Carbon Tax has an Ozone hole about it

I saw this in Business Day. Given how gullible folk like rooitwit are on the subject (The looney is till in 19th century mode and als oback the ludicrous notion o fnothing created everything) I thought thsi maybe enlightening:

SOME really curious things have been happening recently on the climate change front.

By and large, a strange silence has descended. Perhaps it’s just that the media is fed up with it.

But that belies what is actually taking place. The first thing is that carbon dioxide levels are continuing to rise. Far from wringing your hands with worry, however, note the next thing — global temperatures are not going the same way. (Bwahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha)

Between 1995 and last year carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rose 10%, but global temperatures not at all. It is now abundantly plain that there has been no global warming that is statistically different from zero for nearly two decades.

This new data drives a huge hole in the conventional wisdom that rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide is the cause of a global warming crisis. I hope those jokers over at the Treasury, always seeking every opportunity to raise new forms of tax to feed that insatiable monster called the state, take note of this. The facts now imperil their faulty reasoning that a carbon tax is essential to help safeguard the planet. (Dont expect the dullards like rooitwit to get it or the rapacious treasuries of the world - the proganda will continue)

We do not need nor should we be obliged to suffer a quite useless carbon tax, as useless as that toll on plastic bags — from which the initial money disappeared, never to be explained — and the surcharge on new motor vehicles according to their power output. These amount to blatant trickery.

In fact, such global warming as took place since the 1970s can be laid at the feet of chlorofluorocarbons and not carbon dioxide. That’s the research evidence derived by the University of Waterloo and published on May 30 in the International Journal of Modern Physics.

It was chlorofluorocarbons that caused the hole in the ozone layer and in-depth statistical analysis shows that chlorofluorocarbons are the guilty party in driving global climate change, not carbon dioxide.

Conventional thinking, driven by greenie activists and bent scientists (Probably of kiwi origini!!!!), is that global temperatures will rise as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases. But since 2002 global temperatures have actually declined and cooling is set to continue for the next 50-70 years as chlorofluorocarbons in the atmosphere decline and the hole in the ozone layer closes.

While all this is going on and the Arctic sea ice shrinks, the Antarctic sea ice is growing consistently, now larger than ever before recorded.

The Antarctic sea ice has been expanding ever since satellites began measuring it 33 years ago. The difference in behaviour of the two is explained by their contrasting geographies, with the Arctic a sea surrounded by land mass while the Antarctic is a continent encircled by open seas.

Meanwhile, Forbes magazine reports that global warming alarmists have been caught doctoring claims that there is a 97% consensus among scientists agreeing that global warming is caused by humans. Journalists discovered that papers by vigorous sceptics were being deliberately misinterpreted. There is no end to the manipulations by those determined that their invalid views shall prevail. (The whole evolutionarny debacle is of the same ilk. Science no whas proved the impossibility of macro evolution)

Also of consuming interest is that this superfluity of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is resulting in a greening of arid areas. Between 1982 and 2010 leaf cover on plants rose 11% in arid areas in the US, the Australian outback and some parts of Africa and the Middle East.

The carbon dioxide fertilisation effect is encouraging trees to invade grasslands, and it is thought trees are likely to benefit more than grasses from this increase. Whether that’s good will provide academics with something else to rush off to get grant money for research.(Some disgusting dishonesty at universities re trying to obtain research grants)

The sum total of the most recent scientific deliberations is fairly simple. We have all been brainwashed by alarmist greenies who castigate everyone who doesn’t share their beliefs and categorise those among us who have been sceptical from the beginning as being flat-earthers and denialists.(Even today dispute the overwhelming evidence and the total discredting of evolution and everthing was brought into being by nothing brigade they persist with their delusions)

That science is demonstrating the reverse underlines the poverty of attempts by our Treasury to impose a carbon tax. If it persists with this, business has to organise a vigorous campaign to stop it.

Take the buggers to court and sue them for lies and thievery!

 

I suppose whilst you have halfwits like rooitwit mindlessly parroting the global warming nonsense it will take an effort to persuade governments to stop looting their tax base. When will rooitwit and his co loonies ever wake up!! siiigh

SImilar studies done by a Norwegian panel of scientists were recently cited in the Economist. That publication an early and strident proponent of the global warming thesis, now admits the data is not following the models. 

 

What happened here? An elegant theory was hijacked by a bunch of guys working in one of the lower branches of science. Suddenly they weren't in weather stations but at conferences in Tokyo and on the evening news. They liked the change, who wouldn't. So they pushed it, ignoring data, skeptics and common sense. 

 

Next we had the politicians who found a new way to control people, which is at the heart of everything they do. It was too good to miss....so they started legislating.

 

Lastly we had gullible fools, who were tricked into believing any bad weather event was due to global warming. Most recently the huge US tornadoes were blamed on warming, even though they are creatures of instant temperature differentials....and the current spring in the U S is cooler than normal.

 

The lesson here is not to believe everything you are told. We may get warming in future, with sun variation as the most likely source. Right now things are on the cool side of normal.

In fact Moz, as you are no doubt aware, there is stuff being written about the threat of global cooling.

By the way do you think there is an asset bubble being created in the States and elsewhere. I hear the Fed is buying $85 billion a month in US Govt bonds. This keeps interest rates low. Low interest rates mean folk borrow money and buy houses and shares. However once interest rates rise because of quantatative easing being relaxed the asset bubble bursts. Everytime there is any talk of quantative easing stopping the market goes down sharply.

Any views on an exit strategy for the Fed. As interest rates go up bonds go down and the Fed might have some $3 trillion dollars wiped off its balance sheet over time as the bonds mature.

Just to say I have heard presentations where highly respected investment houses are saying assets could rise to astonishing levels but come crashing within the next 24 months. 

Its also very interesting to note that the US is already benefiting from its cheaper shale oil coming on stream. I heard that by 2017 the US will be the largest oil producer in the world!

 

There is a new paradigm developing with shale oil. For one thing the pressure on the dollar which came from the twin deficits, should ease. Buying Norwegian government bonds is no longer such a clear course of action. Nor is gold for that matter, which in many ways is the anti dollar. As far as bubbles go, it's possible we are getting a bubble in some assets as a result of Fed action. But stocks are at average multiples in a low interest rate environment. Even if interest rates go up two basis points over 18 months, we will still be below average. So should we be nervous? I think the answer is yes because other areas of the world remain vulnerable....emerging markets, China, the European periphery and look at Japan's plunge! The pure interest rate effect on stocks is probably tolerable, especially if interest rate rises are signalling an improving economy. Often the biggest interes rate effects perversely are felt as interest rates top out and start to dip from high levels. That signals to investors that bonds are likely to start appreciating and there is no point to wait any longer. So often as the Fed acknowledges economic difficulties by trying to lower rates, they hammer stocks with reduced earnings prospects and a flight to bonds, meaning stock yields have to go up to compete. We are not at that point yet, so we are likely to have an approximate stand off between controlled rate rises and improved fundamentals. There will be some rotation away from dividend paying stocks into pure growth stocks. But the growth stocks will be the ones that will ultimately plunge as interest rates top out or exogenous events occur. I really have no idea where to put fresh money today.....many of the ideas that worked in the last decade won't work in a rising dollar environment. Retail investors are rarely agile enough to play the high beta stocks, so I have found over time consumer discretionary and health care to be the best place to hide. Bottom line....as long as the unemployment rate stays above 6% in the US the Fed has enough weapons to keep interest rates below historical averages. The fact that the trade deficit is improving markedly and Chinese financing isn't as crucial, just improves that control. Don't fight the Fed.

Beeno / Moz - you guys might enjoy the commentary of Todd Harrison who I think has a very well balanced approach to the markets recognizing the invisible hand of the Fed but also the reality of debt and what it means. Definitely not a Keynesian. His writing style is a little different and can take some getting used to, but have been following his stuff for 5 or 6 years and he's got a very good feel for whats going on.

 

He has a website called Minyanville which has other contributors, but I mostly read his stuff. I don't pay for his premium Buzz and Banter which is more for people day-trading and active traders. I don't do that anymore, tried it for a while and sucked :)

 

His post for today is here

 Interesting read. I'm going to bookmark this guy. I generally don't short term trade as he does.....you have to be too vigilant, interferes with golf. But when you are in the 6 to 18 months maturity range the disadvantage  with the guys at the Exchange  diminishes. 

-

-

What looks like seriously dead money these days is the Bric trade. Maybe the soccer WC will get. brazil back on the radar.