Destroying Capitalism?

H/T Leg-iron. Somebody is complaining about this appearing on TV:

I think it’s great.


At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

Given the UN’s track record, the new “economic development model” will be a gigantic turkey. Top down control always is.

But it’s good to know what someone in the UN thinks the global warming scare is really all about. And it doesn’t surprise me at all.

(See also)

And in pursuit of global warming, here’s a 54 second circulation model. Warming air on the right expands and turns red, and cooling air on the left contracts and turns blue. But instead of a stable circulation, it’s a pulsating circulation.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Destroying Capitalism?

  1. Weve always said thats what the democrats here in America were out to do. It started in the 1920s big time with unions then with the raw deal. It seems they want things in terrible economic times because it creates a better atmosphere as Lenin said for communism to take a foothold……

  2. Smoking Myths – The Lies that kill everyone

    We are told that cigarette use is linked to a whole list of diseases. We are told that smoking reduces life expectancy. We have been brainwashed into believing that tobacco is the leading cause of preventable disease. Over and over again, people hear that thousands and thousands of individuals die every year because they smoke.

    Scientists at the Albert Einstein College in New York were recently studying the factors in the lives of 90 year olds that may have affected their longevity. These researchers discovered that 70% of the men over the age of 90 smoked. In the same age group, 30% of the women still smoked. In other words, roughly 50% of the people in the study were still using tobacco products.

    According to Statistics Canada, only 12% of the people over the age of 65 smoke.

    What happened to all of the nonsmokers between the ages of 65 and 90?

    Hint #1

    Smoke related diseases are created using a science called epidemiology which shows associations, not causes. Because it is associative, the science includes former smokers in the statistics – a fact that has been omitted from public statements. An ex-smoker was described as an individual who had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lives and remained a smoke related statistic for 20 years after quitting. In other words, a person who died of lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, etc., as much as 20 years after they had quit may have died because they had used tobacco previously. Everything we have been told about the dangers of cigarettes employs ex-smokers to inflate numbers


    DNA and biochemical studies, however, show us that within a year of quitting a person physically becomes a nonsmoker. Now, the epidemiological studies become tainted. Adding former smokers to nonsmokers in the studies, we find that nonsmokers have anywhere from a 200 to 400% greater chance of dieing from “tobacco related diseases”. These illnesses were never related to cigarette use.

    Smoke related deaths are calculated using a computer program called SAMMEC. The formula used relies on two epidemiological studies which, of course, contain the three cohorts (active, former, and non). Almost two thirds of these deaths are ultimately nonsmokers (former added to nonsmokers).

    Health Canada states that 37,000 people die from smoke related diseases every year. Almost 26,000 individuals in this group are ultimately nonsmokers (non plus former).

    Between 30,000 and 60,000 people die every year in Canada due to doctor error or hospital mishap. A large number of the 11,000 active smokers that die each year fall victim to doctor error. They are diagnosed and treated for disease they don’t suffer from.

    Hint #3

    In 2009, the Lung Cancer Alliance in the USA stated that 61% of the people that die of lung cancer are former smokers. The organization proceded to say that almost 80% 0f the individuals who die of lung cancer are nonsmokers. This group ultimately acknowledged the fact that a person’s DNA returns to normal after a year of not smoking and rejected the notion that ex-smokers should be added to active smokers.

    A couple of years ago, an article appeared in Canadian newspapers showing research that suggested that smoking doubles the risk of a woman dieing suddenly of heart disease. The actual numbers in the study showed 75 active, 128 non, and 148 former smokers. We know from biochemical studies that it only takes a single year for the heart to return to “normal”. The conclusions in the research were therefore wrong. When you add the proper cohorts together you find that a nonsmoking woman has 4 times the risk of dieing suddenly of a heart attack. Almost 80% of the women who read this article felt they were safe when in truth the were not.

    In 1970, 1 in 5 people experienced cancer. By 2002, 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women were affected by cancer in their lifetimes. In other words, cancer doubled during the time period described. The smoking rate, on the other hand, declined by 50%. This pattern is called an inverse effect and proves that active smoking does not cause 30% of cancers. Only by inflating numbers adding ex-smokers can you create a significant association in smoke related diseases. As suggested in the LCA numbers, most of the individuals dieing of these diseases are nonsmokers.

    Hint #4

    The Whitehall Study (1968 – 1998) studied the effects of smoking in the lives of 14,000 British bureaucrats. In order to do this, the scientists divided the subjects into the three cohorts: active, former, and nonsmokers. The researchers discovered NO difference in life expectancy in the three groups. Their statistics also showed that former smokers died of certain cancers twice as often as other people. This study also eliminated heart disease as a smoke related illness.

    Hint #5

    By 1990, the smoking rate had dropped to 30%. It became increasingly more difficult to create links to cigarette use even when ex-smokers were added to the statistics. In 1992, occasional smokers were then added to the numbers. The question was asked: Do you smoke, but not on a daily basis? Once again numbers were inflated. The occasional smoker was the individual who would have 2 or 3 cigarettes while out with friends on a Saturday night. The grandfather who stepped outside to smoke a cigar at his granddaughter’s wedding would fall into this category as well, even though his total consumption in a year might be only 5. Quantity was no longer an issue. Changing the rules of a debate in the middle because your arguments don’t hold water is unacceptable and quite devious. Occasional should never be included with active smokers.

    Hint #6

    Cigarette smoke is 95% water vapour. The remaining 5% containing chemicals measure between 2 and 10 microns or 2 to 10 millionths of a gram. Simply look at the toxins on the side of a cigarette package and follow the decimal point to the realization that the units are actually in mcg’s or millionths. Now factor in the moisture, not just in the air, but in a person’s mouth.

    If you were to focus on the smallest chemical in a cigarette, a person would have to sit in a closed room and smoke 246, 000 cigarettes in an HOUR to reach a level considered dangerous. If you were to measure the largest chemical, then a person would have to sit in that same room and smoke 3 cigarettes every second for an hour in order to reach the dangerous concentration measured in micrograms.

    A recent study out of Louisiana shows that those toxins in cigarettes are already in the fresh air we breathe but coming from other sources. These chemicals, however, are 300+ times concentrated than when found in a cigarette. In a single day, everyone is breathing in the equivalent of 12 to 15 packages of smokes. A child on a playground is inhaling the equivalent of roughly 20 cigarettes an hour. (Don’t be fooled by government studies focussing on particulate matter. The toxins in our bodies double every generation and it’s primarily because of the air we breathe.) According to the FDA the air in our homes is even worse.

    So what happened to all of the nonsmokers between the ages of 65 and 90?


    In 1969, Pfizer purchased nicorette gum from a Swedish company, Pharmacie. Studies had to be funded in universities creating the illusion that nicotine was the addictive chemical in cigarettes. Other research had to be funded to create the dangers the company’s product would cure. Once again, universities, colleges, and research hospitals were used to hide pharmaceutical involvement in the studies.

    In 1991, Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals invented the nicoderm patch. The dangerous epidemiological studies increased.

    In order to sell their products, the two drug companies needed “advertisers” to spread the “word” creating a market. A lot of individuals have profited from the campaigns intended to sell goods at the expense of lives.

    Pharmaceutical companies handed money out to the following:

    – medical associations,
    – medical schools to fund courses guaranteeing that new doctors met the needs of the companies,
    – non-profit health organizations and other NGO’s,
    – universities and research hospitals,
    – WHO, “an independent organization?”,
    – governments and government agencies like the FDA and the CDC.

    Drug companies used names like MacNeill Family Healthcare and Robert Woods Johnson Foundation to hide the gifts. The RWJF owns 1.23 million shares in Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals. This $5.4 billion holding makes the foundation the largest shareholder in the company. In other words, the Foundation IS the drug company that now holds the rights to both the nicorette and nicoderm trademarks.

    In 2006, the RWJF handed out the following gifts:
    – $82 million to the AMA,
    – $84 million to the Association for Smoke-Free Kids ($240 million over a four year period),
    – $99 million to ACS, AHA, and the ALA.
    Altogether the foundation handed out $420 million to a variety of groups all of whom produced progams benefitting Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals.

    The USA is not alone when it comes to pharmaceutical control of its healthcare. Please refer to the World View page.

    The program persists: Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. The real truth, however, will save lives.

    So …….What happened to all of the nonsmokers between the ages of 65 and 90?


    Why did these people die unnecessarily?


    The people who have lost the most over the years – nonsmokers and their families.

      • Smoking Myths – the Lies that Kill Everyone

        SHS – Tell a Lie often Enough—tell-a-lie-often-enough.html

        • In 2006, while the House of Commons was passing a law implementing a smoking ban in the UK, the House of Lords was presenting its own position stating that it was unfortunate that so many people (smoking population) were being affected by a health concern with such little risk. Later that year, the Committee on Commerce and the Economy asserted that it was troubling that the government hadn’t been more sincere giving the real reason for the ban: forcing people to quit. It should come as no surprise that pharmaceutical companies benefited from the “government’s agenda”. Politicians have become underpaid sales reps for drug companies.
          •In 2001, the city of Ottawa in Canada passed a law banning smoking in bars and restaurants. A survey conducted before the ban showed that 75% of the citizens were not in favour of the restrictions. The survey was withheld until after the council vote. The man responsible for this travesty was Dr. Cushman, the head of the Health Unit and chairman of the CCTC at the time. The city councilors refused to revisit the issue. A number of these individuals went on to federal and provincial politics seemingly with clear consciences.

    • Smoking Lamp says:

      This is great stuff. A good counter to the propaganda being reported about the NEJM article today (almost all MSM reporting that the additional diseases are caused by smoking, when the article says there may be a correlation that should be investigated)>

      • A recent study out of Louisiana shows that those toxins in cigarettes are already in the fresh air we breathe but coming from other sources. These chemicals, however, are 300+ times concentrated than when found in a cigarette. In a single day, everyone is breathing in the equivalent of 12 to 15 packages of smokes. A child on a playground is inhaling the equivalent of roughly 20 cigarettes an hour. (Don’t be fooled by government studies focussing on particulate matter. The toxins in our bodies double every generation and it’s primarily because of the air we breathe.) According to the FDA the air in our homes is even worse.

        Love it!

  3. Reinhold says:

    The circulation model is fascinating.
    After a while, when they recognised what’s going on, the cold bubbles invade the right half as if they desire to be warmed up too.

    • Frank Davis says:

      It is rather fascinating.

      I think that what happens is that the small cold bubbles form a dense layer (all the bubbles have the same mass) which flows under the big hot bubbles, pushing them upward. So you get a wedge of cold bubbles pushing quite rapidly under the hot bubbles, pushing them upwards. The hot bubbles then roll ‘downhill’ from right to left.

      It’s the heavier mass of cold bubbles on the left which drives the unbalanced system.

      But it’s a slightly intermittent process. It happens in spurts, with comparative inaction in between.

  4. jaxthefirst says:

    … the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

    I wonder whether that’s why the whole environmental lobby and the anti-smoking lobby are so similar? Perhaps they both privately have always had the same aim. Or maybe both movements have been infiltrated by the “anti-capitalists” in a sort of pincer movement. After all, as the ISIS study shows, smoking bans cause a significant downturn in the economy – not just in the obvious areas of the hospitality industry, but in many other areas, too. The fact that economic woes so often occur within a short space of time in any areas/countries which impose widespread smoking bans just happens too frequently and too predictably to be mere coincidence. And of course, any downturn in the wicked “capitalist-based” economy will be music to the ears of the environmentalists who, as they have at last admitted, want nothing less than a return to a communist, aka a feudal, society (Oh, joy! Subsistence farming for everyone!) where the “haves” – which of course they automatically assume will comprise them and their cronies – get to lord it over the rest of us “have nots.” Now that this silly woman has gone and let the cat out of the bag, it all becomes clear exactly why all those enviro-loons are always and without fail also rabid anti-smokers, and vice-versa.

  5. Bob Johnson E-cig compete with Pfizer.…/pfizer_supports_complete…

    Pfizer Supports Complete Smoking Ban in Public Areas and Improved Access to Smoking Cessation…

    (BUSINESS WIRE)–Pfizer Inc (NYSE:PFE) (LSE:PFZ) welcomes the European Commission’s Green Paper on smoke free environments1, which was put for public consultation earlier this year. Today in Brussels, a week before World No Tobacco Day (May 31st), the world’s leading life sciences company submitted…

  6. Lepercolonist says:

    After decades of accepting forensic science, many are doubting the scientific validity. It is reported that only DNA is scientifically accurate.

    I would like to see a non-biased oversight concerning the science of smoking. Can you prove medically or in court of law that tobacco use caused a particular disease or death ? Beyond a reasonable doubt ? Not with today’s science. But people continue to believe that the science is ‘settled’.

  7. Rose says:

    Frank, you might need that Bloomberg cartoon armed with a scythe.

    ISIS Beheads Cigarette Smokers: Islamic State Deems Smoking ‘Slow Suicide’ Under Sharia Law

    “While cigarettes are allowed under Islam, the terror group’s severe interpretation of Sharia law declares smoking as a “slow suicide” and thus forbidden in ISIS-controlled areas.

    The Islamic State — formerly known as ISIS or ISIL — began imposing radical restrictions last year after overtaking large areas in eastern Syria’s Deir Elzur province, which is adjacent to another stronghold and the group’s de facto capital of Raqqa. ISIS imposed the full-face veil for women and banned music as well as the sale of cigarettes and hookah pipes, noting the “financial and health damages” from smoking, according to Al-Monitor.”

    “Those who violate the smoking ban face a minimum penalty of 40 lashes with a whip. However, the consequences of a repeated offense can be as severe as prison time or even execution.”

    Mar 15, 2010

    “Muhammadiyah issued the fatwa on Tuesday, comparing smoking to suicide, which is prohibited in Islam. The next day, the organization and antitobacco campaigners jointly targeted cigarette advertising as one of the main culprits behind a spike in underage smokers.

    Over the weekend, however, Muhammadiyah found itself on the defensive, denying that the fatwa was related to a grant it received from a US-based antitobacco organization.

    The Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use, funded by New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, lists a November 2009 grant to Muhammadiyah worth $393,234 on its Web site.”

    ‘I’m going straight to heaven… it’s not even close’: Billionaire Michael Bloomberg boasts that his liberal philanthropy has guaranteed him a place in paradise
    http: //

  8. Sweden cuts rates below zero as global currency wars spread

    Morgan Stanley warns that the world is revisiting the “ghosts of the 1930s” as one country after another tries to steal a march on others by devaluing first

    • Manoj Pradhan, Morgan Stanley’s global economist, said the world is revisiting the “ghosts of the 1930s” as one country after another tries to steal a march on others by getting in devaluation first. “The lesson from the 1930s is that those who do so early benefit at the expense of those who wait too long,” he said.

  9. They snuck it in overnite like always

    Kentucky House endorses statewide smoking ban in landmark vote

    FRANKFORT — The Kentucky House narrowly endorsed a statewide smoking ban in public buildings and most workplaces Friday in a landmark vote.

    Lawmakers debated individuals’ right to light up versus public health concerns in a state with historic ties to tobacco and some of the nation’s highest smoking, cancer and heart disease rates.

    The lead sponsor, Rep. Susan Westrom, said that about 950 people die every year in Kentucky due to secondhand smoke exposure.

    The Democratic-led House passed the measure, 51-46. It now goes to the Republican-led Senate, where it faces tougher odds. Senate Majority Leader Damon Thayer has said there’s not much sentiment in the chamber to pass a smoking ban.

    Several dozen Kentucky communities have smoke-free ordinances, but broad swaths of the state have no such restrictions.

    Read more here:

    Hit it I cant get in on the courier

  10. Pingback: Historical Documents | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.