Carbon tax – split decision

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal came down with a decision on Fri. May 3 on Saskatchewan’s challenge to the Federal Government imposing a carbon tax on the residents of Saskatchewan.

In a split three to two decision, they ruled in favour of the Federal government.

From what I have learned, the decision was more about whether the government had the constitutional right to impose the tax on a province rather than if there was merit in the reason for the tax in the first place.

The written decision by the two dissenting judges was more detailed than was the decision of the other three judges.

The dissenting decision will provide justification for appeal, so this is not a final decision on the issue by a long ways.

As Premier Scott Moe said, the decision will be appealed to the Supreme Court.

The province of Ontario has also taken the Federal Government to court on the matter. It will be interesting to see what the decision of that court will be.

This old dinosaur is not very good at finding info on Google.

I was told that the mean temperature on Mars parallels the temperature on the Earth exactly.

I was digging around on Google to find a confirmation of this and while I did not find a clear yes or no, what I did find pretty much confirms that it does. Australian physical chemist, Dr. Peter Carson from the University of Adelaide showed that careful comparison of the different concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide (C02) on Earth, Venus and Mars determines that the supposed greenhouse gas effect has no relation to the amount of atmospheric C02.

The atmosphere on Venus and Mars is about 95 per cent C02 but on Mars the atmosphere is very thin.

Dr. Carson sets out and links in a detailed analysis, a compelling debunk of the claims that adding more C02 into the atmosphere will alter the temperature of a planet’s surface.

In effect, Carson shows that the theory of anthropogenic global warming is false.

I also did some research on Dr. Tim Ball.

He is a renowned environmental consultant and former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg.

Dr. Ball has written extensively on the subject of climate change.

He says almost everything that we hear on radio and television is propaganda and fake news.

In February of 2019, he did an update on an earlier effort to counter the propaganda war that is going on to promote the falsehoods about the environment and climate.

I personally have met and spoken with Dr. Ball twice and I have heard him interviewed on radio numerous times.

I have not seen him interviewed on TV.

The mainstream media are going along with the deception being promoted by the United Nations, environmentalists, all the left wing politicians and you name it, so they are not about to interview someone like Dr. Ball.

I fail to understand why the conservative politicians are going along with this climate change deception.

These court cases would be an excellent opportunity to bring in the real climate experts and prove to everyone that climate change is and always has been natural.

So there would be no need to cut back on carbon emissions.

I think a court case would be an excellent way for conservatives to set themselves apart from the rest of this pack.

There would be key climate information that would become public from this process and that could not be ignored by the press any more than the information that came to light from the SNC-Lavalin situation.

It would not matter what the decision of the court was, it is the testimony of the climate experts becoming public in a court case that would wake everyone up to the deception that has been going on for decades.

 

by Herman Schwenk

About the author

Avatar

ECA Review Publisher