One keeps hearing about Thorium as a possible breakthrough energy source. It would appear there could be something to it. Certainly, given the vast amounts of money invested in other sources of energy it would not seem far-fetched to think that entrenched interests would want to keep Thorium down. What if the subsidies given to the failed energy source of wind power were instead directed to Thorium or other potential true breakthrough energy sources? Do we want to direct resources into catalyzing the next true breakthrough or do we want to keep throwing good money after bad, developing Rube Goldberg schemes to make unworkable wind somehow work?

Abundant Energy for Everyone on Earth

Here’s the deal: It’s abundant. It’s cheap. It will help us get through the major climate crisis coming our way – a mini ice age. There are several varieties from GEET to GALT. We can grow anything, anywhere with cheap and abundant energy.

Full read at following weblink:

A 2011 MIT study concluded that although there is little in the way of barriers to a thorium fuel cycle, with current or near term light-water reactor designs there is also little incentive for any significant market penetration to occur. As such they conclude there is little chance of thorium cycles replacing conventional uranium cycles in the current nuclear power market, despite the potential benefits.[

Full read at following weblink:

Thorium: Kirk Sorensen at TEDxYYC

Thorium: An Energy Solution (FREE at Top Documentary Films)


Shouldn't the media report how bad previous climate change predictions have been instead of participating in the indoctrination?

By Jack Hellner

For the last 100 years, we have seen climate prediction labels go from global warming, global cooling, global warming, climate change, climate catastrophe, climate emergency, and climate collapse. The goal has been to scare the public and especially the children to give up their freedom and money to the powerful government.

Instead of journalists investigating and saying how wrong previous predictions have been, they go along with the indoctrination to force the radical leftist agenda and policies on the public. These people all pretend they care about the poor and middle class, but the proposed policies would destroy tens of millions of jobs, would make income and wealth inequality much worse, and would make many millions more people dependent on government.

Everyone should stop pretending Biden, Mayor Pete, Bloomberg, or any other Democrat is moderate. They are all willing to destroy the economy and give much greater power to the government on the climate and fossil fuels.

Here is a small sample of predictions on the climate that almost all of the media regurgitate with no questions asked:

  • 2019: The U.N. says we have only a few years left because of warming.
  • 2008, on ABC, Good Morning America.  By 2015, New York City would be under water, milk would be $13 per gallon, and gasoline would be $9 per gallon.  Very little of Miami would be left.  (They were so close.)
  • 2005: After Katrina, we were told hurricanes would be more frequent and severe than ever.  Instead, we had a ten-year lull in serious hurricanes hitting the U.S.
  • 1989: The U.N. said we only have a few years left because of warming.
  • 1970: First Earth Day.  Billions would die soon because of global cooling and an ice age.
  • 1922: AP and Washington Post: Coastal cities would soon be underwater because the ice caps have melted due to global warming.

Here is a small sample of questions for politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, educators, Time persons of the year, and people who pretend to be journalists peddling the indoctrination and pushing the agenda.

  • Why should we believe current predictions when previous predictions have been 100% wrong?
  • What caused the floods that created oceans, lakes, and rivers over billions of years?
  • What caused all the ice ages to start and stop throughout history?
  • What caused the Sahara Desert to go from a lush savannah to a desert around 9,000 years ago and have a 9,000-year drought so far?
  • How did so much of California become a desert?
  • Why was Greenland warmer 1,000 years ago than today?
  • How did we go from predicting disastrous warming in the 1920s to predicting disastrous global cooling in 1970 if rising CO2, fossil fuel use, humans, and industrialization cause warming?

It is truly a shame that the media are willing to repeat talking points to push a radical, leftist agenda instead of doing their job of investigating and asking questions and telling the public the truth.

Read the rest of the article at the following weblink:


A Reminder of How Climate Change Hoax Undermined Reputable, Legitimate Science


December 26, 2019
The Carbon Tax: the Big City 'Incentivizes' Rural Vermonters
By John Klar

Progressive legislators, interest groups, and government entities are clamoring to impose their utopian climate change agenda on Vermont’s citizens when the legislature commences its 2020 session. There are numerous Achilles heels in these well-laid (if foolish) plans, and they are easy to spot -- ineffectiveness; damage to the economy; inequality; government bloat.

A key watchword in 2020 will be “incentivizing.” Taxpayers must snap into alertness whenever they hear this shifty expression, because it masks true intent. In Orwellian fashion, the word generally is presented as a positive, when in fact it is always a negative. An accurate definition of the word in this context would be “changing behavior by government compulsion.”

For example, the current proposal for Vermont under the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) is to add 5-18 cents per gallon in tax to Vermonters’ fuels. Proponents argue that this gas tax will “incentivize” citizens to drive less: a sin tax. But who in the world thinks that an 18-cent-per-gallon “incentive” will curb consumption? Advocates argue that it is axiomatic that a higher cost will reduce consumption -- but gas averaged $3.99/gallon nationally in May 2011, and is now only about $2.60.

A degree in rocket science is unnecessary to see where this leads. Once the 18 cents per gallon (presented now as a mere pittance) fails to impact consumption behaviors, the progressives will be back, explaining that the tax must be raised to achieve that goal -- even though many low-income Vermonters are already squeezed to breaking point and use gas to travel to work. The question then becomes how much legislators tax Vermonters to “save the planet.” But the tax will only go up, always with the moral clarion call of saving the children.

The other end of the “incentivizing” scam comes when the government bureaucracy decides how to spend the money extorted through the gasoline and fuels taxes. The proposal is that the money will be invested in part to “incentivize” the purchase of electric vehicles. These vehicles perform poorly in cold, rural environments. Yet even if they did perform adequately, this scheme is patently unfair. As wealthy Vermonters are given an “incentive” to purchase a brand-new $40,000 car in the form of subsidies, perhaps through a sales tax exemption (one proposal), poor Vermonters will not be able to “take advantage” of these programs, and will still pay the same old sales tax every time they muster the meager funds to get another used vehicle. The wealthy receive a beneficial (and optional) incentive to purchase; the poor pay the tab via forced subsidization.

In its January, 2019 discussion of these complex issues, Resources for the Future (“ independent, nonprofit research institution in Washington, DC”) assesses the economic impact of various options:

Read the full article at the following weblink:

The top 10 Bombshell climate TRUTH stories of 2019


Views: 229


You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Penny Gray on December 26, 2019 at 6:16pm

I live on renewable energy on my home in northern Maine.  At five am, sometimes four thirty, I get up, put on my headlamp, and go downstairs.  It's about 45 degrees in the house, not abnormal for December.  I open the wood stove door, throw a few sticks in, open the damper.  Touch the side of the tea pot atop the wood stove to see if it's hot enought to make coffee in the French press.  Nope.  I carry it over to the propane cook stove, fire it up and let 'er rip until the water's boiling.  Pour it into the French press.  Carry the press and my mug back to the wood stove.  Open the wood stove door, so I can sit in my chair in front of the fire.  I turn my headlamp off.  This is nice.  A calming interlude before the chaos of the day in a rural life lived off grid.    Every watt hour is counted this time of year because the sun is so low on the horizon, when it's sunny, that nothing is really generated by the panels.  After a day spent out of doors, I come inside.  Stoke the wood stove.  Turn on a few LED lights.  Power up my laptop.  Go outside before full dark and start the generator, which will need to run about one to two hours to charge my battery bank.  I can tell, while working at the computer, when the batteries are charged because the generator suddenly changes pitch and drops into idle mode.  I shut it off.  I don't think the modern world understands the limitations of wind and solar.  I don't think they want to understand.  In my dreams, all the money we've wasted on wind and solar would have gone into nuclear R&D.  I almost think we have to live in the dark ages again before we begin to see the light.

Comment by Kenneth Capron on December 26, 2019 at 11:36am

We can't even get the Fed to allow reprocessing of nuclear fuel. What are the chances for Thorium to get a footing.

I am putting all my efforts into magnetism as a motive force especially with Iron Nitride available. We could replace all other modes of transportation with a magnetic microrail infrastructure.

Comment by Willem Post on December 26, 2019 at 10:39am


Addition to above comment:

Almost every morning, when I get up at around 6AM, there is NO WIND and NO SUN and the same is true for almost EVERY late afternoon/early evening, when Vermont has its PEAK ELECTRICITY DEMAND.

I go downstairs and turn on my 95%-efficient, condensing, propane furnace in the basement, and my 25-y-old Rinnai stove in the kitchen.

I turn on the burner of the cooktop stove to make hot water for tea, and get two slices of bread out of the refrigerator to make toast.

I turn on my desk lamp and computer and see fantasizing Democrats want to do all of this with wind and solar.

Democrats want to ruin tens of thousands of open-space acres with solar panels and several hundred miles of 2000-ft high, pristine ridge lines, a la Lowell, and to satisfy self-serving, give-me-subsidies-or-I-move-to-NY Blittersdorf.

Democrats want to CARBON TAX EVERYTHING.

Their mantra is:


Are Democrats nuts, or just pretending?
How long can dreamy/fantasizing nut cases keep up that charade?
Do Democrats think we are stupid?

Let us face it: Vermont is just a fly on an elephant's rear.
Democrats, with all their CARBON-TAX-SUBSIDIZED government programs, want to turn the fly into a flea?

But wait!!

All of this has to do with Democrats gaining and holding MONOPOLISTIC, PSEUDO-SOCIALISTIC, CENTRALIZED, COMMAND AND CONTROL of the ENTIRE Vermont economy, like they EXPENSIVELY did with EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

Gaining command and control is the reason Bernie, NEAR 80 YEARS OLD, is flying on private planes, making lucrative speeches (fees go to his tax-free foundation!!), waving arms, making faces, pointing fingers, and running for President, because he knows Vermont does not have enough tax money to finance all his nutty, un-American, Socialistic ideas.


Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power


Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT


(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.”

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

© 2024   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service