moo o nz ob
2010-12-08 05:59:21 UTC
Climate "Scientists" Propose Global One-child Policy, Socialism, Taxes,
Written by Alex Newman
Tuesday, 07 December 2010 14:03
Among the climate solutions proposed by scientists, officials, and
others for the Cancun COP16 global-warming summit are ideas like a
global one-child policy modeled on Communist Chinas brutal system,
a carbon rationing scheme for every person on Earth, world socialism,
and a series of global taxes paid to the United Nations.
Prominent "scientists" have offered some of the more extreme
suggestions. Professor Kevin Anderson, for example, director of a
Centre for Climate Change Research in the U.K., authored a paper
urging the adoption of a World War II-style rationing system for
carbon: The Second World War and the concept of rationing is
something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale
of the problem we face, Anderson explained in an article, urging
world rulers to limit electricity and prohibit food imports, among
I am not saying we have to go back to living in caves, he said. Our
emissions were a lot less ten years ago and we got by ok then. His
suggestion would involve a total freeze on economic growth in
developed countries and carbon rations for every person on the
Perhaps trying to make his colleagues seem moderate by comparison,
another British scientist writing for the Royal Society said such
drastic measures would not be enough to stave off global warming.
Peak warming is determined by the total amount of carbon dioxide we
release into the atmosphere, not the rate we release it in any given
year, claimed Oxford University physicist Myles Allen.
The idea of a global one-child policy modeled after Communist
Chinas has also been a hot topic, but not just among Chinese
communists. In fact, it has even attracted the support of CNN boss Ted
Turner, who urged world leaders to adopt the barbaric tactics at a
luncheon in Cancun over the weekend. If were going to be here [as a
species] 5,000 years from now, were not going to do it with seven
billion people, said Turner, who already has five children of his
Economist Brian ONeill of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric
Research, who also spoke at the luncheon, presented a study claiming
that population growth was bad for the planet. He suggested that
family planning code words for abortion and birth control should
be made universally available to help limit emissions.
The Chinese regime is still hoping to implement its family policy
worldwide, though it drew strong condemnation when it was proposed at
the COP15 global-warming summit in Copenhagen last year. The communist
government frequently brags that its brutal scheme which includes
forced abortions for women with more than one child has helped limit
emissions by reducing the number of children, possibly by as much as
half of a billion.
Then, of course, are calls from scientists for a carbon tax, a
particularly popular proposal among cash-strapped Western regimes that
fund the scientists. What the world needs now is a bold,
experimental, daring step to simply try out something that has never
been done before, and that is a global carbon tax, urged Professor
Johan Rockström of the Stockholm Environment Institute in an interview
with a Singaporean paper.
It will be a crazy step, a daring step, but something the world
simply needs to experiment with, he said, proposing carbon taxes as
high as $40 per ton of CO2. And you set that up as a global
mechanism, using the money raised for so-called development.
That might be what we might need to turn things around in the short
term, Rockström added.
There are several other proposals for global taxation that are also
gaining traction at the conference. Those include a tax on aviation
and shipping paid directly to the UN or a similar tax on banking and
financial transactions, also paid straight into global coffers. Before
the climate summit in Cancun had even started, the UN put out a
document proposing its global taxation schemes. What will come of them
remains to be seen.
As The New American reported last week, another idea being pushed in
Cancun would ban incandescent light bulbs and kerosene lamps
worldwide. That plan is backed by a coalition of governments, the UN,
several humongous corporations, and various communist dictatorships.
The cost would be enormous. And the wisdom of using the far more
expensive CFL bulbs which contain the toxic element mercury is
still a matter of great debate.
Another radical proposal coming from a powerful coalition of radical
leftist regimes in Latin America involves killing what little is left
of the free market. The environmental imbalance capitalism has caused
is without doubt the fundamental cause of the alarming atmospheric
phenomena," wrote socialist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in his
most current column, referring to recent rains that have washed away
some shanty towns in his socialist utopia. He blamed the deluges on
"The world's powerful economies insist on a destructive way of life
and then refuse to take any responsibility," Chavez added. Other
regimes, including that of Bolivian leader Evo Morales, have echoed
Chavez call to end capitalism, transfer the wealth it produced to
Third World countries, and implement global socialism.
There are numerous other extreme proposals coming from global
bureaucrats and scientists riding the climate gravy train. How far
they will get, however, remains to be seen, as newspapers and
columnists around the world continue to ridicule the whole confab and
its theories and ideas. Analysts have even suggested the "global-
warming scam" is unraveling.
For now, climate negotiators are trying to figure out how to extort
$100 billion a year from rich countries for a Green slush fund.
Agreed to in Copenhagen last year with the help of bribery, espionage,
and threats from American and European officials, the fund would
supposedly hand out money to corrupt Third World regimes to deal with
the alleged threat of global warming.