|
Thursday, 02 July 2009 |
|
There is, perhaps, no subject that currently stands greater in importance—not to mention confusion, hype and hysteria—than the topic of climate change (formerly referred to as global warming). Regardless of man’s influence on the climate, policies under active debate and consideration could entirely change the way that we produce, and consume, energy to fuel our economy and lifestyle. This issue spans the globe, impacting both developed and developing countries. Whether the planet is in peril, or whether the risk is an artifice, potential climate change legislation will come with inescapable consequences, both intended and unintended; yet, the climate benefits may be negligible.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 29 June 2009 |
|
It is clear that cap-and-trade is very expensive and amounts to nothing
more than an energy tax in disguise. After all, when you sweep aside
all the complexities of how cap and trade operates--and make no
mistake, this is the most convoluted attempt at economic central
planning this nation has ever attempted--the bottom line is that cap
and trade works by raising the cost of energy high enough so that
individuals and businesses are forced to use less of it. Inflicting
economic pain is what this is all about. That is how the
ever-tightening emissions targets will be met.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 29 June 2009 |
|
Mr. Gore’s tactics have been a little more subtle, and reminiscent
of propaganda methods
which have proved to be effective throughout history at influencing
public opinion. Oneextreme views of any climate researcher when it
comes to predicting a global warming
induced Armageddon.
Listed below are ten propaganda techniques I have excerpted from Wikipedia. Beneath
each are one or more examples of Mr. Gore’s rhetoric as he has attempted to goad the rest
of us into reducing our CO2 emissions. Except where indicated, most quotes are from his
testimony before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, March 21,
2007.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 29 June 2009 |
|
The collection of Lord Monckton's papers, from Commentaries and Essays to Originals and more, this is the most complete list of Lord Monckton's work featured here on SPPI.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
Negligible Climate Effect of the American Clean Energy and Security Act
of 2009 (Waxman-Markey Climate Bill) A PowerPoint Presentation
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
Senator Fielding holds a crucial vote on the proposed Emissions Trading Legislation. Fielding and four independent scientists faced the Minister for the Climate Change and Water, Penny Wong , The Chief Scientist, Penny Sackett, and Professor Will Steffan, director of the Climate Change Institute at the Australian National University. Read what happened from someone who was there.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
Perhaps the most destructive legislation in our country's history will, as soon as this week, be voted on in the House of Representatives: the Waxman-Markey tax bill in the guise of addressing climate change.
It will have adverse and lingering consequences for every American. It will raise the cost of electricity in our homes, the fuel for our cars and the energy that produces our manufacturing jobs, with little or no environmental benefit.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
For years now, I have been afraid to talk about my burden in public.
I've lived in constant fear that around every corner one of Al Gore's
hooded cronies would be there to beat me with the tire iron of
environmentalism.
But in the shadow of an 18-percent budget cut and unparalleled
corruption within the University, I think I can actually fly under the
radar and sneak my self-righteous beliefs past you.
And so the time has come, today I'm going to do it. I feel safe enough
to come out of the closet and declare that I don't believe in the
Global Warming fraud.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
To inflict intense pain for no environmental gain is immoral. To ram such legislation through with backroom deals and no substantive debate – and unleash bureaucrats to control our energy use and lives – is dictatorial and un-American. When The People finally catch on, it won’t be a pretty sight.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
Talking points to the issue that “Global Warming” is no global crisis.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
As the scientific community debates the probable impact of human industry on the Earth’s climate, many in the environmental lobby, determined to dominate the political debate, wage an effective public relations campaign in the public arena. Believing fervently in their version of the facts, they cleverly tailor their rhetoric to have the strongest possible impact on the political process, without regard for the ongoing scientific debate. It is quite ironic that, while those who argue that we face a “climate crisis” like to think of themselves as the advocates for science and reason, their tactics and rhetoric are often reminiscent of a sideshow, relying on hype and fear to capture the public’s imagination.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 25 June 2009 |
|
The White House weather forecast is not the last word on climate: it marks
the last stand of the ‘global warming’ profiteers, and the last gasp of the
scientific-technological elite.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 18 June 2009 |
|
When we drive on a long bridge over a river or fly in a passenger aircraft, we expect the bridge and the plane to have been designed and built in ways that are consistent with proven scientific principles. Should we expect similar standards to apply to forecasts that are intended to help policymakers make important decisions that will affect people’s jobs and even their lives? Of course we should. Such standards exist. But are they being followed?
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Thursday, 18 June 2009 |
|
Chapter Sixteen: The Real Agenda
So if the climate science is wrong, what's the real motivation
here? Why are so many people prepared to spend so much
money convincing the public there's a secular Armageddon
awaiting them?
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 |
|
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) analysis of the economic impact of the Waxman-Markey climate change bill relies on a variety of assumptions. These assumptions strongly bias the cost downward when compared to the results of studies done by the Center for Data Analysis (CDA) at The Heritage Foundation and by CRA International for the National Black Chamber of Commerce.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 08 June 2009 |
|
Analysis for today's policy makers.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 08 June 2009 |
|
SPPI Report: Monckton Answers Rush Limbaugh on Global Warming
Secretary Chu’s madcap scheme to paint roads and rooftops white would cost $17 trillion this century, and would cut global temperature by just 0.2 Fahrenheit.
At the open request of Rush Limbaugh, the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley has calculated that Energy Secretary Chu’s modest proposal to paint all the world’s roads and rooftops white would cost $17 trillion this century, and would cut global temperature by just 0.2 Fahrenheit degrees, reports the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI)– a Washington, D.C. research organization.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Monday, 08 June 2009 |
|
Steven Chu, entertainingly described as an “Energy Secretary”, says we can Save the
Planet from “global warming” by painting our rooftops and roads white.
He says making roofs and roads paler would have the same effect as
taking every automobile in the world off the road for 11 years.
Rush Limbaugh, entertainingly as always, but pointedly, asks –
“Now, would somebody explain to me how he knows this? …
If we can do something that will effectively remove the carbon
emissions of every car on the road for 11 years, then why are we doing
anything else? Why are we doing cap and trade? Why are we getting rid
of SUVs? … How much paint is this going to take, by the way? How much of a footprint does paint manufacturing leave? … I
need a scientist to answer this for me. I understand how clouds at
altitude can help reflect the heat, but I want to know … where does
that reflected heat go? … Are we being told here that reflected heat is
not damaging at all, but direct heat is? It seems to me that, if we had
‘global warming’, wouldn’t we want dark roofs to absorb the heat?”
Christopher Monckton replies.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Saturday, 06 June 2009 |
|
Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson has been roundly criticized for insisting global warming is not an urgent problem, with many climate scientists dismissing him as woefully ill-informed. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Dyson explains his iconoclastic views and why he believes they have stirred such controversy.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Friday, 05 June 2009 |
|
Last year was an active tornado season, the most active this decade. When all was said and done, the calendar year delivered 1691 tornados, with tornados in all but 3 of the lower 48 states.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|