Voici la question qui me guide dans mes recherches...

L’appât du gain manifesté par les entreprises supranationales et certains groupes oligarchiques, de même que le contrôle des ressources naturelles par ceux-ci, dirigent l’humanité vers un nouvel ordre mondial de type féodal, voir même sa perte. Confronté à cette situation, l’être humain est invité à refuser d’accepter d’emblée une pseudo-vérité véhiculée par des médias peut-être à la solde de ces entreprises et groupes. Au contraire, il est invité à s’engager dans un processus de discernement et conscientisation afin de créer sa propre vérité par la confrontation de sa réalité nécessairement subjective à des données objectives, telles que révélées par la science, par exemple.

The penalty that good men pay for not being interested in politics is to be governed by men worse than themselves. - Plato

dimanche 14 décembre 2008

Présentation de Iain Murray

The Heritage Foundation
Washington, D.C.
Apr 29th, 2008

Iain Murray talks about his book The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You to Know About--Because They Helped Cause Them, published by Regnery Publishing.

In his book Mr. Murray recounts instances where the policies of liberal environmentalists have harmed the environment and where the free-enterprise private-property policies of conservatives can provide solutions.


Idées de livre pour vous et vos amis

Dans ces temps des fêtes et d'incertitudes face au climat de la terre et notre avenir sur cette belle planète, voici quelque idées de livre pour les vacances de noël. Si vous lisez ou avez lu ces livre, S.V.P. laissé moi des commentaires. Cliquez sur les livres pour vous rendre sur amazon.ca.


If you listen to the media, you would think that man-made environmental catastrophe was about to engulf the world and imperil civilization. From Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth to nightly jeremiads about CO2 emissions and carbon footprints, we are bombarded around the clock with alarmist reports that disastrous global warming is on the rise and that it's our fault. In Climate Confusion, noted climatologist Roy Spencer shows that fears about global warming are vastly exaggerated and are driven by politics, not truth. He shows that a global super storm has already arrived-but it is a storm of hype and hysteria. Climate Confusion is a ground-breaking book that combines impeccable scientific authority with great wit and literary panache to expose the hysteria surrounding the myths of global warming and climate change. Spencer shows that the earth is far more resilient than exopessimists pretend and that increasing wealth and technology ingenuity, far from being the enemies of the environment, are the only means we possess to solve environmental problems as they arise.

In this New York Times bestseller, authors Singer and Avery present the compelling concept that global temperatures have been rising mostly or entirely because of a natural cycle. Using historic data from two millennia of recorded history combined with natural physical records, the authors argue that the 1,500 year solar-driven cycle that has always controlled the earth's climate remains the driving force in the current warming trend.

Dr. Singer is distinguished scientist. He is the first Director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service, and was for five years the Vice-Chair of the U.S. National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmospheres. He is the founding Dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami and is Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Virginia and Distinguished Research Professor at George Mason University. He has published more than 400 technical papers in a wide variety of professional journals.

Vous pouvez regarder un vidéo de l'auteur ici... très intéressant.

Iain Murray talks about his book The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You to Know About--Because They Helped Cause Them, published by Regnery Publishing.

In his book Mr. Murray recounts instances where the policies of liberal environmentalists have harmed the environment and where the free-enterprise private-property policies of conservatives can provide solutions.


The authors explain their theory that sub-atomic particles from exploded stars have more effect on the climate than manmade CO2. Their conclusion stems from Svensmark's research which has shown the previously unsuspected role that cosmic rays play in creating clouds. During the last 100 years cosmic rays became scarcer because unusually vigorous action by the Sun batted away many of them. Fewer cosmic rays meant fewer clouds--and a warmer world. The theory, simply put here but explained in fascinating detail, emerges at a time of intense public and political concern about climate change. Motivated only by their concern that science must be trustworthy, Svensmark and Calder invite their readers to put aside their preconceptions about manmade global warming and look afresh at the role of Nature in this hottest of world issues.

Tells the shocking stories of more than three-dozen world-renowned scientists whose work refutes global warming hysteria and gives the lie to claims from Al Gore and co. that “the science is settled.” Author Lawrence Solomon—an internationally renowned environmentalist—shows these men have faced a vicious campaign of intimidation by those who, like Al Gore, seek to pervert science and silence dissent to advance their own political agenda. Some have been intimidated into silence. Others have seen their funding denied and their labs shut down as a result of political pressure. But the testimony of their work remains too powerful to deny.Extensively footnoted including URLs to crucial scientific papers (and lively e-mails detailing the inside politics of global warming) and lavishly illustrated with charts and graphs, The Deniers will do more than spark controversy. The Deniers is destined to become the most reliable and provocative sourcebook on the real global warming debate.

In the global-warming debate, definitive answers to questions about ultimate causes and effects remain elusive. In Global Warming: Myth or Reality? Marcel Leroux seeks to separate fact from fiction in this critical debate from a climatological perspective. Beginning with a review of the dire hypotheses for climate trends, the author describes the history of the 1998 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and many subsequent conferences. He discusses the main conclusions of the three IPCC reports and the predicted impact on global temperatures, rainfall, weather and climate, while highlighting the mounting confusion and sensationalism of reports in the media. After taking a hard look at the reality of the greenhouse effect, the ‘evidence’ from climate models, and the models’ limitations, Leroux postulates alternate causes of climate change and analyzes the trends for global temperatures, rainfall patterns, and sea level. He poses the ‘heretical’ question if warming may be considered a benefit in some regions. Finally Leroux suggests a number of priorities for climatologists to better understand processes of climate change, to integrate them into climate models, and to predict accurately future changes in climate. This timely and controversial book lays out the scientific case of the sizable skeptical scientific community who challenge the accepted wisdom.

lundi 8 décembre 2008

Présentation sur le climat

Voici une présentation sur le climat, vidéo et diapo. Présenté à "Regional Council of Rural Counties" en californie en sept 2008. Très instructif, à écouter.









Trouvé ici

mercredi 3 décembre 2008

Histoire d'automobile et d'économie

A Japanese company ( Toyota ) and an American company (GM) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents, and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners, and free pens for the rower.. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes, and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was out-sourced to India.

Sadly.............. The End.

Here's something else to think about:
GM has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US , claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US. The last quarter's results:

TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while GM racked up 9 billion in losses.

GM folks are still scratching their heads.

IF THIS WEREN'T TRUE, IT MIGHT BE FUNNY.

mardi 2 décembre 2008

Nous pouvons recycler les "déchets" nucléaire.

Il est important de comprendre que 97% de ce que l'on appelle "déchets" nucléaire sont réutilisable pour en retirer de l'énergie. Ce document explique les mauvaises décisions politiques qui ont mené à la mauvaise décision de stopper le recyclage depuis 1944. Nous pourrions avoir aujourd'hui un stock de "déchets" presque nul si nous avions réutilisé cette énergie par recyclage. Nous n’aurions pas non plus toute cette polémique entourant ces "déchets".



Vous pouvez écouter une entrevue avec l'auteur de l'article Clinton Bastin qui à été interviewé par Rod Adams de Atomic show.