Global cooling to Global warming idiocy

Editorial: Arnold’s global warming ardor cooling

Days after the state Air Resources Board touted the economic benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger advised his climate bureaucracy to slow down the rush to impose carbon dioxide cap-and-trade regulations.

Facing growing public opposition and a well-financed ballot initiative to suspend the governor’s signature Global Warming Solutions Act, which mostly takes effect in January 2012, Mr. Schwarzenegger last week wrote to the air board, asking it to consider a less-costly approach to restricting greenhouse gas emissions.

“climate bureaucracy”

That was the goal all along. A cadre of useless toadies governing our lives.

So much for respecting Science

Man-made Global Warming is close to being in total free-fall as a theory. Remind your “warmist” friends that they were the same people attacking Bush on the misuse of science.

The Climate E-mails and the Politics of Science

There can be little doubt after even a casual perusal that the scientific case for global warming and the policy that springs from it are based upon a volatile combination of political ideology, unapologetic mendacity, and simmering contempt for even the best-intentioned disagreement. Especially in anticipation of the major climate summit taking place in Copenhagen next month, the significance of this explosive disclosure is hard to underestimate. According to climatologist Patrick J. Michaels, “This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud.”

The evidence of scientific dishonesty supplied by these communications is so copious it’s hard to know where to begin an attempt to describe them. Many of the e-mails brazenly discuss the manipulation of scientific data either to provide the appearance of greater support for global warming science or to undermine the claims of skeptics. For example, CRU scholar Timothy J. Osborn explicitly describes how data can be reconfigured so that evidence of an apparent cooling period disappears. His colleague Tom Wigley discusses recasting the data on sea-surface temperatures so that the results seem considerably warmer but also scientifically plausible. The director of CRU, Phil Jones, brags about his use of eminent climatologist Michael Mann’s “Nature trick” which deliberately confuses scientific data to “hide the decline” in current temperatures.

Every person commenting on this starts with the obligatory sentences that the “hackers, of course, should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.” Nonsense!

They should be pardoned, and awarded some Nobel Prize for Science as a reward for exposing a massive and intentional scientific fraud.

Daily Howler – Gore to make “climate” a “moral” issue

It is really hard to make a moral issue out of greed, lies, and imposition of a soft form of tyranny Al, but go nuts trying.

Gore Out To Change The World

In Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis, Gore argues that the prospect of disruptive climate change presents “a unique and unprecedented challenge” because its impact will unfold over decades and affect societies worldwide. Those are bigger units of measurement than political leaders usually work with when trying to build coalitions for action. “In other words, because of its planetary scope, this crisis masquerades as an abstraction,” Gore writes.

Huh? Check out the rest of the drivel in this National Journal interview.

NJ: Is the challenge more political than it is technological?

Gore: It’s fundamentally moral, ethical, and spiritual. To solve this crisis we cannot rely only on fact-based analysis and the kinds of short-term responses to which we are predisposed. We have to draw upon a capacity that we also have to form longer-term goals based on deep values, and build a sufficient consensus necessary to stay on a path toward those goals.

Perhaps because the latest “fact based analysis” shows a collapse of Gore’s pseudo-science? “Deep values” must refer to either religious beliefs (a core tenet of the environmental left) or perhaps the deep (cash) values Gore intends to earn by cornering the market of fraudulent instruments (carbon off-sets) his lobbying has created.

NJ: In the book, you are certainly skeptical that nuclear energy could grow to the magnitude that advocates such as Graham envision.

Gore: I am not an opponent of nuclear power…

Al Gore is an inveterate liar.

Pass “Cap and Trade”, Bankrupt Nation

Do our friends on the left ever really think of the impact of their policies. As I’ve asked many times before, is there a reason why the US would want to be like Europe?

Who Else Will Challenge Gore’s ‘Truth’?

I asked Gore if he intends to correct the record. He dodged the question, and the so-called reporters defended his right to be evasive by shutting off my mic.

The encounter was disappointing but not surprising. I served years of hard time as a liberal journalist in Europe and learned that covering the environmental beat meant toeing the line of extremism — no inconvenient questions allowed.

But it is now time for journalists, and the consumers and businesses that will pay the ultimate price, to start questioning the conventional wisdom about global warming and exposing its true cost. If alarmists like Al Gore get their way, millions of American families will watch as their dreams of a prosperous and pleasant future disappear.

The evidence of environmentalism run amok abounds in Europe. Spain believed the spin that environmental regulation can create “green jobs” and boost the economy. Now the country has 18% unemployment. Britain could suffer blackouts because of policies that require the country to replace coal with fuels like solar and wind power that aren’t readily available or reliable.

Unfortunately for Americans, many of the lawmakers who represent them in Congress seem unwilling to learn from Europe’s mistakes.

The Senate is now considering a bill that Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., co-authored to create a European-style “cap and trade” system for carbon dioxide emissions, and he just won the endorsement of a key swing senator. International pressure on the United States to adopt such legislation also will increase in December at climate talks in Copenhagen.

That’s bad news for taxpayers. The Obama administration reluctantly admitted last month that cap-and-trade would cost the average American family $1,761 a year.

That $1700 figure is the LOW estimate. So much for bringing back the economy…

Climate Alarmist talks sense on “Crap and Trade”

[Note: If you tend to agree with my view of the idiotic policy of “Cap and Trade,” please start using the “crap and trade” moniker. I realize it is a little raw and uncouth, but then so is creating yet another idiocracy around easily gamed, corrupt, and generally evil instruments created by the government at the behest of greedy corporations and unions.]

Fans of this site know my view of the “man made global warming” as a theory. It’s nonsense. That said, I’ve always been a fan of rational policy, and keeping the air clean and reducing waste is almost always a good idea.

So when James Hansen, a leading alarmist on Anthropocentric Global Warming, starts talking sense on the best way to move forward, I’ll applaud him.

Some Carbon Candor

Liberal interest groups, think tanks, lobbyists, bloggers and other nuisances are inundating the incoming Obama Administration with advice, but James Hansen recently managed to say something interesting. Namely, the famous NASA scientist had the nerve to expose some of the global-warming fantasies widespread among children and politicians.

No, the spiritual leader of the climate-change movement hasn’t recanted. Global warming threatens “not simply the Earth, but the fate of all its species, including humanity,” (Editorial comment: talk about “ManBearPig!!”) he writes in his manifesto, which is tame by Mr. Hansen’s normal rhetorical standards. (He likes to compare carbon to the Holocaust: “those coal trains will be death trains — no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria.”)

But Mr. Hansen also had the honesty to follow his convictions to their logical conclusion, while reproaching his followers — President-elect Obama among them — for not doing the same. To wit, Mr. Hansen endorses a straight carbon tax as the only “honest, clear and effective” way to reduce emissions, with the revenues rebated in their entirety to consumers on a per-capita basis. “Not one dime should go to Washington for politicians to pick winners,” he writes.

Three Cheers for Hansen!!!

“A tax should be called a tax,” Mr. Hansen writes. “The public can understand this and will accept a tax if it is clearly explained and if 100 percent of the money is returned.” Clearly the man is not standing for elective office.

Beltway sachems prefer posturing that disguises the cost of rising energy prices, such as cap and trade. This “subterfuge,” as Mr. Hansen terms it, shifts the direct burden onto businesses, which then pass it along to consumers. Congress may flatter itself that it is saving mankind, but what the Members really want is a cap-and-trade windfall that they can redistribute in the green pork of Mr. Obama’s “new energy economy,” whatever that means.

Green is the next Financial Toxic Dump

A few months ago, I opined that America, home of the best educated and most dynamic people on earth, have become so abused by the toxic mix of politics, special interest greed, and media idiocy, that virtually every policy decision would be the most stupid decision imaginable.

Once again, I think I will be proven right. The article below outlines just how idiotic the “next big thing” is going to be. Like the mortgage bubble, it will end badly.

Fueling Up the Next Bubble

The market normally dispatches the grim reaper to punish foolish entrepreneurs and credulous investors on a slay-as-you-go basis, returning talent and salvageable assets to the fertilizer heap. When played right, only the participants in the game lose their shirts. The cautious crowd gets to watch and say “Tsk-tsk, they should have known better.”

Sometimes, just sometimes, a crazy idea works. When it does, the lucky, smart and bold earn rich rewards. This rare dispensation of disproportionate wealth, along with the knowledge that failure is rarely fatal, is what motivates the thoughtful risk taking that propels genuine progress. Welcome to capitalism in its purest form.

When the grim reaper’s hand is staid by the twin forces of mass delusion and public policy, the game of capitalism mutates. It can become rational to bet on the irrational if you believe your timing is good enough to leave the greater fool holding the bag. Crazy ideas that have a chance of working get lost in a flood of crazier ideas chasing rewards whether the ideas work or not.

Every idiot fad in public education comes to mind…

Quick buck artists crowd out fundamentals players as slick positioning trumps due diligence. Early stage investors who cash out not by resolving risk, but by hiring fat-fee investment bankers to package and sell off their risk attract ever more capital when they trumpet their “returns.” Political entrepreneurs outnumber market entrepreneurs as landing government subsidies proves more lucrative than landing customers. With the exception of loathed shorts that are punished mercilessly if their timing is bad, and investigated by authorities if their timing is good, everyone is motivated to keep the delusion alive.

Sooner or later reality rears its ugly head and the grim reaper breaks loose. Except now he doesn’t come for just the foolish and imprudent. With pent up fury he spreads devastation far and wide, breathing down the necks of even the cautious crowd as they flee for safety. Thanks to the unlimited powers of a democracy stripped of constitutional limits run by populist princes on the payroll of this perverted version of capitalism, the hapless taxpayer is usually called on to clean up the mess.

A Nobel Prize winning PowerPoint presenter wants to end our reliance on fossil fuels in ten years. More power to him if he chooses to bet his own money to make it happen – may he become the wealthiest man on earth if his crazy ideas prove right. But are we really going to gamble 20% of the GDP of the entire human race?

Great banks came tumbling down because they believed computer models could predict housing prices five years out. Are we really going to bet our collective industrial infrastructure on computer models that predict the weather fifty years from now?

A car company that has proven it can only make a profit selling pickup trucks to Joe Six-pack is going to get a public rescue. Do we really think they can be made successful by forcing them to switch over to making compact cars for a handful of affluent environmental zealots with short commutes?

Experienced real estate appraisers proved incapable of honestly assessing the value of a house. But an army of green jobs is going to be created for freshly minted specialists to estimate carbon footprints?

Trillions are going to be spent on bridges and highways by the same people who are browbeating us to drive less?

The world’s most powerful energy source generates no greenhouse gasses. Yet it can’t get a foot in the door because it’s held shut by gale force winds emanating from an army of bloviating lawyers?

You have to admire the way this guy writes. Though the article is more rant than analysis, you simply must know that he’s right. One only need look at “Cap and Trade” proposals to see that the opportunities for waste, corruption, and financial chicanery abound with such schemes.

Look, providing some tax incentives for saving energy is a good idea, as is raising the gas tax to a point that spurs innovation and changes in behavior. We all want a better environment and less waste. However, the idea that a pack of morons like Chuck Schumer, Ted Stevens, Larry Craig, and Barbara Boxer are going to be able to manage the “energy economy” is a bet so stupid that you have to be an intellectual to make it.