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.
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… Read More »
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?
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… Read More »
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.
In a paper recently published in Geophysical Research Letters, Silverman et al. (2009) created a model of coral calcification based on field observations of gross community calcification as a function of aragonite saturation state (Ωarag), sea surface temperature (SST) and live coral cover, after which they calculated calcification rates for more than 9,000 reef locations using model values… Read More »
In 1996 the United Nations Interovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second Assessment Report was released, and I was listed as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernable human influence on climate. I was an invited reviewer for a chapter dealing with the economic impact of sea level rise on small island nations.… Read More »
Originally we were warned about the "greenhouse effect"; then it was "global warming", followed in turn by "climate change". Now we talk about reducing the "carbon footprint". The light is dawning and 30 per cent of scientists are sceptics or deniers.
The Obama administration’s decision this week to introduce stringent new fuel efficiency standards for the U.S. car industry is a testament to the power of climate change hysteria. The lobby goes unchallenged in the corridors of power and will likely incur a disastrous economic and human toll. It is also a means to gaining political power and, for… Read More »
Some business leaders are cozying up with politicians and scientists to demand swift, drastic action on global warming. This is a new twist on a very old practice: companies using public policy to line their own pockets.