Posts

End to Jeep Wrangler soft-tops in California?

New environmental regulations to be implemented in California would require special auto glass to reflect heat and reduce the need for air-conditioning. The law may require Chrysler to stop selling soft-top Wranglers and only offer the hard top, full-glass version of the popular Jeep. The regulations could also limit cell phone, GPS and other radio signals.

Read more

Who’s responsible for the fake U.S. Chamber of Commerce site? Update: fake news conference video

So the United States Chamber of Commerce (USCC) puts forward the denier’s skeptic’s opinion that having the Environmental Protection Agency regulate so-called greenhouse gasses is bad for the economic strength of the United States. Some companies quit the Chamber. Now we’ve got fake USCC Web sites and news releases “reversing” their opinion?

Read more

Live tonight at 8 p.m. ET – Not Evil Just Wrong premieres, climate change myths

By no means will I suggest this film is a documentary without bias, but if you think Al Gore’s “documentary” was without bias you may be nuts. Tonight at 8 p.m. ET is the online live premiere of Not Evil Just Wrong. The film reveals the true cost of Global Warming – re-branded “climate change” – hysteria.

Read more

Gore compares global warming battle to fighting Nazis

The Goreacle is a strange duck. For some reason, he’s equating himself to Winston Churchill trying to convince the world the Nazis were out-of-control. There is a big difference between the Nazis tearing across Europe and, well, the normal warming and cooling of the planet.

Read more

The evaporating global warming “consensus”

I read an article in the Wall Street Journal several weeks ago explaining that the Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, decided to postpone pursuing his Cap and Trade legislation until 2011.  He, much like President Obama, was elected with promises to do something about global warming, or climate change, or whatever the current phrase du jour happens to be.  His reasons were economic.

Mr. Rudd’s March proposal would have imposed total carbon permit costs (taxes) of 11.5 billion Australian dollars (US$8.5 billion) in the first two years, starting in 2010. This would have increased consumer prices by about 1.1% and shaved 0.1% off annual GDP growth until at least 2050…

But an article in today’s Wall Street Journal is even more enlightening, and, perhaps, freightening in light of the Democrats relentless push to pass Cap and Trade “yesterday”.  And, this article will also show you the lengths to which one public servant will go to investigate the facts before casting a vote.

It seems that the “scientific consensus” linking carbon emissions to global warming is, well, melting.  This has been brought about, in part, by those “pesky” facts.  The reality is that in spite of ever increasing carbon emissions since 2001, the earth’s temperatures haven’t increased at all, they have remained constant.

This reality, among other things, has led Poland, the Czech Republic, France, and New Zealand to question,  or repudiate carbon caused climate change.  But, it doesn’t stop there.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. — 13 times the number who authored the U.N.’s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world’s first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak “frankly” of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming “the worst scientific scandal in history.” Norway’s Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the “new religion.” A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton’s Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled…

And, it now appears that Australia will join the above countries in putting a stop to any Cap and Trade legislation, due, in large part, to the efforts of Senator Steve Fielding of Australia.

Mr. Fielding, a crucial vote on the bill, was so alarmed by the renewed science debate that he made a fact-finding trip to the U.S., attending the Heartland Institute’s annual conference for climate skeptics. He also visited with Joseph Aldy, Mr. Obama’s special assistant on energy and the environment, where he challenged the Obama team to address his doubts. They apparently didn’t.

This week Mr. Fielding issued a statement: He would not be voting for the bill. He would not risk job losses on “unconvincing green science.”

Imagine that, an elected official who actually does his home work, and, I assume, reads the legislation on which he is being asked to vote.

So, while the rest of the world is seriously questioning the validity of carbon induced climate change, our government demands that Cap and Trade be passed immediately.  Humm…could it be that they, too, know it’s a bunch of hooey, and are only interested in the resulting taxes?

Is today “float a stupid government idea” day?

Two stories from the news wire today just have me totally baffled. I’m not always thinking “we’re doomed”, but if the Obama administration is considering a national sales tax of 10 percent or more, and has a dork working for him who thinks painting all the roofs in the world white will help stop global warming, we may just be doomed.

Today’s Washington Post has a story from Lori Montgomery on the value added tax (VAT) idea. Washington politicians are looking for more ways to generate revenue, take away our freedom and give everyone health care. Oh crap…

At a White House conference earlier this year on the government’s budget problems, a roomful of tax experts pleaded with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner to consider a VAT. A recent flurry of books and papers on the subject is attracting genuine, if furtive, interest in Congress. And last month, after wrestling with the White House over the massive deficits projected under Obama’s policies, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee declared that a VAT should be part of the debate.

“There is a growing awareness of the need for fundamental tax reform,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said in an interview. “I think a VAT and a high-end income tax have got to be on the table.”

A VAT is a tax on the transfer of goods and services that ultimately is borne by the consumer. Highly visible, it would increase the cost of just about everything, from a carton of eggs to a visit with a lawyer. It is also hugely regressive, falling heavily on the poor. But VAT advocates say those negatives could be offset by using the proceeds to pay for health care for every American — a tangible benefit that would be highly valuable to low-income families.

Liberals dispute that notion. “You could pay for it regressively and have people at the bottom come out better off — maybe. Or you could pay for it progressively and they’d come out a lot better off,” said Bob McIntyre, director of the nonprofit Citizens for Tax Justice, which has a health financing plan that targets corporations and the rich.

Our second stupid idea of the day comes from the UK Telegraph. President Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu thinks it’s a good idea to paint all the roofs white to combat global warming.

He [Chu] said lightening roofs and roads in urban environments would offset the global warming effects of all the cars in the world for 11 years.

“If you look at all the buildings and if you make the roofs white and if you make the pavement more of a concrete type of colour rather than a black type of colour and if you do that uniformally, that would be the equivalent of… reducing the carbon emissions due to all the cars in the world by 11 years – just taking them off the road for 11 years,” he said.

No, this was not a story from The Onion, it was a statement made while Chu was attending a Nobel laureate Symposium! Oh crap…

yes, I know, the pet rock idea was not a stupid idea for the guy selling them, but it was certainly a stupid idea for the bozos who bought one. Are you buying what this administration is selling?

Global Warming officially rebranded “Climate Change”

It’s official. The term “global warming” was not working out so well for the environmental movement, so instead the term has officially been rebranded “climate change.” Read more

My goodness, the Sun determines the earth’s temperature?

climate-chg-spkIn early March the Heartland Institute sponsored a climate change conference with more than 70 featured presenters. You probably did not hear much about it since no politicians or actors were in attendance, and scientific presentations don’t make for good quality 30 second sound bites.

Other than the president of the Czech Republic, the keynote speakers held PhDs in scientific fields; as a matter of fact, most of the 70-plus presenters also had PhDs.

You can check out the Web site for the Second Annual International Conference on Climate Change, which includes audio, video and presentations from the conference.

earth-sun-compareHinderaker at Power Line tips us off that the presentations were posted, something I missed last week. He’s posted a few slides that he found interesting. Although I have not had time to review the presentations, there are a couple of slides that I found interesting.

First, the Sun. Yes the Sun. I’ve always figured that since the Sun is about 93 million miles from earth and is about 100 times the size of earth, there was a pretty good chance that the Sun’s activity – or inactivity – would effect the temperature here on earth. It’s by no means a scientific theory, it’s just what I figured.

The slide shows a pretty consistent correlation between the Sun’s activity and the earth’s temperature. Another slide shows while atmosphere levels of CO2 increase, their is no clear correlation with the earth’s temperatures. Click on the slides below to see the full size.

Why are these professionals considered deniers?

Update: AJ at Strata-Sphere joins in.

Hinderaker sums up…

Due to the efforts of Heartland and others, the public is beginning to catch on to the cosmic scam that Al Gore, James Hansen and others–mostly not scientists–have been perpetrating. Meanwhile, the Obama administration, seemingly determined to inflict the maximum possible damage on the economy in the shortest time, is trying to ram a cap-and-trade carbon tax through Congress before opposition can be mobilized. It’s easier to do that, of course, when you know that Congressmen won’t read the statute before they vote on it. So our only hope is an informed citizenry.

climate-slide01

climate-slide2

Gore statements upstaged by NASA scientist

Dr. John S. Theon, a retired NASA atmospheric scientist has stated that James Hansen – one of Al Gore’s go-to climate gurus – is a public embarrassment to NASA.

Theon wrote a letter to Senator Jim Inhofe’s (R-Okla.) office at the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. From Theon’s e-mail, with emphasis mine.

Yes, one could say that I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results. I did not have the authority to give him his annual performance evaluation. He was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind’s effect on it). He thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress.

My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.

Hinderaker at Power Line lists some pretty impressive credentials and states:

This is one of the bluntest repudiations of global warming hysteria I have seen by an eminent scientist in the field. Sadly, we now have global warming hysterics in charge of environmental policy in the Obama administration.

Inhofe’s office has released full details at the committee’s Web site, including details into Theon’s work experience and publications. He has also posted the video below on his YouTube channel.

Update: I’m tired. My original intent when starting this piece was to reference Al Gore testifying at the House Foreign Relations Committee on Jan. 28, and note he got press coverage and real scientists like Dr. John Theon will be ignored. When I just saw Gore referenced in the headline when I went to the home page, I said “oh sugar”.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAgN3jYgX4w