Have a couple of dopey English scientists take little peyote before developing a computer enhanced model...then with a bing and a bang and a boom…a nice little piece of propaganda before Copenhagen.
The map has been launched by the UK Government, in partnership with the Met Office, and was developed using the latest peer-reviewed science from the UK’s national weather service, the Met Office Hadley Centre and other leading impact scientists.
It highlights some of the impacts that may occur if the global average temperature rises by 4°Celsius above the pre-industrial climate average.
The poster shows that a four degree average rise will not be spread uniformly across the globe. The land will heat up more quickly than the sea, and high latitudes, particularly the Arctic, will have larger temperature increases.
The impacts on human activity shown on the map are only a selection of those that may occur, and highlight the severe effects on water availability, agricultural productivity, extreme temperatures and drought, the risk of forest fire and sea-level rise
Agricultural yields are expected to decrease for all major cereal crops in all major regions of production. Half of all Himalayan glaciers will be significantly reduced by 2050, leading to 23 per cent of the population of China being deprived of the vital dry season glacial melt water source.
The UK’s Foreign Secretary, David Miliband said “We cannot cope with a four degree world. This map clearly illustrates the scale of the challenge facing us today – climate change is a truly global problem that needs a global solution and it is a solution we have within our grasp.
He said that to tackle the problem of climate change, foreign ministries, environment ministries, treasuries, departments of defence and all parts of government and societies, must work together to keep global temperatures to two degrees.
“It is only by doing this that we can minimise the huge security risks presented by a future four degree world,” he said.
Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband said “This map shows that the stakes couldn’t be any higher at the Copenhagen talks in December.
“Britain’s scientists have helped to illustrate the catastrophic effects that will result if the world fails to limit the global temperature rise to two degrees. With less than 50 days left before agreement must be reached, the UK’s going all out to persuade the world of the need to raise its ambitions so we get a deal that protects us from a four degree world.”
Vicky Pope, Head of Climate Change Advice at the Met Office, said “If emissions continue at the current rate the global average temperature are likely to rise by 4°Celsius by the end of this century or even substantially earlier.
“The science tells us that this will have severe and widespread impacts in all parts of the world, so we need to take action now to reduce emissions to avoid water and food shortages in the future.”
Ahead of December’s international climate change talks in Copenhagen, the UK Government is aiming for an agreement that limits climate change as far as possible to 2°Celsius as it says increases of more than two degrees will have huge impacts on the world.
Wow, they didn’t get the Al Gore memo, it’s not about global warming any more it’s about “global climate change.”
Minister for Climate Change Senator Penny Wong has attended ministerial talks on climate change in Spain.
Hosted by the Danish Government, the Barcelona Ministerial Meeting was held between 29-31 October in Barcelona.
Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen highlighted the Meeting as an opportunity to kick-start the last remaining week of formal UN negotiations prior to the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen in December.
“We are just weeks out from Copenhagen and at a critical stage in negotiations,” Senator Wong said.
“This is an important opportunity for countries to make progress on key issues central to achieving consensus in Copenhagen.”
Australia has put forward a proposal that would see a common framework for the mitigation efforts of all countries based on the use of national schedules. This approach would retain economy-wide targets for developed countries and require developing countries to record a suite of actions in line with their national circumstances.
Um, I wonder what an “economy-wide targets for developed countries” means?
In a speech to a joint session of Congress this morning, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told Congress that there was “no time to lose” in the fight against global warming. “We need an agreement at the climate conference in December in Copenhagen,” she said. “That requires the readiness of all countries to accept binding international commitments.”
Binding international commitments means one thing, giving up our sovereignty.
Our founding fathers told us through their writings to steer clear of European entanglements. We do not require any agreements with them now or in the future for that matter. We mustn’t get involved with this madness. This is our sovereignty, our ability to govern our own country, not any global community Merkel, or for that matter Obama, represents. We, the US citizenry, govern our own country.
I spotted this snippet today on Progress Ohio toward the end of a post supporting Issue 2, which truly made me depressed.
Agriculture is Ohio’s largest industry and proper regulation is necessary, however, the creation of a new political board with broad powers and backed by agri-business is not in the best interests of the citizens of Ohio. (SH: But PETA and HSUS are?)
Agriculture has existed in Ohio for at least 200 years without a standards board bureaucracy. Moreover the Ohio Legislature and State Board of Agriculture has the authority to negotiate with animal rights groups and implement prudent changes. (SH: Is this a good idea? Why is our General Assembly negotiating with these fringe radicals in the first place…but oh yes, it was our worthless General Assembly that put the farmer and the citizen in this position in the first place!)
The Humane Society has stated that they will attempt to impose restrictions on farms with or without Issue 2. (SH: Impose; Hitler and Stalin imposed many draconian laws too, but the last time I checked HSUS is just a special interest group.) If the purpose of Issue 2 is to mitigate potential reforms from the Humane Society, it’s a waste of time and energy. (SH: Wow, maybe the State AG should consider applying an Ohio version of the Rico Statute against HSUS.)
Ohio Farmers know their craft and I think they are willing to work with animal rights and public health groups to address any potential areas for improvement. (SH: Why do we have to work with anybody but the consumer? How is working with some nut cases that elevate animals above humans going to make me a better farmer?)
Please join me the Ohio Liberty Council, the Ohio Sierra Club and the Ohio Farmers Union in voting NO on Issue 2. (SH: Boy, this guy almost convinced this traditional conservative to vote for Issue 2 after all of that BS.)
Either way, if Issue 2 passes or fails, the statist is out there ready to place some sort of control on our, the farmers, life. So either way the Ohio farmer loses, and in the end the Ohio consumer loses too.
Update: Check out this post, Why Issue 2 Can’t Stop the HSUS, it should make you mad as it did me, if of course you are concerned about freedom and liberty, and not control.
Renee from Glass City Jungle is reporting that the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus endorsed Issue 2. I wonder what these Democrats know that this farmer doesn’t?
“The OLBC is proud to endorse Issue 2,” said Rep. Sandra Williams (D-Cleveland), President of the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus. “The OLBC has a history of promoting public policy initiatives that will help all Ohioans build a better future. Issue 2 will maintain the viability of Ohio’s agriculture by reinforcing consumer confidence in Ohio-raised food.”
If passed, Issue 2 will create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board (Board). With the creation of this Board, it will ensure that Ohioans are making decisions about livestock and poultry care in their state. “Issue 2 is about making sure we have safe, local, affordable milk, meat and eggs for our families,” said Rep. Carlton Weddington (D-Columbus).
Certainly educated people can discern complex matters, but how can a non-elected board of non-farmers (with one HSUS or PETA representative, read the bill, it’s in there) ensure confidence in 90 percent of the food we eat, which is not grown in Ohio. Can they do something about the factory farms in Nebraska, China or Mexico where we get most of our food stuff? Can this non-elected board of non-farmers (with one HSUS or PETA representative) ensure the right decisions are made concerning how animals are raised in Nebraska, China or Mexico? Can a non-elected board of non-farmers (and one HSUS or PETA representative) ensure we have inexpensive food for our state when 90 percent of our food stuff is produced outside of Ohio? The answer to these questions is NO. So their job will be to focus on less than 10 percent of the food Ohioans produce, which we eat: Can we say this board is a waste of money too!
What Issue 2 is going to do is to put one more nail into the coffin that contains Ohio’s small and mid size farming community. Issue 2 will help HSUS and PETA gain a stronger position and help kill our animal husbandry practices businesses because they have a place on the board. At the same time the board gives Big Agro even more power within the state, all the while they slowly move to foreign countries just like the auto industry did (GM is still around folks and doing very well; it’s now in China). Remember they don’t need an appointed place at the table, they’ll buy a place at the table.
Ask yourself why did the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus go against the Ohio Democrat Party? My take is because this is such a bad bill few truly know what is at stake or the resulting consequences. This should never have gotten on the ballot. But there’s always the outside chance Big Agro paid these urbanites off to get their endorsement.
I say to all you know-it- all urbanites and suburbanites, if you don’t like the way animals are being raised, then stop buying food from the processors that sell it, but stay off of my farm. And to all you Big Agro types that want to use fecal matter to feed your chickens and cage them five high or raise your cattle on feed lots, that’s your choice, but stay off of my farm too! I raise my chickens in a manner I deem right. In order to have real food freedom we have to let the consumer make the choice, not some special interest group!
I am against Issue 2 because this violates the fundamental right of private property (period). We can’t have half freedom folks. There is only freedom or tyranny. Again, I oppose ISSUE 2 because it is threat to private property and the Ohio Constitution. I also strongly oppose HSUS and PETA because they are a threat to my freedom to be a farmer. And lastly I oppose Big Agro because they are a threat to my freedom to be a competitive farmer. Are you getting it yet; Issue 2 is about freedom.
I spotted this snippet from old Comrade Giorgi Vionovich on page two of a sickening article detailing the US Senates disastrous efforts to kill America.
And Voinovich said Democratic sponsors have not reached out to him to negotiate on the legislation. “I think Senator Kerry and Senator Boxer are trying to get the most aggressive bill they can get out of the Senate EPW Committee,” he said. “As a result of that, I don’t think that they are as interested in negotiating as they might ordinarily.”
Voinovich added that he expects Democrats to press for more bipartisan talks early next year once leaders start counting votes and after the conclusion of a major U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen, Denmark.
“If they understand they can’t get cloture on what comes out of committee, I think we’d be more likely to get really serious after we get back after Copenhagen,” he said. “And at that stage of the game, we’ll have much more clarity where everyone’s going.”
Yep, Giorgi has his hands squarely wrapped around the knife the environmental leftists are thrusting in the back of the United States and Ohio.
You know what’s sad; there are people in this state that still think Republicans stand for capitalism and freedom. Sad isn’t it?
This a very troubling video. Every US citizen must realize that our sovereignty has never been threaten more than it is now. Watch this video and find out why it is.
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming. In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009.
A draft of the treaty can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu…
Page 18: Section 38 of the “Share vision for long-term cooperation action plan” contains the text for forming the new government.
Page 40: Section 46 Subsection H of the “Objectives, scope, and guiding principles” contains the text for enforcement and establishment of the rule of law.
There has been considerable debate raised about Monckton’s conclusion that the Copenhagen Treaty would cede US sovereignty. His comments appear to be based upon his interpretation of the The Supremacy Clause in the US Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 2). This clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. TREATIES as the supreme law of the land. Concerns have been raised in the past that a particularly ambitious treaty may supersede the US Constitution. In the 1950s, a constitutional amendment, known as the Bricker Amendment, was proposed in response to such fears, but it failed to pass. You can read more about the Bricker Amendment in a 1953 Time Magazine article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/art…,9171,806676-1,00.html
Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.
It looks like some of the good folks in Wooster 9/12 Project and Wooster Tea Party oppose ISSUE 2, and these are small and mid size farmers. One of their members and blog contributor, Katie Myers, had this to say about the buffoonery:
I am a conservative, born and raised on a farm, card carrying member of the Farm Bureau and depend on agriculture for my livlihood and I have some serious concerns with Issue 2. Back in July, I was very on board with Issue 2. I agree that we don’t need a third party coming into our state and telling us how to farm! In August, however, when I began my policy research and saw the ballot languauge I was appauled!
A constitutional amendment for a self interest group? Yes, it is my self interest group, but regardless a high-jack of the constitution is a high jack of the constitution. If you would like to read an informative article I wrote about Issue 2 follow this link http://countrysideconservancy.wordpress.com/ and here are a few questions that I have and I have posed to many leaders in the community with NO RESPONSE!
Click on to their site and read the rest of Ms. Myers’ posting, as well as the very important concerns about the motives of HSUS and PETA. And let me say it again, HSUS and PETA are not friends of the farmer; in truth they are closer to being our biggest foe. But like the other folks from Wooster, I am opposed to ISSUE 2 because it attacks freedom, liberty and the Ohio Constitution. It’s likely friends we’ll be digging in to fight HSUS and PETA if we defeat ISSUE 2.
A recent commenter jump to a conclusion that wasn’t correct at all. He said because I am opposed to Issue 2, I must be for PETA and HSUS. Boy that is a weak argument.
Look folks, I will not vote for a law that takes away my freedom to fight or block a bully or tyrant. This is the weak argument those that support Issue 2 are making. They want this unelected panel of non-farmers to regulate our farms all to prevent PETA and HSUS from affecting future agriculture legislation. Come on folks that is a weak argument.
The bottom-line, I stand for liberty and freedom and oppose tyranny; that includes government bureaucrats, statists, PETA and HSUS.
