"Goldman Sachs has been one of the most aggressive firms on Wall Street about taking action on climate change; the company sends its bankers home at night in hybrid limousines."

Why are we not surprised? Goldman-Sachs is front and center in the push for global "sustainability" politics. Those politics in practice are essentially soviet justice and civil order married to Fascist economics...they have a wealthy controlling class who are above the law.

The duplicity of Champaign socialism is rooted in fascist economics and soviet social order.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/yates/yates63.html

The working assumption of the author of second article seems to be that Indian farmers are too stupid to recognize their own best interests. Or have they been duped by the New York Times somehow?

Brendan O'Neill's article is good but he makes a basic mistake when he writes that "... a key driving force behind environmentalism is self-indulgent Western guilt." Rather, it is the sadism of the Left (which approaches radical evil), which leads them always to look for "solutions", often to "problems" of their own invention, which damage people. They wish to bring us in the West to our harm, and prey on our decency to do so, but third world people are more vulnerable, and, for the Left, more "fun" and satisfying, all the more so as they sometimes provide gratifying photo-ops as they thank their oppressors for their misery.

O Lenin, O Stalin, have we learned nothing from your hard lessons?

Mark: The core assumption of transnational socialism is that NO ONE knows what is in their own best interests and NO ONE can be trusted to do the "right" thing unless a heavy bureaucratic jackboot is applied to their neck.

Thus it is with transnational green/climate/sustainability politics...this is essentially global soviet administration with Fascist (Plutocratic) corporatism economic components added.

To fulfill the green globalists dream there can be NO private ownership of property (land)or resources as no one but the Plutocrats know how best to use ( read: exploit) that land/resource.

Getting the picture now?

Please read the UN's Agenda 21 if you don't believe me...this 41 chapter abomination sprang from the same UN conference that spawbed Kyoto...it is the bible for global sustainability politics which sets out a global soviet-styled regulatory administration over private property.

"My personal favorite was "Ride mass transit." This to a conclave of Hollywood plutocrats who have not seen the inside of a subway since the moon landing and for whom mass transit means a stretch limo seating no fewer than 10."

Limousine Liberal (definition): An individual who is all for the proletariat provided, they do not have to sit beside them on the bus.

Amen. When one of these pompous buffoons moves into a 1500 sq ft town house and bicycles into work I'll start listening.

But to be lectured on the environment by a jet setter with a Sasquatch-sized carbon footprint, using up enough resources for 50 people, is too much.

//www.drudgereport.com/gore.htm

St. Algore busted flying by Gulfstream, just like that racist/bigot/homophobe Rush Limbaugh guy.

Could Albert be a bigger fool? I don't think so.

rabbit, your 1500 ft2 mansion dwarfs my little 700 ft2 single floor family of 4 home.

let the down-sizing war begin (why i live in a shoe-box...har-har)

Mr Redux: The UN isn't doing this, and the charity in question isn't forcing anyone to do anything. Therefore, the farmers in question are adopting these technologies presumably because they feel it is in their best economic interest to do so. Are they somehow incapable of determining their own best interests?

Makes me long for the old days when crowd following amongst celebrities just meant everybody ended up at the same villa getting drunk or doing lines of coke.

Paper bag beside the highway AJ. ~:D

United Nations bio-chemistry 101

Kyoto + carbon offsets + hypocrisy(catalyst) = eco enslavement

Thank-you Oak Lake Manitoba

AJ:

I cut these celebrities some slack since I figured they would need room for their Oscars and Emmies and Nobel Prizes and such.

Personnally I live in a box on the road. And happy for it, I can tell you.

Mark, you don't think they'd like to upgrade from treadle pump to Cat diesel at some point? Or hell, maybe even a nice coal fired steam engine?

Treadle pumps are crap, Mark. You want to try irrigating a ten acre rice field with a bicycle? Its even harder when you're starving, or so I understand.

Again, Phantom, no one is forcing them to use the pumps over any other technology. Therefore they are choosing them. Are Indian farmers somehow less intellectually equipped to make that choice?

Mark said: "The UN isn't doing this,"

It certainly is..Agenda 21 provided the justification and Kyoto provided the economics for international busibody politics/economics.

In a civil society it is really no one's business how another person farms in another jurisdiction. If that guy used practices that give me quuality produce at competative cists I support his efforts with a purchase, If another fellow does better he gets my patronage.

Patronage is based on value and worth...not dictated mandated driven by political dogmas.

Read agenda 21 before you apologize for some of the world's worst ideas.

Dr Bono Suzuki did a special on sustainable agriculture ( actually it was substainable) in Cuba, with them all plowing their feilds with donkeys. of course it was touted on CBCpravda as planet saving. they dont care if half the world starves.
lately they have been touting the 100 mile challenge , use only food that is grown within 100 miles. sell that one to the latte crowd or better yet , sell that to someone in fort chip. or flin flon.

CBCpravda has become such a joke that you cant tell when they switch to airfarce. it is the airfarce. the billion dollar boondoggle airfarce.

Mr Redux, I have not been talking about the larger politics of global warming, I am discussing the content of the article linked in this post. I fear I'm repeating myself here, but no one is forcing these farmers to choose one technology over another. There is no compulsion, no law, nor any regulation that is forcing them to do this. Therefore, they are choosing this because they believe it is best for themselves. The the second article (and the way the post was framed) implied that this was some sort of neo-colonial practice, but was resting on the very colonial idea that Indian farmers do not, in fact, know what is best for themselves.

Mark, they are using that medieval tech because they are too poor to buy or make anything else. Also too poor to feed an ox to do it for them, as was common practice here in Canada in the last century.

Go visit a farm museum some time. The ONLY reason for a treadle pump is that you can't afford a draft animal or a motor. Nobody choses to sit on their butt pedaling all day long in the heat, or running on a hamster wheel. That is not human nature.

If the UN wants to encourage treadle pumps over and above animals and engines, that tells me all I need to know about the UN.

If you want to know what Indian farmers are doing, check this out:

//www.sristi.org/cms/en/our_network

This is the Honey Bee Network. These guys go out and find brilliant solutions to problems that guys in the sticks have come up with, clean them up and arrange manufacturing and dissemination of them. Inventors get patents and royalties. Capitalism in motion.

These Indian farmer guys are some of the most inventive, hard nosed pragmatists you'll find these days, just like old time Ontario farmers.

Which is why I say if they are using treadle pumps it isn't because they want to. Farmers ain't stupid, Mark. Algore is though. :)

"The last time the selling of pardons was prevalent--in a predecessor religion to environmentalism called Christianity--Martin Luther lost his temper and launched the Reformation."

A big tee-hee.

"the success of carbon-offsetting relies on the continuing failure of Third World communities to develop. Clark writes: ‘Carbon-offset schemes…only work if the recipients [in the Third World] continue to live in very basic conditions. Once they aspire to Western, fossil fuel-powered lifestyles, then the scheme is undone.’"

A big that's-really-sad. Eco-hypocrites don't want the third-world to develop and live as comfortably as even the poorest can in Western nations (running water, electricity, . . .).

All the same, I don't think fossil fuels will last forever. Hope an alternative source of energy can be found, some time.

Reminder

Monday, September 10/07 10 pm Eastern CFRA's Late Night Counsell, climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball-

Tuesday, September 11/07 10 pm Eastern, Steve Milloy of junkscience.com.

http://www.cfra.com/listen/index.asp

Google "Bussard" and "fusion" Ann. Help -might- be on the way. Maybe. Depends if it works or not.

Phantom, "we lived in a 'ole in the ground", "oh yeah?" "We were evicted from our 'ole in the ground" One of my favorite Python bits.

"We dreamed of 'aving an 'ole to live in!"

Gawd AJ, look what you started.

Saskpower buying carbon offsets for new Natural gas plant. I wonder if this will be included in the cost of the project. I also wonder where the money is going and what scheme they are talking about.

http://www.oilweek.com/news.asp?ID=11226

"The turbines are not a renewable energy source and will produce greenhouse gas emissions. Nilson insisted the emissions will be offset through a carbon credit system."

Excellent articles - Krauthammer is 'spot on'. Yes, it's a scam, it's a scam where the rich can use even more and more energy and 'purchase pardons', ie, send money to so-called 'poor nations'.

The Church did this as a means of raising enormous sums of money - heck, trading on everyone's dual emotions of guilt and hope was easy. It's simple to make someone feel guilty for any small transgression - and to feel hope that they can 'wipe out the guilt' by -money.

Now, we have the Kyoto Religion, with the UN as its church. And various wealthy ministers, such as Gore and Suzuki with their outrageous expensive lifestyles - paid for by us, as we purchase their books, purchase their talks etc. These rich then 'buy' credits - and they have the money to do so - while the rest of us must make our govts 'buy credits'...which will increase our taxes, reduce our energy capacities, and make our lives most unpleasant.

The third world countries where these so-called 'carbon credits' will go? Heck, like all UN donations, by the time they get any money, it will be one-twentieth of its original value - as the UN bureaucrats take their cuts.

And there's absolutely no guarantee that that money will be used for 'carbon-friendly industries'. Why should it be? The UN, corrupt as it is, won't ensure this. These countries are all exempt from Kyoto. As noted, China doesn't have the time or money to be cautious about industrialism; it's putting up one new coal fired plant a week.

So- Kyotoism, and its indulgences and pardons is a money-laundering scheme. Take from the West, give to the UN..and a few trickles to the Third World.

ann- the technologies of energy production has changed over the thousands of years. First, man had to domesticate animals and use them, releasing himself from certain labour; he used oxen, donkeys, mules, camels - and horses. But he had to domesticate them and learn proper equipment (such as the horse collar).

Then - came water and wind power; man had to develop the technologies to harness these natural resources.

Then, came fossil fuels - such as coal and its steam power. And gas. And oil. All of them require their own technology of resource extraction and equipment of use.

Each one increased the energy available for use exponentially. And - we'll do the same with the next energy resource, whatever it is. Nuclear or hydrogen or helium or...

Climate change is bogus.

I save like $200 a month on gas, you can too.
www.canadagasdeals.com

Tell you what ET, if Dr. Bussard makes his little fusion plant work Kate may get her wish for a fusion powered John Deere tractor. Scuttlebutt is the Navy is funding a full scale prototype so they can stick it in a ship.

Ship born particle beams, megawatt lasers and electric rail guns anyone? How about an aircraft carrier that can do 150 knots all day long?

Meanwhile the UN is selling pedal pumps in India. All hail the UN.

The article in question does not mention the UN at all, and I would be delighted if anyone could explain how Agenda 21 is forcing any Indian farmer to forego using technology they choose to like to conduct their business.
The farmers probably cannot afford gas pumps. That they choose to avail themsleves of a private company's product to do so is a rational economic choice, based on their own assessment of their resources and self-interest. Yet the article would seem to imply they somehow are not the best judges of their own situation. They are not victims of some sort of neo-colonial conspiracy, as the writer - and by extension, this blog - would imply.

"Why are we not surprised? Goldman-Sachs is front and center in the push for global "sustainability" politics."

And guess who has an option to buy CanWest's TV properties in the near future.

mark - there is no neo-colonial conspiracy to Kyotoism and the funneling of 'carbon credit' payments via the UN to the Third World countries. It's a basic money laundering process.

It operates via the UN. Instead of an industrial country loaning money to these 'developing' countries, the UN is 'fining' the industrialized countries - and the fine is supposedly handed over to the 'developing country' for them to use to industrialize themselves. Supposedly, with non-polluting factories. heh.

There's no sanctions if you put up a coal factory per week - as in China; there's no overseeing of the use of the money - you can use it to buy yourself a new palace. And, as I said, by the time that country gets the money, the UN will have leached off most of it for itself.

Now - you are, I think - if I understand you correctly -, setting up a red herring to this discussion - a kind of 'reverse discrimination' - where you are saying that those who are advocating human labour rather than fuel labour for farm etc work - are stating that the Indian farmer is too stupid to make the choice of fuel vs human labour. I don't think anyone is saying that - but, the COST of fuel, the availability of fuel, etc - is a concern.

AND - the officiousness of the evangelical GreenPeace/UN worker in the field, exhorting these people to stop using fuel and switch to treadles - isn't a myth. After all, we have the same types here, who insist that we feel guilty if we don't ride our bikes etc. Now, as the wealthy, we can assuage our guilt by paying sin money to the UN/church.

Google JOHN KANZIUS for a look at the future thru invention,not regulation or conservation. The oil dependent countries are in for an education.

I am in agreement with the previous comments of GW being much like a leftist religion.

Gore and Suzuki come across as evangelists to me.Maybe even closer to faith(climate)healers.Right down to the matching sex scandal/carbon usage sleazy hypocrisies.

There is one thing I have yet to determine though...
That is IF any of these carbon credit companies(LOL!!)actually have brick and morter entities,did they install confessional booths for their guilt-ridden congregations?

What gullible souls.

Oh,and BTW.....
Once again,shame shame on those scientists who put agenda ahead of integrity.

I just noticed last night that when one purchases Air Canada tickets, one can also buy some carbon credits.
Air Canada is careful to indicate, however, that it is not involved in the transaction.

Make no mistake about this, Gore and his minions of wealthy Hollywood types aren't looking out for the little guy in the GW ploy. Driven by guilt(with the amount of money they rake in for their mediocre talents they ought to be) and more time(equals more income) in the spotlight, it's really about loathing the the fact that we little people have too many things and that there are so damn many of us to cope with.

The little guy now has a shares of many of the expensive products once only privy to the rich. That was unthinkable decades ago. I'm sure it hurts. Essentially we are loathed for our success. It makes perfect sense for them to dehumanize whole swatches of humanity as "carbon footprints" to be coerced and authoritatively dealt with.

Algore is such a first class phony. Some are slower on the learning curve to figure it out. The jerk's house has a winter heating bill of five regular homes. Michael Moore probably accounts for a small rain forest gone in meeting his hamburger needs over the years.

Shame on Prime Minister Steve at the APEC summit explaining how he is now "convinced of the science of Kyoto"!?

"Canada will lead the way"!!??

WTF!

Did we elect just another bunch of liberal idiots?
Is there any hope for this country.
Who really pulls the strings?
What the hell happened to Harper?

Next thing you know Priminister Steve is going to be convinced of the science of Castro.

From yesterdays high brought on by Mulroney hammering the stake through the heart of that vampire Trudeau, to this.
More dispairing words for the ears of a Toronto conservative.

Related, today's new OBL tape, straight from Drudge, indicates he'd vote for the Democrats(or Liberals in Canada if you were on his radar right now)on issues other than the WOT. Soon he'll be making inroads with the left as a model of environmental thoughtfulness for forgoing villas for caves, a better carbon footprint profile than Hitler or Stalin.

He might also get booked for a campus tour yet.

"He goes on to call Noam Chomsky "among one of the most capable of those from your own side," and mentions global warming and "the Kyoto accord."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/new-obl-tape-ir.html

richfisher - how does what Harper said, below:

"The weight of scientific evidence holds that our atmosphere is getting hotter, that human activity is a significant contributor, and that there will be serious consequences for all life on earth," said Harper. "The physical evidence is already there for all to see."

How does this mean that Harper said he is 'convinced of the science of Kyoto' - which claims that the warming is caused by and only by - man. Not that humans are 'significant contributors' but are THE contributor.

I suggest you read what else he said - which was a rejection of the UN Kyotoism with its dictatorial stance - and an insistence that environmental concerns must be balanced with econmoic prosperity. And - that APEC, will not 'dictate targets to the rest of the world' -

Mark, Phantom . . . I believe they are using the old fashioned technologies because they are being bribed to do so -- that's where the carbon credit $$$'s come in. It still amounts to the rich saying "We'll pay you to stay downtrodden and poor."

Anybody here remember the old Negro Spiritual, Massa's in de col' col' ground?
I sense it won't be too long before that comes true. Very prophetic.

carbon taxes more ways that liberals can sap away more money to fill their coffers i mean they want to tax us for something thats not happening except in their own preverted minds

Mark: you are a poor deluded soul. Did you really read the article or just skim through it and then make your spurious assumptions that the poor WANT to use treadle pumps? What the hell are you smoking? Why would they want to use those pumps and shorten their lives by years while you sit here with all the comforts? Why would you possibly think that they would prefer to live to 40-45 while you live to 80-90? Have you ever read anything past "Mandingo"! There is hell to pay for those who think that it is okay to keep our brother men in the dark and living in caves while we reap the long life of ease in the western democracies. We should be working to bring electricity to those villages and towns in the third world . We should be working to give our brothers a hand up and showing them how to have a better life.We should be WILLING to share our knowledge and our progress with all, not hording it to ourselves in fear and loathimg that there might not be enough to go around. May God enlighten your shriveled soul.

Just got back after a long day and read through all this . . . thanks for the tip, Phantom. I've only heard of fusion referred to in a vague way as a part of ongoing research.

Always seems like a new solution would lead to a new set of problems, though.

LindaL, the point I'm -trying- to make is that there's not enough money in the world to bribe a guy to use a treadle pump if there's any alternative at all. Like even a goat-powered pump.

It'd be like riding your bike for 8 hours a day, up hill. We're talking tons and tons of water here in the course of a growing season.

Mark is implying that I and others think Indian farmers are too stoooopid to decide these issues for themselves.

Quite the contrary, I'm saying no one but an imbecile would use such crap machinery unless the alternative was death by starvation. That's what they are up against, and anybody over 40 remembers the last three times more than a million Indians died in a drought.

Given any kind of break at all, these guys will make sure there's never another famine in India. The carbon trading scam just helps make sure they never get that break.

Irritating.

Phantom 11:55AM:

FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
I was happier then and I had nothin'. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
House! You were lucky to live in a house! We used to live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, 'alf the floor was missing, and we were all 'uddled together in one corner for fear of falling.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Eh, you were lucky to have a room! We used to have to live in t' corridor!
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Oh, we used to dream of livin' in a corridor! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House? Huh.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Well, when I say 'house' it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
We were evicted from our 'ole in the ground; we 'ad to go and live in a lake.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us living in t' shoebox in t' middle o' road.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Cardboard box?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt.

@LindaL (6:01 PM):

"We'll pay you to stay downtrodden and poor" sounds like a great title for a book.

Very nice Paul!A little humour puts some of this leftie crap into perspective!

ET
I appologize, perhaps I should have said "convinced with the science that legitimizes Kyoto", and not "science of Kyoto"

Either way what does it matter?
Once the ministry of spending gets the green light, no bureaucrat gives a hoot if we're the "only contributor" or "significant contributor". Canadian taxpayers will still end up with an extra billion dollars a year hole in our pocket and a new giant asbestos brake pad bolted on our economy here, were I do business and live.
It is heartening to hear Prime Minister Steve won't be pi$ed at the rest of the world's countries, if they kindly decline the offer to damage their own economies likewise.

In for a penny, in for a pound"

ET, Phantom: I read the article quite thoroughly, thank you. Again, no one is forcing these farmers to use these technologies. If, in fact, they are being paid to use them, then they are deciding for themselves, for whatever reason, that this represents a better deal than diesel. I am not implying anyone here thinks that Indian farmers are stupid, but that is definitely the premise of the article and of how the post was framed.

A further note – I have made no comment on the effectiveness or morality of carbon offsets. I have questioned no one’s connection with reality, the depth of their intellect nor speculated on the state of anyone’s soul (though I thank Eliza for his well wishes). Nor have I accused anyone here of racism or paternalism. I have not and will not make this discussion personal. All I have done is point out that the implication in the second article linked here is that those doing purchasing carbon offsets are somehow compelling third word residents to do business with carbon offset companies, which in turn are forcing them to live in poverty requires an assumption that the farmers are not capable of recognizing their own best interests. How anyone interpreted from those statements that I believe that Indian farmers ought to choose one technology over another for my comfort is beyond me.

"If, in fact, they are being paid to use them, then they are deciding for themselves, for whatever reason, that this represents a better deal than diesel."

Mark, you make it sound like these farmers are choosing between Ford and Chrysler. The article and me are pointing out (repeatedly!) that this is not the case. They are not being given a choice. There is no choice involved.

Some NGO for the UN comes along ands says "hey, we will give you these crappy treadle pumps and pay you a dollar a year to use them if you will give up diesel pumps". What does the farmer do? He laughs at the stupid UN guy and takes the money, because he doesn't HAVE a friggin' diesel pump, Mark!

No money equals no fuel, no pipe and no engine.

He uses the treadle pump because its marginally easier than carrying buckets, not because its somehow a better deal than an actual pump. He still has to dig the channels by hand, because of course he has no pipes or fittings.

Why? Because yesterday I paid $63 Canadian dollars for EIGHT FEET of -used- four inch steel pipe. Wholesale, Mark. Made right here in Canada, at the Stelco pipe mill.

What will it cost after it gets shipped all the way to Water Buffalo Junction in India? Joe Farmer would be lucky to make $300 a year, can he afford my pipe? How about 2$ a gallon gas, wholesale at the dock in NYC? That's how much it is.

A Ford pickup always represents a much better deal than a new pair of running shoes. Except when you can't afford the shoes, never mind the truck.

Final word Mark. Poverty decides, they don't. Carbon trading in poverty is nothing short of evil.

Phantom, we seem to be talking past each other. I don't dispute that these farmers have limited choice due to their poverty. But if the carbon offset companies are giving them the opportunity to have a treadle pump instead of carrying buckets, then that is a plus for them. If it is encouraging them to give up diesel (which, if you check out the charity's website, is what they're trying to do) in favour of their pumps, and the farmer agrees, it is not up to anyone to tell him that it his not in his interest to do so. If they believe their life will be better with a gas powered mechanical pump, if it is within their means, they will choose one (and it is within the means of many, otherwise the programme wouldn't be trying to convince them to choose otherwise). Relative poverty included, there are clearly choices articulated in this article: gas pump, no pump, foot pump. If, for whatever reason, the farmers see the foot pump as a superior option above either gas or bucket, (and I've read nothing to indicate they're being compelled) then that is a simple business transaction, between two consenting parties.
It's all well and good to say we should be sharing our technology with them (which, I might add, doesn't take into account India's own highly developed industrial, agricultural and technology sectors) but the fact remains we're not. If someone were to show up giving away John Deere tractors to these farmers, I've no doubt that no amount of treadle pumps would entice them to turn them down.
I repeat, I have made no comment on the morality or effectiveness of carbon offsets. All I am saying is that in order to accept that those Westerners participating in schemes like those described in the second article are exploiting the poor requires that one accept that the poor are somehow unable to recognize their own best interests.

I had never thought of GW in terms of the pre- Martin Luthur Catholic Church.

Interesting analogy.

So now that Harper has thrown opposition to the foolishness under the train, who will be Canada's Martin Luther?

BKG

Unable to -protect- their best interests Mark. Difference is large.

Buying carbon credits is like buying snake oil and who wants to oil a snake?

Phantom: Yes, I agree the difference is huge, though Indians have a long and proud history of standing up for themselves, both individually and collectively. Fortunately, as there is no indication in this article that the farmers' interests are being threatened, that's not an issue. The idea of giving up a gas pump in favour of manual labour may seem perverse, but in the absence of an evidence or allegation of ocompulsion, I'll trust the man on the ground's judgement of what's best for himself and his family over that of an Internet columnist in London.