Archive for category Environment
“Fair Share” Most Dangerous Words in the English Language!
Posted by Tom in Economics, Environment, Foreign Policy on December 6, 2009
I mused several posts ago whether Obama would have the moral courage to expose the Climate-gate fraud which has already bilked taxpayers here and across the pond of millions of dollars and euros and which threatens a serious crippling of our economy. I initially had hope that Obama would–in light of the fraud–avoid US commitment to the global warming folly, since he was due to merely stop by the Copenhagen meeting early on his way to pick up his much earned Nobel peace prize. Well my hopes were dashed when he changed his schedule to join other leaders at the end of the meeting to conclude a “meaningful” climate deal.
The White House announced that the U.S. is prepared to pay its “fair share” of $10 Billion. That would be its “fair share” of your money, or rather–since Obama is borrowing that amount in addition to the trillions of deficit already committed–your children’s, grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s money.
So instead of questioning the scientists’, destruction of contrary climate data, their inability to explain the lack of warming this last decade, the manipulation of hockey-stick models, and the suppression of peer review, Obama has decided to affirm his allegiance to the old-time global warming religion.
Now we know Gore, another Nobel peace prize laureate has serious personal investments in the green revolution. And we know that Obama has allocated a significant part of our money in the phony stimulus package to the green revolution. But could there be any other motivation for his apparent blindness?
Why would he amidst a significant recession, double-digit unemployment, a weakened dollar, historic deficits and crippling debt commit this country to an additional tax and regulatory environment the consequences of which portend only downside? And what is fair about a “fair share” of $10 Billion? What is the other side of the fairness equation? Will U.S. taxpayers get any consideration, any quid pro quo? How was this “fair share” negotiated?
After many years of hearing the words “fair share” usually spouted by progressives and leftists, I’ve come to the conclusion that they are a disguise for theft and expropriation used by charlatans to advance an agenda. There is nothing fair about fair share. Any time you hear these words, be on guard and very skeptical!
Tom Motherway
Not Coming to a Theater Near You…Anytime Soon!
Posted by Tom in Environment on November 29, 2009
Thanks to the Canada Free Press
Will Obama Expose the Massive Climate Fraud at the Copenhagen Climate Conference?
Posted by Tom in Environment, Financial Policy, Press on November 25, 2009
Will our young president have the moral integrity to expose the massive climate fraud that has bilked billions from the taxpayers of the Western world? He has a choice-cover up the fraud which has and is being done by the MSM or expose it for what it is.
The recently exposed emails from the Hadley Climatic Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia show that the mainstream world climate scientists who have lived off taxpayer research money for years have bound together in a massive conspiracy to (a) suppress peer review, (b) publish phony “hockey stick” temperature models, and (c) suppress temperature data that doesn’t fit the manufactured, fraudulent conclusion that we have man made global warming.
The leaked emails are devastating. Their content crumbles the very foundation of the global warming nonsense. Nigel Lawson, former British chancellor of the exchequer in demanding a full investigation stated: “Astonishingly, what appears, at least at first blush, to have emerged is that (a) the scientists have been manipulating the raw temperature figures to show a relentlessly rising global warming trend; (b) they have consistently refused outsiders access to the raw data; (c) the scientists have been trying to avoid freedom of information requests; and (d) they have been discussing ways to prevent papers by dissenting scientists being published in learned journals.”
The MSM segment of the Fourth Estate has been and continues to be complicit in the fraud by not investigating the hacked emails. The NYT for example says it won’t deal with such purloined information! So as a public service I refer three good articles on the topic: The Skeptics Are Vindicated by David Warren in the November 25th issue of Real Clear Politics. ClimateGate: The Fix Is In by Robert Tracinski in the November 24th issue of Real Clear Politics. And, The Climate Hoax by Jack Kelly in the November 24th issue of Real Clear Politics.
Jack Kelly tells about Al Gore’s appearance on NBC’s Tonight Show where Al in touting geothermal energy states that “the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot.” As National Review’s John Derbyshire points out, “if the temperature anywhere inside the earth were ‘several million degrees’ we’d be a star!” Kelly goes on to point out that Gore got a D in Natural Science at Harvard; it should have been a F! Yet, Newsweek calls Gore “the thinking man’s thinking man.”
What’s funny in all this mainstream press cover up is that while the scientists and the Gores of this world are profiting from the fraud, the press is becoming irrelevant with no lucre to show for it! My bet is that Obama will not expose the fraud in Copenhagen.
Tom Motherway
C4C–The Latest Obama Scam
Posted by Tom in Centrally Managed Economy, Environment on August 4, 2009
Cash for Clunkers is just another immoral Obamanomics scam. He has dished out a cool billion and plans to dish out another couple of billion of your children’s and grandchildren’s money so that some clunker drivers can have their perfectly good clunkers destroyed for some mythical mileage improvement on the order of 3 MPG! The religious environmentalists fail to point out the carbon costs of destroying perfectly good assets to manufacture other assets. This makes no sense either economically or environmentally.
The winner again is the UAW which seems to hold him captive. The liberals who advocate C4C spin it to the unwashed masses as free money. Yes, there is a free lunch, Rube! In fact, it is simple theft, robbing Peter to pay Paul with Obama as the fence extorting his vigorish.
The simpletons who buy into this program fail to see that the several billion could have been privately employed to invest in innovation, wealth creation, and jobs for a depressed economy. Those same simpletons fail to understand that the money must come from somewhere, that would be taxes and debt; that debt must be repaid with interest; it will be repaid by their children and grandchildren. Obama’s intergenerational immorality at it sleaziest!
Tom Motherway, tom@renohayek.com
Please, Just Stand There, Don’t Do Anything!
Posted by Tom in Energy Facts & Policies, Environment on July 2, 2009
How can the American Clean Energy and Security Act be justified to Americans during this severe recession? It is the worst of special interest pork barrels. It costs the taxpayers, current and future, dearly but provides no benefits. What reasonable person would buy off on this? In other words, how can the public be goaded into suspending reason.
Mat Welch, Editor in Chief of Reason Magazine, showcases the perennial argument of the demagogues to grow government and their own importance. “The Cost of Doing Something” is something we truly cannot afford!
On the eve of what would be a 219-212 House of Representatives vote in favor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the New York Times editorial board argued that whatever the bill’s eventual price tag, it sure beat “the costs of doing nothing.” Warned the Gray Lady: “By any measure—drought, famine, coastal devastation—the costs of inaction, of clinging to a broken energy policy, will dwarf the costs of acting now.”
If that argument sounds familiar, it is. Times columnist Paul Krugman, while declaring those 212 nay votes guilty of “treason against the planet,” posited that “we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself.” Therefore, “How can anyone justify failing to act?”
The same logic, minus some of the apocalyptic language, is being used this summer to push through President Barack Obama’s other massively expensive overhaul to the way America does business: health care reform. “I can assure you,” the president said recently in Green Bay, Wisconsin, “the cost of doing nothing is going to be a lot higher in the years to come. Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will keep going up. Our wages will be lower. Our jobs will be fewer. Our businesses will suffer.” Echoed Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius a week later: “The cost of doing nothing will render us a second rate nation on into the future.” Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), in subsequent House hearings, went still further: “There is not one child, not one worker, not one employer, nor one taxpayer who can further bear the cost of doing nothing.”
Hyperbole aside, the urge to have the government do something in the face of a perceived crisis is arguably the most powerful and effective legislative engine known to man. If the crisis is acute enough, backers of state intervention will even admit that content matters less than the mere existence of action itself. During the height of last fall’s financial panic, for example, New York Mayor and financial journalism titan Michael Bloomberg said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “Nobody knows exactly what they should do, but anything is better than nothing.” As the House of Representatives was passing the stimulus package this February, Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, thundered that “the cost of doing nothing would be catastrophic.” Auto bailout? “The cost of doing nothing is cataclysmic,” warned Sen. Bob Casey (D-Penn.) last December.
Read his full article on the link provided and just hope that the American people are a bit more intelligent than the ruling classes and charlatans think they are!
Tom Motherway, tom@renohayek.com
Bully for the Cato Institute
Posted by Tom in Environment on March 30, 2009
“Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change.The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear.”
— PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA, NOVEMBER 19 , 2008
With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.
We, the undersigned scientists, maintain that the case for alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated. Surface temperature changes over the past century have been episodic and modest and there has been no net global warming for over a decade now.1,2 After controlling for population growth and property values, there has been no increase in damages from severe weather-related events.3 The computer models forecasting rapid temperature change abjectly fail to explain recent climate behavior.4 Mr. President, your characterization of the scientific facts regarding climate change and the degree of certainty informing the scientific debate is simply incorrect.
- Yun Akusofu, Ph.D University Of Alaska
- Arthur G. Anderson, Ph.D, Director Of Research, IBM (retired)
- Charles R. Anderson, Ph.D Anderson Materials Evaluation
- J. Scott Armstrong, Ph.D, University Of Pennsylvania
- Robert Ashworth, Clearstack LLC
- Ismail Baht, Ph.D, University Of Kashmir
- Colin Barton Csiro (retired)
- David J. Bellamy, OBE, The British Natural Association
- John Blaylock, Los Alamos National Laboratory (retired)
- (The list includes over 85 scientists of worldwide renown.)
Footnotes
- Swanson, K.L., and A. A. Tsonis. Geophysical Research Letters, in press: DOI:10.1029/2008GL037022.
- Brohan, P., et al. Journal of Geophysical Research, 2006: DOI: 10.1029/2005JD006548. Updates at http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature.
- Pielke, R. A. Jr., et al. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2005: DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-86-10-1481.
- Douglass, D. H., et al. International Journal of Climatology, 2007: DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651.