Copenhagen: the Real Story

Posted by Larry Miller on December 16, 2009 under Why | 5 Comments to Read

coplogoThere’s a lot going on over in Copenhagen, and many may be surprised to learn that the big brouhaha is not about cap and tax or even Algore’s oversized carbon footprint. Now Nancy Pelosi is pushing to adjourn the House so she can join the party in Denmark and see what additional damage she can do. Even the Director of the UN’s Climate Change Support Team, Janos Pasztor, has been quoted by the Heritage Foundation as saying, “This is not a climate-change negotiation … It’s about something much more fundamental. It’s about economic strength.”

The developing countries are claiming the United States, along with other western democracies, owe their assemblage of third world dictators 100 billion dollars a year. The city is abuzz with useful idiots who actually believe New York and Miami are destined to sink beneath the sea. They tend toward anarchist thinking and those that can read can quote chapter and verse of Marx, Lenin and Mao. There is an overwhelming correlation between militant environmentalism and pernicious socialism.

It turns out that carbon emissions are not even the enemy… capitalism is! The capitalism that took root where free people could work for the benefit of themselves and their families, instead of the “collective good”. It is the capitalism that brought people the highest standard of living in the world. It is the capitalism that was stifled in the controlled economies of both petty and major dictatorships. It is the capitalism that proved economic planning did not work… that those seeking control over their countries were driving them into the ground… and it had to be stopped.

This exorbitant transfer of wealth from producing nations to incompetently run countries is only the beginning of the hallucinogenic plans discussed at the Copenhagen conference. One of the organizations presenting their material is the Optimum Population Trust. Their paper was titled Fewer Emitters, Fewer Emissions, Lower Cost, with a subtitle Reducing Future Carbon Emissions By Investing In Family Planning.

This step takes us from viewing people who believe in freedom and capitalism to viewing people themselves as the enemy. The central planners not only have the audacity to believe they have the right and ability to run peoples lives but they should also have the authority to decide how many people there are and who they should be.

Under the Methods Used segment, they tell us “The first model was developed to estimate the cost of providing family planning to all women who wish to delay or terminate childbearing but who are not using contraception i.e. all with unmet need for family planning.” Their findings show “that each $7 spent on basic family planning (2009 US$) would reduce CO2 emissions by more than one tonne”. Columnist Anne Applebaum calculates that “Since the average American generates 20.6 tons of carbon annually, it will cost $144.20 — $576.80 for a family of four — to buy enough condoms to prevent the births of, say, 0.4 Kenyans.”

This condescending attitude toward the value of the lives of those non-elites living under the thumb of the “warmers” was powerfully illustrated in the recent film Not Evil, Just Wrong which exposed all sort of holes in the global warming / climate change story. After spending several minutes describing the evidence that the pesticide DDT was, indeed, not harmful to the environment, the film showed sickly children and grieving mothers – the result of uncontrolled mosquitoes spreading malaria through many parts of the African continent. This was followed up with some pompous American woman in jungle attire commenting that this was not so bad, that the children did not much of a life ahead of them anyway, besides the land was not so crowded, and… she enjoyed hearing the birds who were not around in as large numbers when DDT was used. Her’s would have been a grand story to include in Eugene Burdick and William Lederer’s book, The Ugly American.

For those who claim to be pro-life, connecting with people holding these philosophies, must be an exercise in cognitive dissonance. To know what is right, and to work with people who have such a narcissistic, anti-Christian world view must be painful indeed. To aid and abet those believe they know better than the creator who should be granted life… to contribute to those who contrive to deprive millions of children the ability to grow up and make their world a better place is something I simply cannot comprehend.

Some were not pleased when the leaders of the conference made the announcement that even though it was being held during the Christmas season, no Christmas decorations would be seen in the conference hall. This was an entirely appropriate decision as there is no reason for Christian symbols to be present at such an anti-Christian gathering. At least they were not hypocritical in that area.

Click here to read the entire Optimum Population Trust report.

Bookmark and Share

  • Larry Miller said,

    As on update, overnight reports came in that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said the US was ready to commit to the folly of the $100 billion payment.

  • admin said,

    Weather.com reports that Copenhagen Airport is experiencing sub freezing temperatures and drifting snow as world “leaders” attempt to land to take part in the “global warming” conference. God does have a sense of humor!

  • Ed Darrell said,

    This condescending attitude toward the value of the lives of those non-elites living under the thumb of the “warmers” was powerfully illustrated in the recent film Not Evil, Just Wrong which exposed all sort of holes in the global warming / climate change story. After spending several minutes describing the evidence that the pesticide DDT was, indeed, not harmful to the environment . . .

    They told that old whopper? Why would you cite a film by non-Christians, especially a film that tells such whopping fibs? DDT is one of the most problematic chemicals ever created, one of the special targets of the Persistent Organic Pesticides Treaty (POPs Treaty) which is intended to eliminate harmful chemicals that are so dangerous they cannot be controlled.

    Here in the U.S., the story of DDT’s damage to the reproduction of birds and little girls and boys is well known. We have recovered several species of bird, including the bald eagle, because of our success in banning the release of DDT to the environment beginning 40 years ago.

    There is no study that suggests DDT is not incredibly dangerous. We should be suspicious of anyone who makes such a bizarre claim.

    . . . the film showed sickly children and grieving mothers – the result of uncontrolled mosquitoes spreading malaria through many parts of the African continent.

    The campaign to keep DDT instead of fighting malaria has successfully delayed help to these people for years. DDT is not much of an effective tool to use, since mosquitoes developed resistance and immunity starting in the mid-1960s, but the political wrangling over DDT has kept governments from mounting campaigns against malaria for the better part of two decades now. How many children must die before these heartless corporate poison advocates let us get on with fighting malaria?

    Recent Gates Foundation tests show integrated pest management, the program Rachel Carson urged in 1962, reduces malaria by 50% to 85% with bednets. IPM programs have been fought by DDT interests for too long.

    <blockquote This was followed up with some pompous American woman in jungle attire commenting that this was not so bad, that the children did not much of a life ahead of them anyway, besides the land was not so crowded, and… she enjoyed hearing the birds who were not around in as large numbers when DDT was used. Her’s would have been a grand story to include in Eugene Burdick and William Lederer’s book, The Ugly American.

    Did it identify the woman? I’ll wager she was an actress hired by the film-makers. Her statement is contrary to the position of every environmental organization on Earth. Anyone who will tell such whopping tales about DDT would probably hire an actor to mouth false lines, too. Who was that woman?

  • Larry Miller said,

    I received a somewhat hostile response to this piece that illustrates much of the error in the “warmers” thinking. There were so many ideas that just are not in line with the facts that I could not post it without information to set the record straight. I could not do justice to the subject with a paragraph response so the posting along with the response will be posted later tonight. Be sure to come back and check it out.

  • admin said,

    As promised, you can find details about why Mr Darrell’s assumptions, while well meaning, do not quite line up with reality at http://bizy.be/t6ikM… that is the post What About DDT?

Add A Comment