12   2:00:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#83)

You are about objective discussion and bearing and considerate thinking even though we may have diametrical points of view. And we may never agree. Farmfriend, you know how to carry debate.

Thank you. Agreement with me is not required for my friendship.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-12   2:33:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#89. To: farmfriend (#87)

I wasn't agreeing with you. I was just saying I have respect for your opinions even though I may thoroughly disagree and take issue with your points.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-12   2:55:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#91. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#89)

I wasn't agreeing with you. I was just saying I have respect for your opinions even though I may thoroughly disagree and take issue with your points.

I know you weren't agreeing with me. My point was that it is not a problem, not required for friendship.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-12   2:57:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: farmfriend (#91)

I wasn't rubbing your back or attempting to coddle you or show some method to garner any special relationship, either.

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-12   3:04:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#92)

I wasn't rubbing your back or attempting to coddle you or show some method to garner any special relationship, either.

Damn, I could use some good coddling.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-12   3:07:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#94. To: farmfriend (#93)

Well, I can't do it; not because I don't like you it's because the effort requires touchy-feelie. But what do you think of my new by-line?

grace_is_by_our_lord  posted on  2009-07-12   3:10:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#96. To: grace_is_by_our_lord (#94)

But what do you think of my new by-line?

I think that is not something I'm going to discuss.

farmfriend  posted on  2009-07-12   3:18:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 96.

        There are no replies to Comment # 96.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 96.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]