Image via Wikipediahttp://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/debates/copenhagen_article/8979
In my book on biodiversity, Beyond Conservation, I had mentioned in one of the chapters that perhaps the man-made global warming theory was not all it was being cracked up to be. The changes we are seeing now, I wrote, suggested that some other processes were at work. I then took time out, visited the science libraries, and checked the original science upon which today’s models are based.
I was shocked by what I found. Firstly, there’s no real consensus among the scientists in the UN working groups, especially around oceanography and atmospheric physics. The atmospheric physics of carbon dioxide for example is presented as being pretty straightforward: it is a greenhouse gas, therefore it warms up the planet. But even that isn’t settled. There’s a huge amount of scientific disagreement on how much extra heating in the atmosphere you will get from carbon dioxide. It is even broadly accepted that carbon dioxide on its own is not a problem.
Secret highly toxic ingredients of chemical dispersant Corexit finally revealed! - Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
http://farmwars.info/?p=3084&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FarmWars+%28Farm+Wars%29
“EPA had the authority to act all along; its decision to now disclose the ingredients demonstrates this. Yet it took a public outcry and weeks of complaints for the agency to act and place the public’s interest ahead of corporate interests.”
On the toxicity question, you could hardly find a more dangerous combination of poisons to dump into the Gulf of Mexico than what has been revealed in Corexit. The Corexit 9527 product has been designated a “chronic and acute health hazard” by the EPA. It is made with 2-butoxyethanol, a highly toxic chemical that has long been linked to the health problems of cleanup crews who worked on the Exxon Valdez spill.
A newer Corexit recipe dubbed the “9500 formula” contains dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, a detergent chemical that’s also found in laxatives. What do you suppose happens to the marine ecosystem when fish and sea turtles ingest this chemical through their gills and skin? And just as importantly, what do you think happens to the human beings who are working around this chemical, breathing in its fumes and touching it with their skin?
The answers are currently unknown, which is exactly why it is so inexcusable that Nalco and the oil industry giants would for so long refuse to disclose the chemical ingredients they’re dumping into the Gulf of Mexico in huge quantities (over a million gallons dumped into the ocean to date).
But it gets even more interesting when you look at just how widespread this “chemical secrecy” is across Big Business in the USA… and how the U.S. government more often than not conspires with industry to keep these chemicals a secret.
Large manufacturers of consumers products — such as Unilever, Proctor & Gamble and Johnson & Johnson — routinely use toxic chemical ingredients in their products — ingredients which are usually kept secret from the public.
Similarly, virtually every perfume, cologne and fragrance product on the market is made with cancer-causing chemicals that their manufacturers refuse to disclose, claiming their formulas are “trade secrets.”
Throughout Big Business in America, the toxic chemicals used in everyday products such as household cleaners, cosmetics and yard care remain a dangerous secret, and the U.S. government actually colludes with industry to keep these chemical ingredients a secret by, for example, refusing to require full disclosure of ingredients for personal care products. The FDA offers us virtually no enforcement in this area, depending almost entirely on companies to declare their own chemicals are safe rather than requiring actual safety testing to be conducted.
Mondoweiss
Schumer on Gazans
Collective punishment is sometimes too nice. Because the Gazans voted for Hamas, says NY Senator Schumer, "to strangle them economically until they see that's not the way to go makes sense." (I wonder what he would do to Helen Thomas to get her to change her mind?) Also calls for "regime change" in Iran, and brags that there are multiplex cinemas in the West Bank. Freedom. At the Orthodox Union; video at Daily News. H/t Alex Kane.
This came in Comments
June 11, 2010 at 6:35 am
In a speech to AIPAC in 2008, Ephraim Sneh strongly implied that the same crime should be committed against the Iranian people, in order to correct their “inability” to elect west-compliant leaders.
Here’s what he said:
The Iran problem is not the nuclear project. The problem is the regime which is based on Islamist fascism. That is the problem. Now, the regime must be eliminated. It’s the regime that should be eliminated. Who should do it? The Iranian people. The Iranian people doesn’t like this regime. …So what is feasible is not reform; the regime would not allow reform. But they can be forced out, they can be toppled by the people. It’s feasible.Here’s where he said it: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/190205
But there are two preconditions in order to accelerate it; one, real, effective sanctions, sanctions that would make it impossible for the regime to govern, to run their economy, to feed 70 million people.
The US government is equally complicit in the crime Sneh proposed: Congress has passed legislation designed to ‘Iraq Iran’ — to sanction Iran to the point that it is too weak to resist an invasion and overthrow of their country. The Obama administration has supported this crime, and the State Department has drawn the international community into the criminal conspiracy: two days ago, the US forced through another round of sanctions against Iran.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment