Sunday, August 9, 2009


In a lecture given last June, Gwynne Dyer remarked that the exhaustion of aquifers in the Colorado River system would drive 30 million urbanites in the American southwest from their homes. He argued that such an emergency would force the United States to expropriate Canadian water whether we liked it or not----so best to sell it to them now under a commercial agreement that at least would yield some benefits for Canada.

But what of the refugees? It would be interesting to see how the Green-Left would react to the prospect of a vast exodus north to Canada. After all, these refugees would pose a threat to everything they hold dear. That is, they would be mostly white, speak English, adapt to our laws and customs with ease and make an instant contribution to our society. Moreover, their application for refugee status would be so obviously legitimate that expensive hearings with the Immigration and Refugee Board would be waved----thus depriving a thriving bureaucracy of more job security. Our main job as a country, according to Green Party leader Elizabeth May, is to embark on a “great multicultural project”. We must weave a tapestry of cultures whose core values are in fundamental opposition, a United Nations in microcosm, to prove to the world that we have found the magic formula for world harmony. Diversity Uber Alles.

Elizabeth May has defined the very essence of mass immigration. In a nutshell, it is the displacement of indigenous species, be they human or non-human. What is ironic about the Green approach is that the “diversity” they champion is actually the growth of a human monoculture at the expense of the diversity in nature. The volume of megafauna may indeed be as large today as it ever was, as was the contention of Green Party luminary Erich Jacoby-Hawkins, but the proportion of humans in the mix is much higher than it ever was, and insatiable in its appetite to grow even more, pushing all other species off the plate. And since, according to Green gospel, human population growth has no necessary connection to environmental degradation, we can continue to accommodate it. After all, Korea, he pointed out, has a population of 178 million people jammed into the area of Southern Ontario, so there is no reason why we can’t do that here too. It is all just a matter of sensible planning. Besides, only by cramming millions more human cattle into our cities can we make mass transit economically feasible. So by dumping 170 million people into Ontario we can actually improve the environment. More humans, but hey, fewer cars, so we all come out ahead. Impeccable logic that. The fate of the 500 endangered species in Ontario would be of no account----it is not about biodiversity anyway, but green house gas emissions. After all, what did biodiversity ever do for us ? There is lots of it in the “bio-rich” tropical zones of the world so who gives a fig for the species in Canada? They are useful only for campaigns to raise money. “This magnificient animal is in danger of extinction if we don’t rally to save it NOW----so please send your generous donations to “Save—The (poster child of the month) Fund”, care of the Sierra Club (or Nature Conservancy or the Campaign to Elect Elizabeth May). Our Board of Directors must make a living too.

However, it is imperative that these extra millions of refugees be of a kind as to make their adjustment to Canadian society difficult. The Ethno-Cultural Industry must have a raison d’etre. Lavish multicultural grants and endowments for “Welcoming Centres”, Diversity Sensitivity Workshops, Human Rights Tribunal adjudicators, Harassment Officers, Quota hiring overseers, ESL teachers, Human Rights Commissioners, Immigration lawyers etc etc are the very backbone of our economy. No immigrant flow, no industry. Our economic recovery would flop. In any case, this industry serves a vital purpose----to reconcile us to newcomers. After all, it is up to us to adjust to them. We must become sensitive to their needs, not ours, their customs, not ours. So watch what you say! In fact, free speech must be curbed in order that they feel welcome. Liberty of thought and expression is just one of those superfluous features of our bland and worthless Canadian heritage anyway, a hang-up that Dead White European Males had that is an impediment to cultural and ethnic harmony. What is a “Canadian” anyway? There is no hierarchy of citizenship here, no seniority for the native born (except “First” Nations). And that goes for non-human species native to our land as well.

So remember the Green Motto: “Reduce your individual footprint ad infinitum
to make room for more and more incoming feet---MOVE OVER!”

Tim Murray
July 27/09

Droughts 'may lay waste' to parts of US
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
The Guardian, Thursday 26 February 2009
Article history

The world's pre-eminent climate scientists produced a blunt assessment of the impact of global warming on the US yesterday, warning of droughts that could reduce the American south-west to a wasteland and heatwaves that could make life impossible even in northern cities.

In an update on the latest science on climate change, the US Congress was told that melting snow pack could lead to severe droughtfrom California to Oklahoma. In the midwest, diminishing rains and shrinking rivers were lowering water levels in the Great Lakes, even to the extent where it could affect shipping.

"With severe drought from California to Oklahoma, a broad swath of the south-west is basically robbed of having a sustainable lifestyle," said Christopher Field, of the Carnegie Institution for Science. He went on to warn of scorching temperatures in an array of cities. Sacramento in California, for example, could face heatwaves for up to 100 days a year.

"We are close to a threshold in a very large number of American cities where uncomfortable heatwaves make cities uninhabitable," Field told the Senate's environment and public works committee.

The warnings were the first time Congress had been directly confronted with the growing evidence that the impact of climate change will be far more severe than revealed even in the UN's most recent report, in 2007.

The hearing was also the first time senators had been permitted to hear testimony about the dangers to human health from climate change. In 2007, the Bush administration censored testimony from the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the rise in asthma and other respiratory illnesses, as well as the increasing occurrence of "tropical" parasites.

"The CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern," said Howard Frumkin, the director of the centre for environmental health at the CDC.

Yesterday's gathering of climate scientists, led by the head of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, RK Pachauri, was designed to give momentum to efforts by the Democratic leadership to press ahead on energy reform.

"If we don't do it people are going to die. They are going to get sick and they are going to die," said Barbara Boxer, who as chair of the Senate environment and public works committee is key to securing the passage of climate change legislation. But even with the new administration and the Democratic leadership in Congress now united on the urgency of acting on climate change, there were still signs of battles ahead.

The hearing saw a steady stream of bickering between Boxer and her Republican counterpart, James Inhofe, renowned as a climate change sceptic.

Republicans argued that Barack Obama's proposed carbon cap legislation would be costly. "I will certainly oppose raising energy costs on suffering families and workers during an economic crisis when the science says our actions [to combat climate change] will be futile," said Kit Bond, a Republican senator from Missouri.

The Republican minority on the committee also invited testimony from Professor William Happer, a physicist at Princeton University, who is a well-known climate change sceptic. "It's still not as warm as it was when the Vikings settled England," said Happer.

No comments: