Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Nature Answers Clark's Carbon Credits Scheme

Ruapehu erupted again and spewed vast amounts of green house gases, other vapours and tonnes of rock and ash into the atmosphere and stratosphere.

This event is a salutary lesson to the silly little people who peddle their global warming religion and it's compulsory tithing down our throats.

Has anyone calculated (a) the amount of CO2 etc which was 'emitted' last night and (b) the cost of carbon credits required for us to 'buy back our virginity' so to speak? The message Nature is sending to Labour is simple. You are farting against thunder and thunder will always win. Here is Climate Change Minister David Parker addressing the question.

Has anyone noticed that both The Guardian and the Financial Times have rubbished such emmission trading schemes? Well yes, Fran O'Sullivan has noticed.


Anonymous said...

David Carter??

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Woops! Corrected.

JC said...

In the lesser eruptions of 1997 the mountain was whacking out 1000 tonnes of shit a day, mainly SO2, I think. At around 4100 CO2 equivalents per tonne thats 4 million tonnes times $15 = $60 million indulgences required.

Of course, the mix might be the more benign CO2, or the 24,000 times CO2 equivalent sodium hexa-fluoride.

Much better, I think, to have a god who you can blame.. and keep your wallet firmly secured in the back pocket.

Incidentally, have you noticed that tax goes up as belief in god goes down?


pdq said...

The blow torch of common sense finds its target with the NZ Labour.

Anonymous said...

It's all a con to give the UN an income stream safe from the nations.
That way it can't be held accountable by the free nations.

With Carbon Emmissions and the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) we are truly screwed.


The Perfect Man said...

Exactly. The UN wants more influence, i.e. power and money is a form of power. They just want to take our money (power) so they have more influence in world affairs (meaning inside individual nations).

Its all about control and if they need to lie to get it that doesn't bother them, afterall might is right when there is no absolute truth because they have declared God to be non-existent (bang on with the tax comment JC).