Nationwide Warns Customers About Carbon Credit Trading Scams

The Nationwide Building Society/Bank regularly sends customers lists of financial scams to avoid, included in their latest newsletter to customers is Carbon trading:

Carbon Credit trading schemes

The fraudster normally calls investors out of the blue to tell them that carbon credits are ‘the new big thing’ in commodity trading and that they could make significant profits. The caller may claim that industries now have to off-set their CO2 emissions, the government is focusing on green developments, and that carbon credit trading is an ever growing market. While not all carbon credit trading schemes are a scam, you may lose money on your investment by not getting a competitive rate when trading a small volume of carbon credits or not being able to sell your credits at all.

Hat tip to GG Girl for emailing me this.

About Tory Aardvark

Climate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook

Posted on May 5, 2012, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Church Of Climatology, Climate Change, Green Lies and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. The incongruences and hypocrisies in suggesting that climate realists are equivalent to religious fundamentalists are obvious to any but the intellectually blinkered.

    For example, we support our convictions with an ever growing mountain of evidence, whilst actual fundamentalist religious types and climate deniers base their beliefs on…? …Actuallly, I’m not sure what they base their beliefs on, because I see nothing to support either of these (often intertwined) viewpoints! Perhaps those of you who believe in omniscient sky-fairies with magic powers or in the polemnics of snake-oil salesman who suggest that you should not trust (a) scientific consensus, could enlighten me?

    This old Al Gore as a Messiah nonsense that you continue to trot out is laughable, in that as a general rule, those who believe in something without evidence (irrationalists, or to use a term you may understand better – morons) are usually more likely to suffer with deficiencies in their cognitive processes than those who view and interact with the world rationally.
    If you are intelligent human beings (and I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt), then you can see the fallacies in blind faith, can’t you?

    The ‘not trusting this particular scientific consensus, whilst accepting all (or at least most) others’ is perhaps the most hypocritical thing about anything you do. Either you accept the scientific method or you don’t, because there is and never will be scientific proof, a scientific fact or even (despite their names) scientific laws (i.e. the law of gravity; ~thermodynamics; conservation of mass; etc).
    There will only ever be scientific theory supported by consensus.

  2. So where is all this evidence to be found? Climate warming activists only seem to be able to quote conclusions drawn from evidence, without ever producing the evidence itself. To start at the most basic level, how do they define the current temperature of the Earth, in order to compare it with what it was, say, 30 years ago? [with thermometers, stupid!]. Temperature measured on land in inhabited regions is air temperature using thermometers in Stevenson Screens; in remoter parts of the land surface and over the sea, it is the surface temperature that is measured by means of analysing its infrared radiation from space. How can you prove that you are comparing like with like? Where is the evidence that applying the adiabatic lapse rate to take account of falling temperatures with increased altitude is being handled correctly? Where is the evidence to prove without any doubt that measuring the infra-red signature of the surface is an accurate measure of the temperature of the earth as a whole? Where is the evidence that the quoted earth temperature is the average figure for a whole year? Where is the evidence that the effect of changes in solar activity, which are most certainly taking place, are being separated out from the effect of temperature changes of man-made origin? Where is the evidence that measurements taken in 2012 are using exactly the same methods that were used, say, 30 years ago, in order to draw valid conclusions about the rate of change? Not a single one of the countless spokesmen for the Climate Change Brigade has a clue about these questions, they all blindly rely on the conclusions they are told to believe. I am not a climate change denier, just a sceptic, who will remain sitting on the fence until someone out there produces the evidence to support their claims! OK!

    And another thing. The oft quoted sea level rises that are drowning certain Pacific Islands are fiction, since these islands are at the edge of a subduction zone at a tectonic plate boundary, and the islands are being pushed under the adjacent tectonic plate. It has nothing to do with the sea level, just land subsidence. Norway on the other hand is slowly rising out of the sea.

Leave a Reply

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

%d bloggers like this: