U.N. and Greenhouse Gas Emission

by Matthew Spinks

U.N. holds out hope for climate deal (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34298135/ns/us_news-environment)

Posted on the front of MSNBC.com was another article about global warming and how the UN is attempting to combat the effects of such Greenhouse Gas emissions. This article basically summarized how the UN was still asking for donations at a conference in Copenhagen from delegates of every nation currently involved in the UN. Although it did outline how many of our Globes natural features (such as Icebergs and Glaciers) are in decline, it failed to mention the recent findings of a hacker who successfully debunked the original theorists who coined the phrase of "Global Warming". Now this in itself is not enough to prove a direct example of social control, but when it comes to money, a countries monetary value is only as good as the citizens who back it. According to this article, "Billions of dollars-and billions over the next few decades" are all it will take to 'solve' the issue of 'global warming' once and for all-but who pays for this massive bill? Obviously it is not on an individual basis, but is it right for citizens of nations to be forced to foot the bill in taxes and revenue over an issue that has no factual evidence? (according to recent email verification of the New York Times to fradulent emails)This the most obvious implementation of social control in its most basic form; Taxation. The UN, even in previous evidence that disproves global warming still chooses to pursue a route that would combat said 'manmade disaster' with new technologies that would make it easier to gather information about the climate and other features that are in question as of November 25th. It is direct social control and the only reason why is that there is no clear definition of who (Or what, other than temperature gauging products)this large sum of money is going to, only that is being directly given without any say from the overall consensus of the public.