Global warming question?

It is all about eco guilt, nothing more.

If you want to know to know the intent behind AGW/ACC, read the entire answer, and read what they are saying in their own words quoted, so there can be no misunderstandings of their actual intent.

Actually, the whole reason AGW/ACC exists at all, is to get countries to sign the Copenhagen Treaty (like what the AGW/ACC promoters want), to give the UN COP absolute control over the US economy and society (in their own words below). They have drafted a 181 page document outlining that they will have absolute authority unquestioned and unaccountable to no one but themselves (in their own words).

These are a few statements that are legally binding for the countries that surrender their rights to the UN COP. Segments of the expose are shown below, and an expanded expose is at:

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/U...

(though not a full list of their demands and aspirations)

(the COP is Conference of Parties, an established organization by the UN for a one world government, and "Convention" is the countries that surrender to the COP through the treaty.)

Page 39, #32

"Funds will be under the control of the COP as the supreme authority of the Convention."

The COP will have unconditional, unrestricted power over the economy and society. Why is this stated if it is all about science, and nothing to do with a one world government and absolute global rule???

Page 18, #36

"..adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate, in order to assure the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention."

Market rules and dynamics subordinate???? This IS what has caused the current global economic meltdown - Market rules and dynamics subordinate.

Page 7, #3

"a major obstacle to efforts to promote [sustainable] economic and social development [and to [reduce] poverty] [eradication] [promote poverty aliviation,] [which are the first and overriding priorities of all developing countries]."

If it about AGW, why is poverty eradication the primary and overriding priority????

Page 18, #38 (a)

" The government will be ruled by the COP"

Does the US want a foreign dictator to have absolute rule over society and the economy???

Page 29, (q)

"Any lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason to postpone or scale down action on adaptation];"

It is suppose to be about irrefutable science. Why would this be stated if there is any lack of certainty? - because it is all about a lack of science certainty for the claim of Global Warming.

Page 78, #4

"economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities"

Poverty eradication again?? Stated many times. Isn't this issue about saving the planet??

Page 87, #77

"A separate pool of funding to finance national coordinating bodies through a direct line item in the secretariat’s budget shall be established. Such support shall not be subject to measurement, reporting and verification."

Poverty eradication is named numerous times. The COP will have absolute and unconditional authority, and billions of US dollars will be extorted to fund their pet projects and no one will know where the billions will go - i.e. Page 87, #77, second sentence - "Such support shall not be subject to measurement, reporting and verification."

Check out this publication of exposing only a few segments and statements shown in full so there can be no misunderstanding of their intended objectives in the statements and what the sections translate to mean.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/PDFs/U...

The full 181 page document is at:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca7/eng/i...

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/10...

Science and AGW/ACC has nothing to do with the issue. By the way, by 1933 the world was to be in turmoil caused by AGW/ACC according to publications in 1922 -

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/16/you-ask-i-pr...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/globalwarmi...

Your first two points have been talked about quite a lot in here. Your third point is false. As the amount of water vapour increases in the atmosphere, for those rain-prone areas, the amount of rainfall will increase as well as will the amount of flooding.

http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/number-of-flood-ev...

And what happens to the fresh water supply when flooding occurs? It becomes contaminated. There will actually be a loss of fresh water, through flooding and contamination, rather than a gain.

http://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/Volume_25/issue_3/du....

Canada, however, will see more benefits compared to other countries as long as those pests, such as the bark beetles, stay south of the border. The end result of that being a severe loss of trees.

The bad, non-ecological effects are:

- loss of arable land elsewhere, so emigration into Canada will be required.

- loss of coastline, as low lying areas are flooded (so property lines will have to be adjusted).

- loss of crops, and crops become less suitable as food, so we will have to eat one another.

No Global Warming does not require that more water be dropped anywhere useful, or at a time where crops can benefit, like Canada.

As Global Warming increases, the ozone layer get more depleted. And you had the record-sized northern ozone hole over you just last year (2011).

Because you can't guilt-trip the masses into accepting devastating carbon taxes if you put a happy-face on global warming.

------------