So the Bamster, fool that he is, goes with the latest warmer BS

Paul Driessen give it a go.

I never improve on Driessen, so I’ll just paste it here.

Thanks Paul, for what you do.

President Obama has decided to make “dangerous manmade climate change” the centerpiece of his 2014 political campaign. The White House launched the effort last week with the release of its 829-page National Climate Assessment report – which many scientists and other observers have justifiably criticized as a litany of doom and gloom, unsupported by actual temperature and climate observations or evidence.

My article summarizes the true state of the world’s climate and weather, examines the political reasons behind the President’s climate change campaign, and assesses the many harmful impacts that the Administration’s anti-hydrocarbon policies are having on American businesses and families.

Thank you for posting the article, quoting from it, and forwarding it to your friends and colleagues.

Best regards,

Paul

Manmade climate disruption – the hype and reality

Distractions, agendas, false realities, and policies that bring much harm but few benefits

Paul Driessen

The White House has released its latest National Climate Assessment. An 829-page report and 127-page “summary” were quickly followed by press releases, television appearances, interviews and photo ops with tornado victims – all to underscore President Obama’s central claims:

Human-induced climate change, “once considered an issue for the distant future, has moved firmly into the present.” It is “affecting Americans right now,” disrupting their lives. The effects of “are already being felt in every corner of the United States.” Corn producers in Iowa, oyster growers in Washington, maple syrup producers in Vermont, crop-growth cycles in Great Plains states “are all observing climate-related changes that are outside of recent experience.” Extreme weather events “have become more frequent and/or intense.”

It’s pretty scary sounding. It has to be. First, it is designed to distract us from topics that the President and Democrats do not want to talk about: ObamaCare, the IRS scandals, Benghazi, a host of foreign policy failures, still horrid jobless and workforce participation rates, and an abysmal 0.1% first quarter GDP growth rate that hearkens back to the Great Depression.

Second, fear-inducing “climate disruption” claims are needed to justify job-killing, economy-choking policies like the endless delays on the Keystone XL pipeline; still more wind, solar and ethanol mandates, tax breaks and subsidies; and regulatory compliance costs that have reached $1.9 trillion per year – nearly one-eighth of the entire US economy.

Third, scary hyperventilating serves to obscure important realities about Earth’s weather and climate, and even in the NCA report itself. Although atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been rising steadily for decades, contrary to White House claims average planetary temperatures have not budged for 17 years.

No Category 3-5 hurricane has made landfall in the United States since 2005, the longest such period since at least 1900. Even with the recent Midwestern twisters, US tornado frequency remains very low, and property damage and loss of life from tornadoes have decreased over the past six decades.

Sea levels are rising at a mere seven inches per century. Antarctic sea ice recently reached a new record high. A new report says natural forces could account for as much as half of Arctic warming, and warming and cooling periods have alternated for centuries in the Arctic. Even in early May this year, some 30% of Lake Superior was still ice-covered, which appears to be unprecedented in historical records. Topping it off, a warmer planet and rising CO2 levels improve forest, grassland and crop growth, greening the planet.

Press releases on the NCA report say global temperatures, heat waves, sea levels, storms, droughts and other events are “forecast” or “projected” to increase dangerously over the next century. However, the palm reading was done by computer models – which are based on the false assumption that carbon dioxide now drives climate change, and that powerful natural forces no longer play a role. The models have never been able to predict global temperatures accurately, and the divergence between model predictions and actual measured temperatures gets worse with every passing year. The models cannot even “hindcast” temperatures over the past quarter century, without using fudge factors and other clever tricks.

Moreover, much of the White House and media spin contradicts what the NCA report actually says. For example, it concludes that “there has been no universal trend in the overall extent of drought across the continental U.S. since 1900.” Other trends in severe storms, it states, “are uncertain.”

Climate change, Johnstown Floods, Dust Bowls, extreme weather events and forest fires have been part of Earth and human history forever – and no amount of White House spin can alter that fact. To suggest that any changes in weather or climate – or any temporary increases in extreme weather events – are due to humans is patently absurd. To ignore positive trends and the 17-year absence of warming is abominable.

Fourth, sticking to the “manmade climate disaster” script is essential to protect the turf, reputations, funding and power of climate alarmists and government bureaucrats. The federal government doles out some $2.6 billion annually in grants for climate research – but only for work that reflects White House perspectives. Billions more support subsidies and loans for renewable energy programs that represent major revenue streams for companies large and small, and part of that money ends up in campaign war chests for (mostly Democrat) legislators who support the climate regulatory-industrial complex.

None of them is likely to admit any doubts, alter any claims or policies, or reduce their increasingly vitriolic attacks on skeptics of “dangerous manmade global warming.” They do not want to risk being exposed as false prophets and charlatans, or worse. Follow the money.

Last, and most important, climate disruption claims drive a regulatory agenda that few Americans support. Presidential candidate Obama said his goal was “fundamentally transforming” the United States and ensuring that electricity rates “necessarily skyrocket.” On climate change, President Obama has made it clear that he “can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will.” His Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Interior, Department of Energy and other officials have steadfastly implemented his anti-hydrocarbon policies.

Chief Obama science advisor John Holdren famously said: “A massive campaign must be launched to … de-develop the United States … bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation.… [Economists] must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable [re]distribution of wealth.”

(The President also wants to ensure that neither a Keystone pipeline approval nor a toned-down climate agenda scuttles billionaire Tom Steyer’s $100-million contribution to Democrat congressional candidates.)

This agenda translates into greater government control over energy production and use, job creation and economic growth, and people’s lives, livelihoods, living standards, liberties, health and welfare. It means fewer opportunities and lower standards of living for poor and middle class working Americans. It means greater power and control for politicians, bureaucrats, activists and judges – but with little or no accountability for mistakes made, damage done or penalties deliberately exacted on innocent people.

A strong economy, modern technologies, and abundant, reliable, affordable energy are absolutely essential if we are to adapt to future climate changes, whatever their cause – and survive the heat waves, cold winters, floods, droughts and vicious weather events that will most certainly continue coming.

The Obama agenda will reduce our capacity to adapt, survive and thrive. It will leave more millions jobless, and reduce the ability of families to heat and cool their homes properly, assure nutritious meals, pay their rent or mortgage, and pursue their American dreams.

America’s minority and blue collar families will suffer – while Washington, DC power brokers and lobbyists will continue to enjoy standards of living, housing booms and luxury cars unknown in the nation’s heartland. Think Hunger Games or the Politburo and nomenklatura of Soviet Russia.

Worst, it will all be for nothing, even if carbon dioxide does exert a stronger influence on Earth’s climate than actual evidence suggests. While the United States slashes its hydrocarbon use, job creation, economic growth and international competitiveness, China, India, Brazil, Indonesia – and Spain, Germany, France and Great Britain – are all increasing their coal use … and CO2 emissions.

President Obama and White House advisor John Podesta are convinced that Congress and the American people have no power or ability to derail the Administration’s determination to unilaterally impose costly policies to combat “dangerous manmade climate disruption” – and that the courts will do nothing to curb their executive orders, regulatory fiats and economic disruption.

If they are right, we are in for some very rough times – and it becomes even more critical that voters learn the facts and eject Harry Reid and his Senate majority, to restore some semblance of checks and balances.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.

About these ads

7 responses to “So the Bamster, fool that he is, goes with the latest warmer BS

  1. If Obama is attempting to destroy the US, he should not be considered a fool.

    • your point?

      Dont’ be obscurandant, if that is a word–is he a serious threat for bad reasons, in your opinion, or is he a foolish destructive puerile brigand?

  2. Yes I would realy like to know the answer to that proposition

  3. Westchester Bill

    John1282 and I are polar opposites whit respect to abortion. He makes a legal arguement that a fertilized egg is a human being making abortion murder. I make a normative arguement that abortion is used by a third of American women during their lifetimes and that abortion is used for birth control in Japan. I don’t call John1282 stupid, and, as far as I know, he hasn’t called me an idiot.

    Most of us do not question much our medical docors and I believe that the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second. Actually the speed of light is defined, but I have no idea how one gets from the definition to the ruler on my table. Some reliance on experts is natural. There is a problem in choosing experts. At one time there were certified psychics. Barack Obama, the Clintons, and many others have chosen poorly with respect to climate change expertise. But one should not call these folks stupid because of that alone.

  4. Westchester Bill… You have a sane statement, except for the last part, that once we choose our experts, then close our minds to opposite views because of our personal ideologies the use the experts data (wrong or wright) to force my agenda… then Stupid does become a qualifier…

    • Westchester Bill

      We are products of evolution, and for the vast majority of our time on Earth as a species, it was desirable to move from one camp to the next as a unit. Choosing a leader to guide the group helps a lot, although the choice of whether to move North or East is indeterminable. Once the leader is selected second question is a mortal risk. The close mindedness that R.S. helms talks about comes from this in my opinion. We can see the echo of our early life in choosing Presidents. Charisma has greater value in politics than technical competence. Wouldn’t you rather have a beer with George W. Bush than with Al Gore? There was no selective pressure to be all that rational.

  5. Obama does not understand, or care about, science. He cares about control, power, and money. Thus he goes with the ideology that funnels control, power, and money to a few select individuals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s