If you ever hunted you know what I am talking about. You find the area that deer frequent and use other hunters to frighten them and drive them towards your concealed position. As the deer pass you nail them. These men are called beaters. In Africa they banged things and whacked the foliage with sticks to drive game from hiding. This is where the expression "beating the brush" comes from because it flushes out game from concealment.
Part of the Global Warming hype is all about flushing scared liberal investors' cash from their normal hiding holes of municipal bonds, mutual funds, etc. so Al Gore and his pals can take a shot at them. This is known as opportunistic feeding. As all those guilty liberal dollars go stampeding by, just grab the weakest and have a feast - then hang the pelt from your corporate website, mount the horns on your annual report.
An article by the Guardian helps explain this.
How can you possibly hope to regulate a scam?
A Guardian investigation has found evidence of serious irregularities at the heart of the process the world is relying on to control global warming.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which is supposed to offset greenhouse gases emitted in the developed world by selling carbon credits from elsewhere, has been contaminated by gross incompetence, rule-breaking and possible fraud by companies in the developing world, according to UN paperwork, an unpublished expert report and alarming feedback from projects on the ground.
It's the same weakness that has plagued mankind for millennia .. greed.
One senior figure suggested there may be faults with up to 20% of the carbon credits - known as certified emissions reductions - already sold. Since these are used by European governments and corporations to justify increases in emissions, the effect is that in some cases malpractice at the CDM has added to the net amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.
The problems focus on the specialist companies that validate and verify the projects in the developing world which produce the certified emission reductions. Three of those companies have failed spot checks, which revealed a catalogue of weakness.
Let me put this in a slightly different light. There three companies were only the ones that got caught.
Separately, one of the CDM's experts calculates that as many as one third of the projects registered in India are commercial ventures which do not produce any additional cut in greenhouse gases and were wrongly approved.
There are only 17 of these validating and verifying companies. Most of them have a clean track record and will have approved reliable emissions reductions, but three of them have been performing so poorly that the CDM's executive board ordered spot checks - and all three companies failed on multiple grounds. The findings on one company, which is believed to have validated dozens of projects and verified millions of tonnes of carbon reductions, were so bad that the board considered suspending its right to work.
Why is it that the controlling authority seeks to protect the companies that bring the rest of the industry into a bad light? Follow the money. First find out who these companies are; then see who owns them. Then find out what else they own and their political affiliations.
The chairman of the CDM board, Danish energy consultant Hans Jürgen Stehr, insisted that in the end the problem was not bad enough to require any of the companies to be suspended. However, he said: "This has been serious. We are talking about competence and the ability of the company to do a proper job." He ruled that none of the three companies be named.