Rainforests become monstrous cash machines in the name of 'saving the planet'

Concerned only with the planet's safety and 'security,' carbon profiteers are focused on the US Senate's ongoing back room deals to "put a price on carbon," or in plain English, to strangle what is left of the US middle class via the massive hoax of global warming and give it to those who deserve it more-very rich people hiding behind an elaborate environmental scam.

• It's assumed the Banana Republic of the United States will extract all from its middle class taxpayers (preferably those in the private sector) to further enrich global organized crime elite. Media darling front men and groups mentioned in this article, WWF, World Bank, Nature Conservancy, Woods Hole Research Center (an advocacy group not to be confused with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, a bona fide scientific organization), World Resources Institute, Al Gore, the UN, and others.

"The WWF (World Wildlife Fund) and other green campaign groups talking up the destruction of the Amazon rainforests are among those who stand to

• make billions of dollars from the scare.

This “green gold-rush” involves taking control of huge tracts of rainforest supposedly

• to stop them being chopped down, and
• selling carbon credits

gained from carbon dioxide emissions they claim will be “saved”.

• Backed by a $30 million grant from the World Bank,

the WWF has already partnered in a pilot scheme to manage 20 million acres in Brazil.

• If their plans get the go-ahead in Mexico at the end of the year, the forests will be worth over

$60 billion in “carbon credits”, paid for by consumers in “rich” countries

• through their electricity bills and in increased prices

• for goods and services.

The prospect of a billion-dollar windfall explains the sharp reaction to the “Amazongate” scandal, in which the IPCC falsely claimed that up to 40 percent of the rainforest could be at risk from even a slight drop in rainfall.

• Here, the IPCC was caught out again making unsubstantiated claims based on a WWF report.

But unlike the “Glaciergate” affair where its claim that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was conceded to be an “error”, the IPCC stood firm on its Amazon claim, stating that the assertion was “correct”. What makes the difference is that there is

• no serious money locked into melting glaciers.

• Amazonian trees, however, are potentially worth billions....

Carbon trading itself presents a very valuable income stream for investment and finance houses, which are

• well-represented on the boards of environmental charity allies and donor foundations.

All of these can be relied upon to provide generous support for future activities, funded in part from carbon trading."...

• from EUReferendum, "Amazongate II: A green gold rush," by Richard North, 3/21/10

Reference, Telegraph UK by Christopher Booker, 3/20/10, "WWF hope to find $60 billion growing on trees"

• "Just as alarming to the WWF and its allies, who were hoping to make billions from Brazilian forests, has been the failure of the US Senate to approve the cap and trade bill championed by President Obama. Since the

EU has excluded the rainforests from its own cap and trade scheme,

• bringing the US into the net is vital for the WWF’s hopes of finding “money growing on trees”.

The price of carbon on the Chicago Climate Exchange has just plummeted to its lowest-ever level, 10 cents a ton. "....(item near end of article) The World Bank, photo from EUReferendum via WUWT.... Finally, NY Times on the Senate's deliberations, seriously: "One of the biggest questions facing the Senate trio involves whether to

• auction off most of the allowances
• or

give them away to industry constituents."...2/24/10, "Carbon Pricing Sticks out as Senate Climate Bill's Main Obstacle" by Darren Samuelsohn of ClimateWire.

• Really. Why any question? The man made invention of man made global warming is the greatest crime against humanity in history. Anyone in the US Senate who does not work to defeat this bill should go to jail. My opinion. ed.

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon