Your UN Mandated Future – Eat Rotten Food and Crap in a Bucket

This is what your overlords at the United Nations would mandate for all Americans if given a chance:

For the most part, the top contestants frequently rode bikes instead of driving, kept the heat down in the winter, grew some of their own food, went without air-conditioning and airplane travel, and spent little on clothes and entertainment. Dunn pulled ahead of the others in part because he uses a wood-burning furnace, which produces local air pollution but lowers carbon emissions significantly. He also had an advantage in that he eats expired and discarded food he acquires from stores and restaurants in his work as a recycler and composter.

Dunn beat out second-place finisher Sayre Vickers, 32, in part because of his living arrangements. Dunn, who is divorced with three grown children, didn’t live with his current partner and their two young children during the period covered by the contest. But he shared his home heating bill—and split the associated carbon emissions—with three people who live beneath him. Vickers lives solo.Vickers, of Garfield Park, grows tomatoes, basil, wild spinach, kale and peppers in front of the sunny windows of his apartment and makes his own furniture from discarded wood. With no running water, he hauls his 3 gallons a day from the bathroom one floor below.

The toilet is a bucket, with a 30-gallon garbage can nearby for storing human waste layered with sawdust. Vickers has a friend in the suburbs who allows him to park the cans when they fill up. The contents decompose, forming compost.

and how do we know this is what we would be required to do if the idiots in the ecoNazi movement were given half a chance?  Well, they come right out and say so:

Dunn is already living at roughly the level of carbon emissions that scientists at the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change say the average human must achieve by 2100 if we are to avoid dangerous effects of global warming.

Yes, the reach of the Green Overlords.  No running water, burn logs for heat, no ac, no car, no travel, no new clothes – just be glad they allow you to live I guess.  What they really want to do is turn back civilization.

Its articles like that which make me turn up the ac just a little bit more.

And what about people who don’t have nice friends – like Vickers – who allow them to stack up buckets of human waste in their yards?

Abiding By Kyoto – Not!

World and U.S. opinion seems to revolve around who signed Kyoto rather than actual carbon dioxide emissions. Once again, stated intent trumps actual results. Can even the global warming believers possibly believe this treaty has anything to do with it?
clipped from www.americanthinker.com

One would think that countries that committed to the Kyoto treaty are doing a better job of curtailing carbon emissions. One would also think that the United States, the only country that does not even intend to ratify, keeps on emitting carbon dioxide at growth levels much higher than those who signed.
And one would be wrong.

  • Emissions worldwide increased 18.0%.
  • Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1%.
  • Emissions from non-signers increased 10.0%.
  • Emissions from the U.S. increased 6.6%.
  • In fact, emissions from the U.S. grew slower than those of over 75% of the countries that signed Kyoto.  Below are the growth rates of carbon dioxide emissions, from 1997 to 2004, for a few selected countries, all Kyoto signers. (Remember, the comparative number for the U.S. is 6.6%.)
    • Maldives, 252%.
    • Sudan, 142%.
    • China, 55%.
    • Luxembourg, 43%
    • Iran, 39%.
    • Iceland, 29%.
    • Norway, 24%.
    • Russia, 16%.
    • Italy, 16%.
    • Finland, 15%.
    • Mexico, 11%.
    • Japan, 11%.
    • Canada, 8.8%.
      blog it

    Eco-Hyperventilating

    For those who have better things to do than keep track of the latest in a long series of UN sponsored playtimes about the environment, there is one going on in Bali now. Of course a ton of very, very, VERY serious bloggers like this one, writing very, very, very, VERY, VERY serious posts:

    The next three days might prove to be among the most crucial in history. If countries can agree to talks that will lead to the cuts in emissions that will keep global conditions within tolerable levels, then humankind could have a bright future. If, however, governments fail to rise to this challenge there could be very rough times ahead…………

    Leadership and resolve is now needed from those countries who say they see the danger posed by rapid climate change. The EU must keep its nerve, and not only argue for an obligation on industrialised countries to cut emissions by a sufficient amount, but to also resist those countries who are trying to wreck these talks by insisting that developing countries should take on legally binding targets as well. The rich nations have the means to act and are largely responsible for the global temperature increase we already have……….

    Some thoughts in response:

    1. The next three days might prove to be among the most crucial in history.

    Its overblown rhetoric like this which actually harms your own cause. The globaloney left and parasitic bureaucrats from the United Nations and all the associated NGOs have been crying doom about everything for such a long time that the sound becomes some sort of background noise.

    You don’t really believe that the next 3 days will determine the fate of the earth. Otherwise why aren’t you spending every penny you own, mortgaging your house and car and all your possessions, and bringing every single resource you have in an effort to get your desired outcome? By your own words, this is the most crucial 3 days in all of human history and all you can do is sit around observing and yammering about it? You don’t do more than whine about the issue because you know this is more about some sort of money shakedown and an anti-capitalism kabuki dance.

    Your governments certainly don’t believe that what you are saying is true. The heads of state aren’t convinced that its true or they would be there. The most cruical days in all human existence? The government representation is a lot more about a nice pre-Christmas vacation in a Pacific paradise. With a great opportunity to bash America, but that’s just gravy to the UN lickspittles and their ideological kin walking the beaches of Bali.

    2. Leadership and resolve is now needed from those countries who say they see the danger posed by rapid climate change. The EU must keep its nerve

    This would be the same EU that is growing its carbon dioxide emissions faster than the United States? Your moral slip is showing – and you don’t have any leadership on this either. Are you leaders willing to stand up and tell your citizens that they need to reduce their standard of living by 40%? No more flying, no more driving, no more building individual houses, no more than one sheet of toilet paper per use? Of course not. Because its just another sheet of paper with silly writing on it that the EU and all other countries in the world know they can ignore with absolutely no consequences to themselves. But it will make them feel really, really good to stand up and say they did something for the environment.

    If you really wanted to effect global change you should encourage all the oil and coal use you can. Only when the oil and coal are gone will the global economy change to something else.

    3. The rich nations have the means to act and are largely responsible for the global temperature increase we already have

    You actually think that mankind now possesses the power to terraform the entire planet? Again, I don’t believe you do. The whole article is about some vauge plan to reduce carbon emissions by 40% by 2020, but specifics on how that is to happen are thin on the ground. And will this have any effect on the global temperature? Not that anyone can prove with any measure of certainty. We don’t know the daily rainfall of the Earth. We don’t know the cloud cover percentage of the Earth to any certainty. We don’t know the temperatures and effects of the different currents in the oceans. There is so much we don’t know about the global atmosphere and especially how all the parts work together over this huge planet. And yet your religious belief in carbon emissions as the only source of global warming (see that big ball of fire in the sky? might it have some influence on the atmosphere?) means that you want everyone on the earth to give up technology? to stop driving cars? to stop heating or cooling their homes?

    Again, you don’t really know what 40% reduction means or implies. Somehow you violated the earth with carbon emissions by flying from Britain to Bali. Journalists are exempt? Are you willing to accept nuclear power for your electricity? No nasty carbon emissions with nuclear. I couldn’t say for sure, but since most eco-nauts love the planet and hate nuclear power it is a guess you wouldn’t like that solution at all. But this is the end of days for the earth – would you be willing to compromise your “no nukes” stance to save the earth? Just how are you going to get your electricity? And don’t say wind power – it might sound good, but since you can’t depend on the wind 100 percent of the time every wind farm has to have some backup generation capability that will work when you can’t get power from those huge turbines. Your own government in the UK is proposing to put 2 giant wind turbines on every single mile of coastline, but they still admit that you have to have some backup power generation – if you want reliable electricity anyway.

    So you use hysterical rhetoric, don’t actually believe in what you are saying, want to have some sort of moral stance taken rather than anything that would interrupt your own comfortable life, and believe in imaginary solutions to real world problems.

    And then you wonder why we don’t believe you?

    Jet parking shortage at climate change meeting?

    Haven’t they heard of teleconferencing? Its getting much easier to find this stuff. Which is definitely because the dead stream media doesn’t have a monopoly on information any more.

    clipped from www.balidiscovery.com

    How to Jettison a Jet

    (11/3/2007)
    Tempo Interaktif reports that Angkasa Pura – the management of Bali’s Ngurah Rai International Airport are concerned that the large number of additional private charter flights expected in Bali during the UN Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) December 3-15, 2007, will exceed the carrying capacity of apron areas. To meet the added demand for aircraft storage officials are allocating “parking space” at other airports in Indonesia.
    The operational manager for Bali’s Airport, Azjar Effendi, says his 3 parking areas can only accommodate 15 planes, which means that some of the jets used by VIP delegations will only be allowed to disembark and embark their planes in Bali with parking provided at airports in Surabaya, Lombok, Jakarta and Makassar.

      blog it