“De Omnibus Dubitandum”
“De Omnibus Dubitandum”
Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!
Evergreen Solar Inc., the Massachusetts clean-energy company that received millions in state subsidies from the Patrick administration for an ill-fated Bay State factory, has filed for bankruptcy, listing $485.6 million in debt. Evergreen, which closed its taxpayer-supported Devens factory in March and cut 800 jobs, has been trying to rework its debt for months. The cash-strapped company announced today has sought a reorganization in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware and reached a deal with certain note holders to restructure its debt and auction off assets. The Massachusetts Republican Party called the Patrick administration’s $58 million financial aid package, which supported Evergreen’s $450 million factory, a “waste” of money.........To cut costs, Evergreen shifted some of its production to Wuhan, China, last year. That joint venture will remain operating subject to financing talks with Chinese investors
My Take - History has repeated itself. This didn't work during the Carter years and we had no reason to expect it would work now; unless or course we are intellectuals, then we are capable of believing the most unbelievable things. Now to the point! Green is a failure everywhere. Why would we think it would be successful in pest control? It really is true. Some things are so stupid that only an intellectual can believe them.
History tells us that listing a critter as an endangered species does little for the species and can do a great deal of harm to the local economies—the spotted owl and the delta smelt are two oft-cited cases. But there is not a big body of evidence showing how these listing decisions were made. It was just assumed that the species plight warranted protection. But that was before the listing proposal for the dunes sagebrush lizard threatened a large segment of U.S. domestic oil production and the economies of Southeastern New Mexico and West Texas……. [Now a] the team is exposing fatal flaws in the proposed rule that should bring every previous listing, and the entire process, into question. ….In researching the process, it was discovered that for ESA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) doesn’t go through what the science community would call “peer review.” They have an “internal peer review”—FWS checks over FWS’s own work. The agency does not disclose the identity of the report writer or the “peer reviewers.” …….Whoever wrote the proposed rule clearly wanted the lizard listed as the document is filled with contradiction and speculation—but it was issued anyway. In the proposed listing it states: “We do not know the magnitude or imminence of the direct or indirect impacts of competition and climate change on the status of the species at this time. However, we consider exposure to oil and gas pollutants to be a threat to the species throughout its range, both now and continuing into the foreseeable future.” Wait, you, the unknown author, are willing to destroy the regional economy based on “we do not know” and “we consider”? In other cases, the word “likely” is used to describe a population reduction. Elsewhere it is stated that the species is “persisting.” “Could,” “can,” “we believe”…
One example of the contradictions within the listing rule is in reference to the pipelines found in the habitat area and utilized in oil and gas activities. The concluding comments of the pipeline section say that pipelines are a “significant threat,” but earlier it states: “It is not known how dunes sagebrush lizards utilize pipelines.” Additionally, one of the studies the rule is based on indicates that the lizards like pipelines and service roads: “…pipeline cuts and sand roads serve as preferred habitat…” ……How would you feel if your family lost the farm because the needed water was diverted to save the smelt, or your livelihood was taken away because of the spotted owl, and you discovered that, like the dunes sagebrush lizard, the ESA listing was based on secrecy, speculation, and contradiction? It is imperative that the process be brought out into the open……In short, the proposed rule plays on fear, uncertainty, and doubt and fails to scientifically show that the lizard is endangered or is negatively impacted by human activity.
My Take - Please read the entire article to get the full effect of what is being said and for the links. It has been known by those who have been reading and writing about the ESA that this whole process has been corrupt from the very beginning. The reality is that extinction is the rule. Every species that is alive today will go extinct at some time, based on how they determine what is a distinct species. The snail darter that was the focus of the ESA at the beginning is a classic example. There are many species of darter in the Tennnessee River and new ones are being discovered all the time. What was unique about the snail darter? It liked to eat snails. Let's get real. This whole thing has nothing to do with saving species, (at which ESA hasn't been very successful, in spite of the hundreds of millions pouring into the effort) it has everything to do with controlling the land and the people who live there. We have lost our minds.
Meet Ilse Koch, the so-called "Beast of Buchenwald", wife of Karl Otto Koch, Kommandant of that notorious slaughterhouse, and later of Majdanek in Poland. When we were little boys, growing up in the shadow of World War II, my classmates and I, as little boys will, tried to make each other shudder over the gory details of the woman's sadistic cruelties to Jewish concentration camp prisoners. Most infamously, she is the one accused of making lampshades from the preserved skin of her murdered victims. It's said she preferred sections with interesting tattoos. But what would we do today—and how would the media react—if somebody were to travel around the country delivering passionate, and repulsively well-received speeches in defense of Ilse Koch, demanding that what she did be done again, as a matter of government policy? You think you know, don't you?
Meet Audrey Tomason. Reportedly Barack Obama's Director for Counterterrorism, the diminutive 30-something Tomason is said by Wikipedia to be "one of the most secretive women in U.S. intelligence circles", so much so that her master's thesis, written while attending Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, is now classified by the U.S. government as top-secret, as reprehensible a violation of academic principles as possible.
It is known that she has authored a report called "The Apocalypse Equation", suggesting that it would be more "humane" for our world—meaning our species—to undergo a "planned and controlled genocide" rather than to see it descend into the abyss of chaos it is now entering.
Making the most out of junk science and garbage arguments like global warming and peak oil, Tomason asserts, without credible support, that the "sustainable population" of this planet (whenever one of these creatures utters the word "sustainable" it's time to empty your shooting hand and unfasten your safety-strap) is only 1.5 billion people, compared to the United Nations' estimate of seven billion, expected to be reached by October 31st of this year—not to mention the figure, even worse, of 10 billion, estimated by the year 2100. The solution, at least according to this intellectual and spiritual descendant of Ilse Koch, is obvious: get rid of five and a half billion individuals now cluttering up her nice, neat, idealistic globe. The correct word, by the way, is not "genocide", a racist crime, but democide, the indiscriminate slaughter and disposal of men, women, and children, without regard to race………
Final Thoughts - When are we going to come to grips with the fact that to be green is to be irrational and misanthropic? There is no sacrifice so great, or weight so burdensome that they aren't willing to place on our backs. We need to understand that their emotional appeals are a subterfuge. A subterfuge that works because they appeal to our own values; using them against us. And they successfully do so by creating feelings of guilt for "not doing the right thing". In reality we are doing the right thing. We are altering our environment in order to survive. If mankind fails to do so mankind cannot survive. Is this not their goal?
Let's review one greenie issue, energy creation and use. They are against the use of oil, natural gas and coal. For years they had everyone believing that we were running out of oil so we had to change what we were doing in order to preserve what was left for future generations. That turned out to be a lie. Then we had to stop because we were creating a serious problem with the Earth’s temperatures because we were using so much energy that emits CO2. That was a lie also. We have more than enough oil, natural gas and coal to last for over 200 years. And, as it turns out Anthropogenic Climate Change is a complete fraud!
They supported wind energy; then they were against it. They supported solar energy; then they were against it. They supported ethanol; then they were against it. They supported hydroelectric dams; then they were against them. So now they want us to stop driving, using electricity and shut down all the factories and end capitalism.
What then are they really for? They believe that humanity is a plague on the planet. You might like to review the article How Do You Pronounce Misanthrope.
Stuff You Won't See on the News
"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes, and ships, and sealing wax -
Of cabbages and kings,
And why the sea is boiling hot,
And whether pigs have wings."