With Washington and BC set to become the Calif why would the spreading of the Pacific rift be a bad thing. The east can melt all the snow with the Saudi oil they import. Win, win.
Canada Failing to Put Climate Change Plans in Action
- Thread starter EagleSmack
- Start date
Excellent question. I think he is writing in fluent Cabernet Sauvignon.
Sure as hell ain't English.
One clown getting support from another clown doesn't add up to the exchange ending up in a 'reasonable explanation' for anything other than collectively you know shit about the changes the earth has already been through in the last 4B years.
Care for a tour? about 20 hours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E56WlVFp6Rk&list=PL9OMJke2jE_CMr2LRVhiaxVYJkY9ZO58W
How The Earth Was Made
add in this map from the recent past and if you need help winding back the clock 200M years there is a vid out by Neal Adams for the dummies, such as you two clowns, Pete and RePete.
Just off the coast of BC is a rift that expands 10ft to the west for every inch NA moves to the north. 200MYA we would have been speaking Japanese if we were where the water begins today. The highest mountains might have been islands that far back as the crack originated at the AB/BC border. From 200MYA to when the crack started is piled up in the place we call BC or it went under when it hit China. The shelf that is there is crust that is being dragged out and will go under to become magma and the organic mud will be baked and rise in the cracks to become pools of oil.
See how easy it is to understand 'logic' compared to the magical world you are currently trapped in?? A nod will suffice at this stage.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Person
A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person
Care for a tour? about 20 hours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E56WlVFp6Rk&list=PL9OMJke2jE_CMr2LRVhiaxVYJkY9ZO58W
How The Earth Was Made
add in this map from the recent past and if you need help winding back the clock 200M years there is a vid out by Neal Adams for the dummies, such as you two clowns, Pete and RePete.
Just off the coast of BC is a rift that expands 10ft to the west for every inch NA moves to the north. 200MYA we would have been speaking Japanese if we were where the water begins today. The highest mountains might have been islands that far back as the crack originated at the AB/BC border. From 200MYA to when the crack started is piled up in the place we call BC or it went under when it hit China. The shelf that is there is crust that is being dragged out and will go under to become magma and the organic mud will be baked and rise in the cracks to become pools of oil.
See how easy it is to understand 'logic' compared to the magical world you are currently trapped in?? A nod will suffice at this stage.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Person
A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person
One clown getting support from another clown doesn't add up to the exchange ending up in a 'reasonable explanation' for anything other than collectively you know shit about the changes the earth has already been through in the last 4B years.
Care for a tour? about 20 hours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E56WlVFp6Rk&list=PL9OMJke2jE_CMr2LRVhiaxVYJkY9ZO58W
How The Earth Was Made
add in this map from the recent past and if you need help winding back the clock 200M years there is a vid out by Neal Adams for the dummies, such as you two clowns, Pete and RePete.
Just off the coast of BC is a rift that expands 10ft to the west for every inch NA moves to the north. 200MYA we would have been speaking Japanese if we were where the water begins today. The highest mountains might have been islands that far back as the crack originated at the AB/BC border. From 200MYA to when the crack started is piled up in the place we call BC or it went under when it hit China. The shelf that is there is crust that is being dragged out and will go under to become magma and the organic mud will be baked and rise in the cracks to become pools of oil.
See how easy it is to understand 'logic' compared to the magical world you are currently trapped in?? A nod will suffice at this stage.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Person
A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person
========================================================================================================================
Pity poor MHz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He has NO CLUE why people mock him!!!!!!!!!!!
His tinfoil hat does not keep out the static any more!!!!!!!!!!
It must be a Yankee or Zionist PLOT to render Muslims vulnerable to mind rays by reducing the quality of foil!!!!!!!!!!!
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That IS the answer!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is why Trump has put tarrifs on our good Cdn aluminum!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trump does not want MHz to have access to good foil!!!!!!!!!!!!
The threat of the Carbon tax must be working Lol
Frosty Wednesday morning across Saskatchewan, nine records broken
Frosty Wednesday morning across Saskatchewan, nine records broken
One clown getting support from another clown doesn't add up to the exchange ending up in a 'reasonable explanation' for anything other than collectively you know shit about the changes the earth has already been through in the last 4B years.
Care for a tour? about 20 hours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E56WlVFp6Rk&list=PL9OMJke2jE_CMr2LRVhiaxVYJkY9ZO58W
How The Earth Was Made
add in this map from the recent past and if you need help winding back the clock 200M years there is a vid out by Neal Adams for the dummies, such as you two clowns, Pete and RePete.
Just off the coast of BC is a rift that expands 10ft to the west for every inch NA moves to the north. 200MYA we would have been speaking Japanese if we were where the water begins today. The highest mountains might have been islands that far back as the crack originated at the AB/BC border. From 200MYA to when the crack started is piled up in the place we call BC or it went under when it hit China. The shelf that is there is crust that is being dragged out and will go under to become magma and the organic mud will be baked and rise in the cracks to become pools of oil.
See how easy it is to understand 'logic' compared to the magical world you are currently trapped in?? A nod will suffice at this stage.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Person
A phrase frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
The decision whether an accused is guilty of a given offense might involve the application of an objective test in which the conduct of the accused is compared to that of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. In most cases, persons with greater than average skills, or with special duties to society, are held to a higher standard of care. For example, a physician who aids a person in distress is held to a higher standard of care than is an ordinary person
The Triassic earth 200 million years ago.
======================================================================================================
Poor Petros........he loves the maps!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder how much time he spends seeking them out while IGNORING REALITY??????????????
Here is an article offering a serious warning regarding the LIE-beral carbon crap and trade mess. With some comments of my own in brackets):
Call it cap-and-fraud. Cap-and-trade, one method Canada will use to try and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, is especially vulnerable to organized crime
By Lorrie Goldstein, Toronto Sun
First posted: Saturday, July 23, 2016 04:17 PM EDT | Updated: Saturday, July 23, 2016 06:01 PM EDT
As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the premiers jostle on what carbon pricing in Canada will look like and how much it will cost us, a modest proposal.
We should rename the carbon pricing scheme known as cap-and-trade — which Quebec already has and Ontario will have next year — by what inevitably happens under it.
That is, cap-and-fraud.
Nothing disastrous has occurred in North America’s fledgling carbon market — yet — other than a recent crash in the price of carbon credits, which, while alarming, wasn’t due to fraud.
(The crash in carbon credit pricing was something to be expected- companies had NO intention of buying the carbon crap unless rthey absolutely had to and thus dragged their feet- and they did purchase- they bought the absolute minimum number of credits- companies were willing to curtail production rather than risk buying costly excess carbon credits they might not need- so LIE-berals did not earn as much money as expected!)
(Cdn LIE-beral carbon crap and trade plan is modeled on the disgraced- now 16 year old European carbon crap plan. The Europeans have proven conclusively that carbon crap and trade only cleans cash from wallets and leaves the dirt in the air!)
But Europe’s older and larger cap-and-trade market, the Emissions Trading Scheme, is overrun by fraud.
France, Poland, Italy, Denmark, Germany and the U.K. are among many European Union countries where billions of euros have been stolen by individuals and organized crime.
Inevitably, Canada will be drawn into this madness, if only to buy international carbon credits when our domestic schemes for reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change fail, as they inevitably will.
(The Europeans have created a “market” where companies can “trade” excess carbon credits they do not need- and this has opened the door to organized crime! It has allowed manipulation of carbon credit prices by stock market swindlers. Has opened the door to forgers creating fake carbon documents. Has opened the door to sleazy accounting practices that hide true levels of emissions and etc.)
(And it DOES NOT HELP- that Europeans started the program by immediately EXEMPTING their biggest corporate employers from the carbon crap plan! Wynne-bag LIE-berals have so faithfully mimicked the Europeans that they have exempted the 150 biggest corporate polluters in Ontari-owe from any need to participate in the carbon crap! And LIE-berals wonder why small biz HATES them when it hands the corporate big players- who all happen to be unionized- and thus LIE-beral friendly- that carbon bonus? And then LIE-berals try top tell us that corporations do not pay fair tax rates- UNDER LIE-BERAL RULES! The hypocrisy is ENDLESS!)
(The European carbon crap model is just like our LIE-beral version- and our Environment minister Climate Barbie McKenna has finally admitted carbon crap is a job killer! In order to save jobs- Europeans have been exempting a steadily wider range of companies from participating in carbon crap- with the result that it is only ordinary people and the smallest businesses that pay carbon crap! And such carbon crap revenue that Europeans take in is paid right back out to their civil service union Hogs so their carbon foot print remains UNCHANGED! Carbon crap and trade is simply a costly scam designed to supply MORE GRAVY to Hogs- whether Cdn or European- the result is the same!)
Had Canada not withdrawn from the Kyoto protocol in 2011 after failing to meet our emissions targets under Liberal and Conservative governments, we would have had to buy up to $14 billion worth of international carbon credits to comply with the treaty.
(Currently Our idiot Boy Justin is buying over $2 billion dollars of carbon credits from places like Viet Nam- with NO COHERENT explanation of how throwing money at Viet Nam Rice farmers will reduce Cdn carbon emissions! But then LIE-berals- with their anti white bias- believe that third world countries are morally superior somehow!)
Interpol identified 10 types of criminal activity in carbon trading in its June, 2013 “Guide to Carbon Trading Crime.”
It said while all stock markets are vulnerable to manipulation, cap-and-trade is particularly prone because:
“Carbon credits do not represent a physical commodity but instead have been described as a legal fiction that is poorly understood by many sellers, buyers and traders. This lack of understanding makes carbon trading particularly vulnerable to fraud and other illegal activity.”
The stock used in carbon trading is a carbon credit or permit — created by governments which either give them away or sell them to major industrial emitters.
A carbon credit entitles the bearer to emit one tonne of industrial carbon dioxide or equivalent, on the theory another emitter didn’t.
(And of course there is NO reason why somebody else should reduce THEIR emissions just because you bought that carbon credit from govt! The Illogic is glaringly obvious -except to LIE-berals- who ONLY SEE GRAVY!)
Since CO2 is a colourless, odourless gas, it’s relatively easy to commit fraud. Interpol noted this can include:
“Fraudulent manipulation of measurements to claim more carbon credits from a project than were actually obtained; sale of carbon credits that either do not exist or belong to someone else; false or misleading claims with respect to the environmental or financial benefits of carbon market investments; exploitation of weak regulations in the carbon market to commit financial crimes, such as money laundering, securities fraud or tax fraud; computer hacking/phishing to steal carbon credits and ... personal information.”
(IN other words- builders of those govt sponsored “green” projects can EASILY LIE about how much emissions have been reduced!)
The Stockholm Environment Institute reported last year almost 75% of carbon credits generated by Russia and Ukraine could be fraudulent. There have been similar findings with regard to China, India and elsewhere.
(In other news- the amount of ozone depleting chemicals being released into the air has been SOARING lately- indicating that third world countries are IGNORING the ban on the use of certain fluro-carbons! Which means that reports of carbon emissions are likely just as riddled with deliberate FRAUD- for profit! Third world countries see nothing wrong with milking western SUCKERS!)
The public pays the cost because carbon pricing increases the price of most goods and service, since most are made using fossil fuel energy. And if a carbon credit is fraudulent, there’s no lowering of emissions because of it.
(But of course LIE-berals DO NOT rally care about carbon- their focus is ENTIRELY on GRAVY FOR HOGS - and as the price of all things rises under carbon crap influence- so too does their rake off of sales tax! LIE-berals are focused ONLY ON the buying of votes so they can cling to power at ANY PRICE!)
Why Do People Want to Refute Climate Change?
New research sheds light on how threat to the status quo shapes beliefs.
According to NASA, the evidence is incontrovertible that climate change is real and represents a serious threat. Based on studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals, they report that at least 97% of working climate scientists agree that "climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities". The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts" reports unequivocally that climate change has multiple negative impacts on the environment and is extremely likely to be caused by human-made greenhouse gases (go here for the Synthesis Report, IPCC, 2014).y
NASA succinctly presents the evidence for and impact of climate change: sea level rise, global temperature rise, warming oceans, shrinking ice sheets, declining arctic sea ice, glacial retreat, extreme [weather] events, ocean acidification, and decreased snow cover. The psychological effects of climate change have been an area of increasing concern for behavioral health researchers, and the American Psychological Association in collaboration with ecoAmerica report that in addition to negative effects on the environment and physical health, climate change is taking a toll on mental health, "due to trauma and distress due to personal injuries, loss of a loved one, damage to or loss of personal property or even the loss of livelihood," citing higher rates of PTSD, mood and anxiety disorders following natural disasters (Clayton et al., 2017).
Furthermore, many believe we are facing what is referred to as the Sixth Mass Extinction, following Elizabeth Kolbert's 2015 Pulitzer Prize book The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History, and work by Ceballos et al. (2015) and other research groups, that species are disappearing at a massively accelerated rate, 100 times higher than the baseline extinction rate in the last century, thought to be related to human activity.
How then is it possible that so many people deny the reality of climate change, and the negative impact it is having on the environment, and on our health - as well as the looming, potentially extinction-level threat we face together?
Researchers have been studying how people come to deny climate change. A recent study by Clarke, Ling, Kothe and Richardson (2017), Perceived Mitigation Threat Mediates Effects of Right-Wing Ideology on Climate Change Beliefs, available in pre-print from the Open Science Framework, reviews the existing literature on how political ideology influences attitudes about climate change, and reports new finding based on their survey of 334 US participants, 59.9% of whom identified as liberal, 21.6% as conservative, and the rest in the middle politically.
Clarke and colleagues sought to clarify the relationship among various dimensions of political belief and motivations for denying climate change, noting that prior research has demonstrated a significant correlation between right-wing ideology and climate change denial. In addition to hypothesizing that various components of political belief would be correlated with climate change denial, they predicted that "climate change mitigation threat" (anxiety that efforts to address climate change will negatively impact the socioeconomic status quo) would be a significant additional factor in climate change denial. In other words, researchers expect that people who deny climate change would at least be partially motivated to do so to avoid negative effects on social and economic factors, in spite of being presented with the clear and present danger posed by climate change.
To test their hypotheses, they recruited subjects to participate in a survey of political belief-related factors and climate change denial related factors. They administered the following scales:
1. The Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale, measuring a) authoritarian aggression, b) authoritarian submission, and c) conventionalism;
2. The Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) scale, measuring the "tendency to prefer group-based hierarchy and inequality";
3. The Ideological orientation measure, asking individuals where they fall politically, ranging from "extremely liberal" to "extremely conservative";
4. The Climate Change Mitigation Threat (CCMT) scale, measuring anxiety-related the possible effects on socioeconomic stability due to proposed changes such as higher costs for higher carbon emission, caps on emissions, and the impact on conventional fuel industries from alternative energy sources;
5. The Climate Change Denial scale, measuring four types of climate change denial including a) denial of existence of climate change, b) denial of human cause, c) impact denial and d) climate science denial.
Their findings, representing correlations and requiring follow-up research to clarify causal relationships, are nevertheless fascinating.
First of all, they confirmed that ideological orientation, RWA and SDO were associated with higher levels of climate change denial. The found that CCDT was correlated with all ideological variables as well as with all climate change denial variables. This supports the basic idea that not only is right-wing ideology connected with climate change denial, but it is also connected with reporting greater concern that addressing climate change will upset the socioeconomic status quo.
Furthermore, they found that while SDO and Conventionalism predicted all of the climate change denial factors, the Agression and Submission subscales were not statistically significant on a more complex level of analysis.
Because the threat to the socioeconomic status quo was a partial determinant of climate change denial, this research strongly suggests that political orientation leads to climate change denial for additional reasons such as identification, where conservatives might adopt the prevailing views of the group, including attitudes about climate change. It is interesting, though of unclear significance, that on closer analysis Aggression and Submission were not correlated with climate change denial, especially in the context of measuring contributors to Authoritarianism, highlighting the role of Conservativism over the potentially effects of retaliatory or defensive reactions.
The finding that socioeconomic threat is associated with avoidant coping (denial) is telling because it is another disturbing example of how people can sacrifice long-term health and safety in order to prevent short-term losses. Avoidant coping is generally considered to be maladaptive, for example, and acceptance and reappraisal, forms of active coping, are generally more effective.
Research like this from Clarke et al. is crucial because we need to understand how and why people deny climate change in order to effect positive changes. By understand how various facets of conservative ideology drive climate change denial, we may be able to develop communication and intervention strategies to combat climate change denial, and precipitate greater efforts to embrace comprehensive change across political divides.
Rather than succumbing to partisan conflict (because it generally seems absurd to liberal-leaning people not to address climate change, leading to a conversation non-starter), it may be possible to conduct research and present information which allows for reappraisal of the socioeconomic impact of changing policies related to fossil fuel use and carbon emissions, particularly if persuasive arguments can be made that it will be socioeconomically beneficial in the long run. This approach could foster more adaptive responses based on acceptance and reappraisal, rather than on threat-based assessments and membership-based adherence to group norms. Such arguments have been effective in changing insurance company policies when advocacy groups have demonstrated that spending money up front will save money later, for example showing that treating mental health and addictions leads to significant financial savings in the future by preventing serious physical health consequences.
Research like this may also help liberal-leaning individuals to have greater empathy for their conservative counterparts - which could allow for more constructive dialogue, making bipartisan efforts more likely to succeed. Confrontational or derisive approaches, on the other hand, tend to lead to greater polarization. Finally, given that conservative identification may lead people to adopt group values supporting climate change denial, persuading those conservative leaders who accept climate change as a serious problem to speak out may be an effective strategy to change attitudes over time.
Psychology Today © 2018 Sussex Publishers, LLC
========================================================================================================
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
STUPID LIE-berals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
STUPID RED TORIES- AKA LIE-beral LITES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And stupid civil service union Hogs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ALL SCRAMBLING to save their entitlements by BLAMING OTHERS for THEIR HUGE CARBON FOOT PRINTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They DO NOT want to think about stuff like this:
Here is another article illustrating LIE-beral greed and stupidity and why electricity costs so much. With some comments of my own in brackets):
The shocking incompetence of Liberal energy policy
First posted: Saturday, July 01, 2017 07:17 PM EDT | Updated: Saturday, July 01, 2017 07:59 PM EDT
As Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne might say, given her propensity for wasting our money, “What’s another billion?”
This time, a billion dollars is the amount the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE) says the Wynne government wasted last year alone dumping clean energy down the drain.
OSPE past president Paul Acchione explained the culprit is “curtailment ... an industry term that means the power was not needed in Ontario, and could not be exported, so it was dumped.
“It’s when we tell our dams to let the water spill over top, our nuclear generators to release their steam, and our wind turbines not to turn, even when it’s windy,” Acchione said.
“These numbers show that Ontario’s cleanest source of power is literally going down the drain because we’re producing too much ... it’s an unnecessary waste of beautiful, clean energy, and it’s driving up the cost of electricity.”
(Much of this mess is driven by the need to make room on the power grid for the mouldy green energy so beloved of LIE-berals! LIE-berals have agreed to buy any and all green energy produced by friends of the LIE-beral Party- at rates hundreds of percent above the cost of other forms of generation- and LIE-berals do not care that we have NO WAY to shut off the production of mouldy green even when we have way more power than we need! LIE-beral friends ARE ENTITLED and to shut off their flow of gravy for any reason would be LIE-beral/WRONG!)
This is distinct from the money Ontario loses when it sells electricity to Quebec and the U.S. at a loss because we have a huge energy surplus.
“Taken together,” Acchione said, “total exports represent nearly enough electricity to power every home in Ontario for an entire year.”
The situation is so bad — according to a 2015 report by Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk, Ontario pays twice the U.S. average for wind power and 3.5 times for solar power — that the basic theory of successful investing, buy low, sell high, has been turned on its head in Ontario.
Here, our Liberal government buys high and sells low, which we all pay for through our hydro bills.
OSPE says the root problem is the politicization of energy policy.
(The most outrageous part of LIE-beral policy is that our green energy is actually producing MORE air pollution- NOT LESS! First we have the huge plume of green house gas to produce all the concrete and steel for wind towers and support towers to connect to the main power grid; plus the array of toxic chemicals needed to make the carbon fibre wind blades; then add in the fuel for natural gas fired generators that MUST be kept FULLY fired up 24/7 and ready to take over at a moments notice because the costly green energy is so unreliable! LIE-berals have turned our electrical generation system into a VAST slush fund for LIE-beral pals- WITHOUT actually doing anything to clean the air!)
“It is imperative that we depoliticize what should be technical judgments regarding energy mix, generation, distribution, pricing and future investments in Ontario,” President Jonathan Hack said.
But even when the Liberal government gets good advice from its experts, it ignores it.
(Water powered generators are the cheapest form of generators but they are also the easiest to SHUT OFF- just a flip of the switch and water spills away- with the added bonus that water generators need the smallest work force to operate since the technology is so simple. But a nuclear power station- with highly skilled staff- takes three days to go safely from idle speed to full power and another three days to go back to idle again- no fast reaction there! And thanks to the greed and incompetence of Atomic Energy scientists, our govt has hired specialists from Britain and France to run the nuclear plants- and their corporate bosses EXPECT a return on their investment in our system! So for reasons of political expediency AND LIE-beral GREED, the cheapest and cleanest form of electrical generation-water power- is being DUMPED!)
Lysyk in 2015 — completing work started by her predecessor, Jim McCarter, in 2011 — reported that Ontario paid $9.2 billion extra for 20-year contracts with wind and solar power developers because it sweetened the deals, despite the fact its own experts said its existing procurement program was successfully doing the job.
Even worse, Ontario didn’t need wind and solar power to replace coal-fired electricity, which the Liberals actually did with nuclear power and natural gas.
The ultimate absurdity is that the Liberals continue to sign new wind and solar contracts, despite the province’s massive energy surplus, caused in part by the loss of manufacturing jobs due to skyrocketing electricity prices.
If you think the Liberals don’t know what they’re doing, other than kicking the crisis down the road by subsidizing electricity prices to the tune of $24 billion, which could eventually cost Ontarians up to $93 billion, according to Ontario Financial Accountability Officer Stephen LeClair, you’re right.
(Ontari-owe LIE-berals remain dedicated to their mouldy green energy slush fund. They have read the tea leaves and know they will not likely be in power after the June 2018 election- so they have quietly signed 4 year labour contracts with the civil service Hogs that are virtually the ONLY supporters of LIE-berals and they will hope we have short memories and can be persuaded to re-elect LIE-berals in the 2022 election!)
(If LIE-berals do retain power in the 2018 election then in 2019 we can look forward to an economic blood bath as LIE-berals loot and pillage to pay off their HUGE IOU`s to civil service Hogs! And if they return to power in 2022, then we can look forward THEN to the economic blood bath that LIE-berals want to drown us in as they seek to cling to power at any price!)
(Old news reports from several years back- the ones LIE-beral friendly news media now do not want to discuss-.told us that 97 percent of ALL civil service union Hog pensions were rapidly approaching bankrupt status. LIE-berals cannot shovel cash fast enough into the greedy pockets of Hogs with the result that the cost of LIE-beral promises grows rapidly at a pace way beyond inflation with each passing day- compounded and amortized! We could not pay when the promises were originally made and we cannot pay now that the mess has been added to with compound interest! But LIE-berals WILL continue to use our electrical generation system to milk cash from us any way they can! Without that gravy to placate Hogs and without the votes the gravy buys from special interest groups such as Muslims who hate us; LIE-berals could not be elected to collect dog crap in the parks!)
The word "likely" should never be used with the statement that "evidence is incontrovertible"
... Talk about the denial of reality... On a related note, how on Earth can the solution be monetary as in a tax?... it doesn't solve the "incontrovertible evidence".
That is a caveat incase the scam gets hit with a class action suit. "We said likely not definetly, can't you read?"
Just thought that it was funny (fukkin hilarious actually) that the article made the statement that "the evidence incontrovertible"
That doesn't leave any room for the disclaimer statement
That doesn't leave any room for the disclaimer statement
Is it really? Are you a schill funded by natural gas? Big oil is big natural gas therefore you must be funded by them.
If solar is the energy of the future, why is there a 600% mark up and a 122% tariff on solar?
Call your local solar company and get a quote for a 10KV grid tie system and I'll get a wholesale quote from China and we'll compare.
Deal?
If solar is the energy of the future, why is there a 600% mark up and a 122% tariff on solar?
Call your local solar company and get a quote for a 10KV grid tie system and I'll get a wholesale quote from China and we'll compare.
Deal?
I'll make it easy, I ready know a 10KV system from China is $7500USD.
https://m.alibaba.com/product/60782...spm=a2706.7843299.1998817009.8.3c571189tCu6AF
Your turn Gaviscon.
https://m.alibaba.com/product/60782...spm=a2706.7843299.1998817009.8.3c571189tCu6AF
Your turn Gaviscon.
Last edited:
========================================================================================================
Lost in all that LIE-beral moudly green energy PROPAGANDA is an UGLY TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ANY GREEN EFFORT BY LIE-berals contains several requirement for "successful" implementation - by LIE-beral standards-and two ODD omissions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The green plan must bring in more money for govt- because that is what govt NEEDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The green plan must not look to obviously like a major tax grab or it will be opposed and kill LIE-beral election hope- as is currently happening to Our idiot Boy Justin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The green plan must NOT be presented in a plain way so that interested observers can find out if it is actually working as advertised- which means Cdn carbon crap and trade will have just as much criminal fraud as the European version it is modeled on!!!!!!!!!!!!
The green plan MUST NOT interfere with the carbon footprint of wealthy civil service union Hogs or their LIE-beral allies- because they are ENTITLED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the two omissions are these:
LIE-berals do not care that their mouldy green plan kills jobs and impoverishes people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And LIE-berals do not care that their mouldy green plan DOES NOT actually clean the air!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All that matters is that mouldy green plans generate MORE GRAVY for LIE-berals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!