Tag: Global Warming

Climate Alarmists Claim Another Scalp

 

Three weeks ago, a distinguished meteorologist called Professor Lennart Bengtsson joined the advisory board of the Global Warming Policy Foundation – a London-based climate skeptical think tank founded by Margaret Thatcher’s former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Lawson.

This represented a huge coup for the cause of climate skepticism. Formerly an avowed warmist, Bengtsson was by some margin the most distinguished climate scientist to defect to the other side. Why did he do so? Because, like all good scientists, he went with the evidence. Bengtsson’s speciality is climate modelling. Shocked by the increasing divergence between the extreme warming of the climate models’ doomsday predictions and the mild-to-non-existent warming of real world data, Bengtsson realized that he could no longer support the so-called “consensus.”

Change: Climate and Otherwise

 

shutterstock_109199027“Change is a very most natural thing” — Steven Fromholz                                                                                 Recently, our president, leading what he claimed would be the most transparent administration in our history, went before an unquestioning press corps to call our attention to something (anything) more important than how four Americans were left helpless to die before a terrorist mob; or how it was covered up; or what a failure that “signature” health care bill is; or how 92 million Americans are not working; or exactly what we will all be paying when the final provisions of ObamaCare have kicked in; or that the entire world is considerably more dangerous after five years of a more “thoughtful” foreign policy on the part of the U.S. I know what a long, clumsy and run-on sentence that was. But the toughest English teacher I ever had is long dead and she was always the only one whose red marker I really feared. (I am told she passed peacefully at 96 grading essays and still believing that my spelling was the worse that she had ever seen — with the possible exception of my uncle, whom she also taught.) 

Our president was determined that we should take note of the politically crafted National Climate Assessment, which promises sure destruction if we do not act within the minute to arrest climate change. The report laid out predictions of dire, deadly, and immediate consequences. Yet, despite the scale of the supposed threat, our enlightened president has a solution — he can manipulate the earth, winds, and sky at whim if only he’s vested with enough tax dollars and authority to regulate individual behavior.

Almost every poll in recent months tells us that the American public not only does not consider “climate change” a pressing issue, but is also increasingly regarding it is a non-issue. Yet the left still treats it as one of the altars upon which our liberty should be sacrificed. 

War on Coal = War on Freedom — D.C. McAllister

 

In 2008, President Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle, “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them.” 

Obama’s Climate Action Plan clearly states his opposition to coal: “Going forward, we will promote fuel-switching from coal to gas for electricity production.”

Leftist Guardian to Any Global Warming Skeptic: Shut Up — Jim Lakely

 

The Australian edition of The Guardian — probably the most hard-left of the lefty daily newspapers in the English-speaking world — published a story Thursday about how Attorney General George Brandis stood up for skeptics of the theory of man-caused, catastrophic global warming.

Brandis is not a skeptic himself. He believes in man-caused, catastrophic global warming, but he also believes in liberty. So he gave a “passionate” speech in which he said it was “deplorable” that skeptics are being excluded from the climate change debate. People who say the “science is settled,” Brandis said, are “ignorant” and “medieval.” He did all but call the climate alarmists in Australia’s government fascists.

Member Post

 

We live in an age of maximum outrage over minimal problems. Global warming protesters, for example, are essentially complaining about what the weather might be like for generations that aren’t even born yet. They may as well worry about wage inequality among moon colonists. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

FINALLY! Climate Alarmists on Defensive; Fox News States ‘Skeptics’ Have Science on Their Side — Jim Lakely

 

Wednesday evening was the second night in a row the new report from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) was featured on “Special Report with Bret Baier” on the Fox News Channel. It should be noted: Baier’s show destroys its competition on cable news with about 1.7 million viewers each night.

FNC covered the press conference the Heartland Institute and NIPCC held Wednesday morning at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. It informed a fantastic story from Doug McKelway, who said the NIPCC report presents “a torrent of new data… poking very large holes in what the President has called the scientific consensus about global warming.”

Liberal Fascism in Action: Putting Man-Made Global Warming Skeptics in Jail

 

National Review’s Jonah Goldberg has spent a lot of time since the 2008 publication of his seminal work on the history of the progressive political movement defending the book’s title, Liberal Fascism. He can stop now.

Adam Weinstein, elite liberal journalist — who, sadly, has been reduced to writing “Rants” for Gawker — is example 13,873 that proves the thesis. And it’s a doozy.

Matt Ridley Puts Gobal Warming Away, Or, May We Move Onto the Next Impending Catastrophe Now, Please?

 

Catching up on my reading, I just came across Matt Ridley’s article on global warming in the Wall Street Journal last week. Mr. Ridley—no, strike that; since the death of his father in 2012, Matt Ridley is more properly referred to as the Rt. Hon. the Viscount Ridley — Lord Ridley explained that, in its forthcoming report, even the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admits that fears of global warming have been (forgive me) overheated.  A couple of excerpts from a column in which, in my judgement, Matt Ridley simply puts global warming away:

Even with its too-high, too-fast assumptions, the recently leaked draft of the IPCC impacts report makes clear that when it comes to the effect on human welfare, “for most economic sectors, the impact of climate change will be small relative to the impacts of other drivers,” such as economic growth and technology, for the rest of this century. If temperatures change by about 1C degrees between now and 2090, as Mr. Lewis calculates, then the effects will be even smaller….

Member Post

 

Despite all hysterics to the contrary, even the IPCC is now admitting the previously unthinkable, regarding the species impacts of global whatevering: “But the UN climate body now says it is no longer so certain. The second part of the IPCC’s new assessment report is due to be presented next Monday in Yokohama, Japan. On […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

It’s Weather, Not the Apocalypse

 

Another day, another weather panic. A storm bears down on the media centers of the east coast. Reporters don oversized parkas, waddle into the howling wind and offer jeremiads about global warming climate change. “Repent! The End is Nigh!”

Because who would expect the northeast to get snow in February — it’s unheard of! Messrs. Delingpole and Steyn made great sport of this on their recent podcast.

Magical Thinking Versus Reality — George Savage

 

Americans exited the 20th century the triumphant torchbearers of classical liberalism—communism on the ash heap, the era of big government officially over–yet by the teens of the third millennium we find ourselves rejecting logic and experience to embrace the politics of magical thinking. How did this happen?

First, consider some examples of the phenomenon. This headline from yesterday’s Los Angeles Times, for example: “Electric cars can go only half as far in freezing weather, AAA finds.” After untold billions showered on Obama donors far-and-wide and a $7,500 per car direct federal tax subsidy for the Master of the Universe with a yen for a new Tesla, we now find a flaw: batteries don’t do well in the cold. Who knew? Apparently, our federal masterminds never consulted any automobile mechanics or high-school chemistry students before legislating alternative-energy nirvana.

Can California Make Laws For the Rest of the Nation?

 

That’s the question I examine in the newest installment of my column for Hoover’s Defining Ideas. California has recently enacted a series of carbon regulations so sweeping that they have the practical effect of regulating behavior throughout the nation. As I note in the column, it is, in my judgment, time for this issue to be heard by the Supreme Court.

The reason this case is so important is that California’s regulations essentially usurp the powers of the federal legislative branch. As I argue: