This trading lark is for pussies, let's all be like Al Gore and 'trade' carbons

  • Thread starter Black Swan
  • Start date
  • Watchers 5
B

Black Swan

The snake oil fraud is on the way to becoming a bull5hit billionaire....:D Some great
comments after the article:...

There was an interesting development this week.
Al Gore, perhaps scenting that all is not well with the Manmade Global Warming credo, has published a new book, "Our Choice".
In it he says: "Simply laying out the facts won't work."
He has decided that only an appeal to people's spiritual side will now work.
The problem for Gore's Church of Global Warming is that if you set out the facts, they are deeply unconvincing.
1. The planet cooled in 2007.
2. The planet cooled in 2008
3. The planet appears to be cooling in 2009 (North American temperatures have been unusually low, and the winter arrived three months early this year in Peru).
4. CO2 emissions have continued to rise in each of these years.
5. The cooling phase began when the sun went into one of its regular phases of relative inactivity.
6. The rise in temperature that undoubtedly took place in the 1980s and 1990s did so when the sun became unusually active.

Hmmm....are the facts telling us something heretical?
Never mind.
JUST BELIEVE, MY BRETHREN

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


GOOGLE up AL GORE AND OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM. You will find that THE WEALTH OF AL GORE is intertwined with oxy petroleum. Al Gore's father sat on the Board of Directors at Occidntal Petroleum after he lost his seat in the US Senate until his death. ALGORE Jr.while vice president of the United States profited as a shareholder of OXY PETROLEUM. During the Clinton/Gore years OCCIDENTAL PETOLEUM ACQUIRED THE ELK HILL RESERVES IN CALIF. (OVER 47,000 ACRES) THE LARGEST PRIVATE ACQUISITION OF PUBLIC LAND IN US HISTORY. Our former president George Bush alluded to the Elk Hill Reserve Acquisition by Oxy to Candidate Gore in their second debate before the 2000 election...the look on ALGORE's face at that moment was "priceless"- I saved the tape) While Occidental Petroleum was CLEAR CUTTING THE CLOUD FORRESTS IN COLUMBIA for Oil exploration along the Amazon River the stone age UWA INDIANS protested the the "DRAWING OF BLOOD FROM MOTHER EARTH". Many disapearred as they protested. (see Amnesty International Global Alert Hotline IN 2000). UWA INDIAN chiefs were denied VISAS to come to the United States where they intended to protest at the Democrat National Convention (2000). (see Rain Forrest Action Network www.ran.org) The Real Al Gore is a PROFITEER tied to an INTERNATIONAL OIL EXPLORATION COMPANY (OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM) FOUNDED BY ARMOND HAMMER (WHO TRADED WHEAT TO COMMUNIST RUSSIA IN THE 20s-30s to prop up V. LENINS COMMUNIST STATE). Simon Jenkins with the London Times wrote a few insightful articles back in 2000 for the London Times that will illuminate the reader on WHAT ALGORE REALLY IS.



Al Gore could become world's first carbon billionaire
Al Gore, the former US vice president, could become the world's first carbon billionaire after investing heavily in green energy companies

Last year Mr Gore's venture capital firm loaned a small California firm $75m to develop energy-saving technology.

The company, Silver Spring Networks, produces hardware and software to make the electricity grid more efficient.

The deal appeared to pay off in a big way last week, when the Energy Department announced $3.4 billion in smart grid grants, the New York Times reports. Of the total, more than $560 million went to utilities with which Silver Spring has contracts.

The move means that venture capital company Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years.

Few people have been as vocal about the urgency of global warming and the need to reinvent the way the world produces and consumes energy as Mr Gore. And few have put as much money behind their advocacy and are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and when it comes.

Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming sceptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world's first "carbon billionaire," profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...d-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html
 
The extent of Al Gore's hypocrisy is such that he'd probably qualify for the T2W modding team !
 
Those who are open-mindedly sceptical about GW/CC may like to search on YouTube for:

Professor Rob Carter

Co2science

Freeman Dyson

Professor Bob Carter

Robert Felix Global Cooling

John Christy
Roy Spencer

Also see www.second-opinions.co.uk
 
The problem for Gore's Church of Global Warming is that if you set out the facts, they are deeply unconvincing.
1. The planet cooled in 2007.
2. The planet cooled in 2008
3. The planet appears to be cooling in 2009 (North American temperatures have been unusually low, and the winter arrived three months early this year in Peru).

There is no convincing evidence that the long term warming trend has stopped or reversed regardless of all the blather about the last couple of years. The climate always has and always will have have short term variability over periods of several years. But in a typically propagandistic fashion, the denies love to cherry pick a couple of years here and there or a carefully chosen ten year period with very agreeable end points. It is bad science. Indeed, it is dishonest and "science" is too good a term for it.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/
 
More on the global cooling bunk:

Statisticians reject global cooling

"In a blind test, the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians and asked them to look for trends, without telling them what the numbers represented. The experts found no true temperature declines over time.

"If you look at the data and sort of cherry-pick a micro-trend within a bigger trend, that technique is particularly suspect," said John Grego, a professor of statistics at the University of South Carolina."

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ap-impact-statisticians-reject-174088.html

It is just incomprehensible to me why this should come as any sort of surprise to traders who spend half their lives looking for pullback in trends.
 
More scientists (over 30,000) refuting man made global warming:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

"With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scient...change#Statements_by_dissenting_organizations

Let's be clear on what this says Not one single scientific body of international or national standing disputes AGW.
 
More scientists (over 30,000) refuting man made global warming:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Lets just have a bit of a closer look at this one. According to the US census (http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/education/cps2008.html) there are about 40 million people in the United States who hold Bachelor's degrees. Lets assume that half of those hold degrees in technical disciplines such as science, engineering, medicine etc. Thats 20 million people.

According to the petition website, the only requirement to sign the petition is to hold a BSc or similar. Doing the figures, that is just 1.5% of qualified people (by the web site's own definition) have signed the petition. And that is, I suggest, rather less than impressive.

In any case, the whole methodology is fundamentally flawed. The world is full of people with BSc's who have done no science since leaving university and have no more idea than the next person about climate science. I have a BSc in physics, but I would in no way consider myself a scientist.
 
There was some brief thing this morning on Radio 4 about carbon trading being more deadly than Strontium-90 (finance guyy vs friends of the earth girl). Whilst listening to it, it occurred to me that if the world production of CO2 decreases at a lower rate than the sum of cap's (Government targets will never be hit) + ability to process CO2 (technology will not scale that quickly), price is likely to increase in this carbon futures market as demand will exceed supply for a longer time. Is it me or is this a stunning no brainer of a 'go long and hold' strategy?
 
yes carbon trading as an idea is a scam. its about taxing human existence that will enrich the few who dominant the 'unregulated' exchanges.The idea is each human will pay an inescapable tithe [via a proxy] to those firms just because they need to eat and breathe. Carbon credits are given away free by the govt to some firms. money out of nothing. its like giving gold bars away free.

easy money.

Carbon trading could trigger a financial collapse like the sub-prime loans crisis
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8343489.stm

Carbon markets not working, says Deutsche Bank
http://www.theecologist.org/News/ne...n_markets_not_working_says_deutsche_bank.html

CFTC chair calls for comprehensive regulation of emissions markets
http://www.ogj.com/index/article-di...ics-markets/2009/11/cftc-chair_calls_for.html
 
There was some brief thing this morning on Radio 4 about carbon trading being more deadly than Strontium-90 (finance guyy vs friends of the earth girl). Whilst listening to it, it occurred to me that if the world production of CO2 decreases at a lower rate than the sum of cap's (Government targets will never be hit) + ability to process CO2 (technology will not scale that quickly), price is likely to increase in this carbon futures market as demand will exceed supply for a longer time. Is it me or is this a stunning no brainer of a 'go long and hold' strategy?

In theory, but in practice it is not hard to forsee weak kneed governments handing out extra free permits to big polluters "in the national interest". We already see this nonsense in Australia and we don't even have a carbon trading system as yet.

This of course will dilute the value of the permits in circulation.

I don't have a lot of faith in carbon trading as a solution and it is obviously open to corruption of many sorts. Direct regulation and taxation plus serious subsidies for low emission energy production R&D and capital expenditure would be far better. The dimensions of the problem are enormous.
 
Just looked at a chart - seems to follow DAX/FTSE stock based profile instead of having a life of it's own right now. Maybe that's just a market maturity thing.
 
In theory, but in practice it is not hard to forsee weak kneed governments handing out extra free permits to big polluters "in the national interest". We already see this nonsense in Australia and we don't even have a carbon trading system as yet.

This of course will dilute the value of the permits in circulation.

I don't have a lot of faith in carbon trading as a solution and it is obviously open to corruption of many sorts. Direct regulation and taxation plus serious subsidies for low emission energy production R&D and capital expenditure would be far better. The dimensions of the problem are enormous.

Wouldn't that jusy cause an inflationary effect and further compound the speculative upside of a buy and hold approach now? Essentially the demand will exceed the supply for a long, long time regardless of how govenrments handle the problem until technology finishes innovating and then scales to create liquidity in this market. I agree that low liquidity will indeed create volatility in the early days but as it matures and liquidity needs are met, the lag will just force price up.

Did that make any sense?
 
Top