Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris


June 28, 2014 - 12:08 am

President Obama’s recently announced energy and environment policies have been tried in many countries, always with the same result: abject failure. Yet when critics point this out, explaining that “the U.S. economy will lose millions of jobs and billions of dollars in growth,” Obama simply waves their objections away:

“Let’s face it,” the president answers. “That’s what [critics] always say. … Every time… the warnings of the cynics have been wrong.”

Other leaders, especially those in Europe who are further down the green path than is America, know better.

The deputy leader of the German Green Party in the Bundestag, Oliver Krischer, summed up the dangers of relying on green power when he said,

A few years ago the renewable sector was the job miracle in Germany; now nothing is left of all of that.

Every European economy that followed the green agenda has faltered badly. Consequently, Germany is building coal plants to replace both failed wind power sources and even clean nuclear plants that are a casualty of irrational phobia after the Fukushima nuclear accident. In 2013 alone Germany built six more coal plants. China and India build four new ones every week, rendering Ontario’s coal shutdown, as well as those planned for the U.S., completely irrelevant from a climate perspective no matter what one believes about the science.

Obama’s dangerous climate and energy policies rely peripherally upon the reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This is the climate science agency created by Canadian billionaire Maurice F. Strong through the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). It is instructive to review how Strong’s actions ruined Ontario since Obama is taking America down a similar path.

Strong was UNEP’s first head and, while in this position, convened the first international expert group meeting on climate change.  Strong then foisted the IPCC onto the world at the Earth Summit (officially, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development [UNCED]) in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, where he chaired the conference as UNCED conference secretary-general.

This was the same year that left-leaning NDP Premier Bob Rae appointed Strong to run Ontario Hydro, the major power producer for the province. Strong immediately applied the UNEP’s philosophy and policies designed to demonize carbon dioxide (CO2) as the byproduct of fossil fuel-driven industries and nations, very much as Obama is doing right now in the U.S.  A magazine article titled “Maurice Strong: The new guy in your future” explains what he did at Ontario Hydro:

Maurice Strong has demonstrated an uncanny ability to manipulate people, institutions, governments, and events to achieve the outcome he desires. Through his published writings and public presentations he has declared his desire to empower the UN as the global authority to manage a new era of global governance. … The fox has been given the assignment, and all the tools necessary, to repair the henhouse to his liking.

Strong used Hydro’s massive debt, ostensibly created by building nuclear power plants, to eliminate fossil fuels, transforming Ontario from a “have” province contributing to the wealth of the Canadian federation to one that now relies on the rest of the country for financial handouts. It was obvious that this was coming. In 2008, then Canadian Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty forecasted:

If this continues – this is not hyperbole, this is a fact – Ontario will become a “have not” province in confederation. And it will be Premier (Dalton) McGuinty’s legacy that he in two terms took Ontario from being the strongest economic province in the federation to a “have not” province.

Following the Earth Summit, Strong, by then adviser to presidents, prime ministers and powerful corporations, continued to take a leading role in efforts to implement the outcomes of agreements reached at UNCED through:

  • the establishment of the Earth Council
  • the establishment of the Earth Charter movement
  • his chairmanship of the World Resources Institute
  • his honorary board membership with the David Suzuki Foundation
  • membership on the board of the International Institute for Sustainable Development, the Stockholm Environment Institute, the Africa-America Institute, the Institute of Ecology in Indonesia, the Beijer Institute of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and others
  • membership with the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the World Wildlife Fund, and the China Carbon Corporation

We got a glimpse of what may be Strong’s underlying objectives when he told a reporter, supposedly concerning the plot of a book he would like to write:

What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is “no.” The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?

Strong worked towards achieving this goal by creating the IPCC and other organizations that supposedly demonstrated that CO2 from human industrial activity is causing runaway global warming.  Strong admitted that he couldn’t implement his plan as a politician, so, according to author Elaine Dewar (Cloak of Green):

Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.

Ontario’s energy policy failures intensified to the point that, by November 2010, even the left-leaning Toronto Star newspaper admitted:

The McGuinty [Ontario] government has a major electrical power problem, one created by its decision to use the power system as a political policy tool. This policy has resulted in the doubling of rates in Ontario to a level higher than in most U.S. states. Ontario’s former industrial advantage has disappeared, while the government has been pretending that nothing is wrong.

Ontario’s economy continues to decline today largely due to the government’s decision to turn off the province’s cheapest form of electricity—coal. In 2003, coal provided 25% of Ontario’s power. By mid-April 2014, coal was completely phased out. Replacing hydrocarbon fuel energies with alternate energies drove Ontario’s costs through the roof and created a multitude of other problems. This is precisely where the U.S. is now headed, only it will be worse since Ontario still benefits from Canada’s policy of financial equalization between provinces, while there is no one who will bail out the U.S.

Many commentators knew America was in trouble when Obama, then the frontrunner in the Democratic Party presidential primaries, told the San Francisco Chronicle:

If somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted… .Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

Contrary to popular belief, the IPCC evidence doesn’t actually support the claim that CO2 produced by human activities is causing dangerous climate change. There is no scientific need to replace fossil fuels.

Indian Union Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh summed up the situation well:

“Science is politics in climate change; climate science is politics” and we are being “led by our noses by Western (climate) scientists who have less of a scientific agenda and more of a political agenda.”

Western politicians like Obama are promoting energy policies based on falsified, politicized science and alternative energies that don’t work. Maurice Strong, creator of the myth of CO2-caused dangerous climate change, applied his claims in Ontario and the result was disastrous. The U.S. president’s energy policies are the same but more inexcusable since everyone can see what has already happened in Europe and Ontario. Why repeat this tragedy in America?

Dr. Tim Ball is a Victoria, British Columbia-based environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. Tom Harris is the Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I think the globalists/leftists/small 'c' commies etc etc (call them anything you like - stupid?) are missing a screw or three in their thinking. How the hell can you drag an economy into the dirt - and they KNOW it will - with the policies they are pursuing and still manage to have the money to grow their beloved government? Where is the mythical 'money tree' that is going to fund their pie-in-the-sky nanny state when industries that fuel the economy dry up and disappear?

I think they've not thought this out to some kind of logical conclusion. Which of course does not surprise me - I'm just hoping someone smarter than me can illustrate this to them in a manner that will resonate with them.

Or maybe I'm missing the point? That they really don't care what happens to their precious government if they can exact their revenge on capitalism?

Eh --- maybe I do get it.

Not that it seems reasonable... But then much of what they do is less than reasonable.

34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
All true, SD. And it's the tip of the iceberg.

Russell Brand outline the One World Socialism model. Steal wealth, crush capitalism, force reparations, take down the 1st world countries, prop up third world countries.

Bumping uglies with the Muslim Brotherhood, glorifying Louis Farrakhan and assaulting Jews and Christians...persecuting them, beating them, cheating them, mistreating them...killing them.

The Woodstock Jihad does this by a long con. It hides as "compassionate liberals".

Carbon dioxide is not pollution. But in order to pull of the One World Socialism scheme, the IPCC created a "science hoax".

It's a global power grab. To steal wealth and make "reparations" and "redistribute". It's a criminal conspiracy and an overthrow.
My only request is to not call traitors "progressive".

There is nothing "progressive" about treason, tyranny or totalitarianism.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Too bad you wrote this article on the weekend here. Calling the global warming scam a hoax, a redistribution scheme...will only get you called an hysteric on Saturday and Sunday.

The intent to falsify science in order to force weath out of certain nations' citizens and into the hands of a corrupt leftist One World Socialist crony now obvious except to the willfully blind and the Woodstock Jihad.

The IPCC is as corrupt as the execrable UN committees that keep passing anti-Israel resolutions. They should carry the same weight with any thinking person.

They don't. We have fools and dupes and dunderheads putatively on "our" side who believe that "scientists" have something of merit in the Ponzi scheme of phony climate con game tactics. Con men know where to find their pigeons. We have some roosting here on weekends.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (52)
All Comments   (52)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Because shut up, denier.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Contrarian investments?: I believe this global warming scare is a hoax. And that the end result of this anti-capitalism will be the same as all the other experiments with socialism etc. I am trying to do my part. I am informing some of the young people I interact with. I am donating to politicians that are struggling to reverse O’s policies. But so many people are making so much money on all of this, it’s an investment bubble as well. Can someone please help me? Can someone here suggest a way to bet against this bubble? Investments that will do well when people realize the reality of O and the hoax? One approach is to bet on traditional energy, oil, coal, etc. And those shorts of bets/investing are straightforward. But what about betting against some of these green investment ideas? Do any of you know people who focus on these sorts of contrarian investmenting?
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Doc Ball & Mr. Harris,

I commend your piece. For let's face it, EVERYTHING Teleprompter Jesus has done pre and present teleprompter-paper is a total failure. Intellectually. Scientifically. Non-economically feasible etc.,

Fred Singer & Dennis Avery are ridiculed by scientifically-void troglodytes and NWO seeking federally funded Bolsheviks, apparatchiks to no-end.

Ubama has merely proven to be a moronic, inept social cause crusader. Nothing more.

How, why post-pubescent people from ALL walks of life, political leanings don't acknowledge inasmuch re: Barack Kardashian merely cements the idiotic not 'interesting' times we live in.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
It's BS all the way down . . .

"Ich bin ein Denier!"
I deny that Anthropomorphic Global Warming has any significant impact on climate.
I deny that Global Climate Change is having a net negative impact on life on Earth.
I deny that Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is a pollutant.
I deny that alternative energy sources have Socialist solutions.
I deny that any Science is Settled.
I deny that those funded by Politicians seek Scientific truth.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
There is an unspoken war going on against the American people. It's being waged on us by the political, academic, economic and social elites. They have ALL of the advantages; power, money, connections. We, on the other hand, have only numbers. Yes, there is a portion of the population that is subsidized to ignore this war (about thirty percent, I think). They don't care, as they will be recompensed any losses by the government. That leaves about sixty percent of us fighting rearguard battles against the dominant ten percent.
We lost one battle this week against the Republican establishment here in Mississippi. But we won one against them in Virginia two weeks ago. The odd thing of it all was that we won in VA fair and square. Literally David against a Goliath. Cantor outspent Brat by maybe 20 to 1? Here in MS Cochran and the Repubes had to go to extraordinary lengths to win. Did they cheat? Some say so. But, they also say that all is fair if you don't get caught. By this time next week we'll learn whether we get a recount or not. Especially
of the Democratic voters that might have voted in their own primary. The jury is still out, literally.
A lot of people are holding their breaths waiting for the 2016 run of Hilary (?) against whoever (Paul, Rubio, Christie, Cruz etal.) I say that election isn't as important as the one due in November of 2014. If we can pull it off where we need to, we can hold against Obama and whoever is elected in 2016. If we can't, Katie bar the door.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
The intellectuals of the world tell us that we cannot judge the merits of a philosophy or a policy solely based on it's results.

They tell us that we must weigh the intentions behind the idea... or the potential good that it might cause.

But a wise man back in the day said it differently:

"By their fruits ye shall know them."

Every time this old saw of socialism has been tried it has led to poverty, grief, pain, and death...

...and yet we continue to insist making the same damn mistakes over and over and over again... insisting that this time we'll 'get it right.'
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
pollutant (mwol) : a substance that makes land, water, air, etc. dirty and not safe for use.

co2 has many uses, not the least of which is that our very existence depends on it. we exhale it, plants inhale it. it is one of the most stable of compounds. it only becomes 'not safe for use' when its levels become harmful, like everything else in life.

sounds to me like you could just about call any common compound (or element) a harmful pollutant in a certain environment. ex: too much water can kill us all.

it is also claimed to be a factor in global warming by trapping heat. I guess the powers that be were concerned about humans releasing so much of it as to cause substantial increases in man made global warming. this is something not exactly accepted as fact by all concerned, nor whose final outcome is fully understood or accurately predictable, by a long shot.

like all lefty science, its only real, dangerous and important (fixable) if it rings the (tax) ca$h regi$ter.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
If the intent is to crash the system then why wouldn't they impose failed programs here? America is under siege- engaged in a state of war and the opposition's general is Barack Hussein Obama and the foot soldiers are members of congress- both parties. The main weaponry has little to do with military equipment- it takes the form of the dollar. The battle is being waged with great effectiveness.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
What gets my goat is driving around Silicon Valley and seeing all the new roof-top solar photovoltaic panels. The state of California has jiggered the electric rates such that the McMansion owners are subsidized by the poor renters in the apartments.

Where's the "environmental justice" in that?
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
This is similar to the situation in Germany. Middle class German home owners have erected subsidized photovoltaic panels, and the electric companies are forced by government regulations to "buy" excess energy, even if they don't need it and have no way to store over-supply.

Now the poorest German taxpayers, who do not own their own homes, have been overwhelmed by the average 80% increase in electricity costs in the past 10 years. More increases are built into the system: another 60% increase coming by the end of the decade. Plus the grid is not unreliable - there have been cases where expensive electronic factory equipment burned up because the grid collapsed momentarily. Some businesses are threatening to go east where Poland and the other countries are too pragmatic risk an unreliable electricity grid.

The system was rigged from the beginning: The big companies erecting the wind farms and the home owners who invested in "green" panels were promised their investments would pay off. The poor are now paying. In Germany 600,000 households had their electricity cut off last year.

See der Skpiegel "German energy poverty".

Coming soon to America. Of course Obama will solve this like he solves everything: the middle class will forced to pay bills for two famillies: their own plus some "unfortunate" family's electric bills. Or else Obama will sign an executive order that no one pays more than 5% of their income for electricity, like student loan payments, which leave taxpayers with the unpaid balance if the loan balance is never paid. The Federal Reserve can then buy up Treasury debt no one else is foolish enough to buy and then our grandchildren can shoulder the debt chains.

Obama-energy - it's the right thing to do.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Whitehall, are you saying that the new solar collectors are placed on top of the apt. buildings & the apt. dwellers don't get at LEAST 50% of the collected energy? How come the McMansion owners don't put solar collectors on their roofs...oh wait...their communist H.O.A.'s wouldn't allow's not " esthetically pleasing"!!
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
pilfering hundreds of billions of dollars demonstrates the very success, for criminal syndicates at least, of the climate fear mongering scam
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All