Anchored by Andrea Canning - Original Air Date: Monday July 12, 2010
ABC News Global Warming Debate Part 1:
Continue reading Marc Morano Debates Daniel Weisson on Global Warming.
Recently in Cap And Trade Category
Susan Ferrechio , Washington Examiner
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., plans to bring a comprehensive energy and climate bill to the Senate floor by the end of the month that will include a cap on carbon emissions produced by the nation's utilities.
Reid announced his plans after huddling with President Obama about the Senate's July agenda and said he wants to introduce the bill, which has not yet been written, the week of July 26.
Reid was vague on details, but signaled he wants the bill to require the nation's electricity providers to pay a price for emitting carbon, which the EPA says will lead to global warming.
Thanks to Climate Realists
Christopher Monckton has issued an extensive and detailed critique and refutation of a widely circulated 83-minute personal attack on him by one J.P. Abraham, a lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of St. Thomas, Minnesota.
Professor Abraham's 83-minute lecture with 115 slides purported to demolish a talk about climate change that Lord Monckton had given in St. Paul, Minnesota, in October 2009. More than 2.5 million people have seen Monckton's talk on
In June 2010, John Abraham posted up an attack on the internet via the servers of the University of St. Thomas. Within a week, Monckton's response letter with its near-500 questions was in Abraham's hands, to which he has not responded as challenged.
Monckton publicly accuses Abraham of -
Bad faith in having "furtively" spent eight months preparing his savage personal attack behind Monckton's back, entirely contrary to accepted academic practice;
Malice in having made dozens of serious allegations about Monckton when he knew the allegations he had made were false in every material particular, or had no reason to believe the allegations were true;
Appealing to a false authority on the subject of the climate that, as a lecturer in fluid mechanics, he did not possess (Monckton demonstrates Abraham appears at times incompetent even in arithmetic);
Academic dishonesty in having repeatedly made up statements that Monckton had not made, having put those statements to other scientists, having obtained hostile responses from those scientists, and having included those hostile responses in his attack as though they were responses to what Monckton had said; and
Lying repeatedly by misstating what Monckton had said and then attacking those misstatements; by falsely and repeatedly alleging that Monckton had misrepresented scientists' results when Monckton had either accurately represented the results or not cited the scientists he was alleged to have misrepresented at all; by unjustifiably and repeatedly impugning Monckton's integrity, qualifications, experience, and competence in a manner that he knew to be inaccurate; and by repeatedly taking Monckton's words out of their context and making a willful nonsense of them.
Continue reading MUST READ: Response to John Abraham by Lord Monckton.
Why the environment is no longer a surefire political winner.
Just three years ago the politics of global warming was enjoying its golden moment. The release in 2006 of Al Gore's Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, had riveted global audiences with its predictions of New York and Miami under 20 feet of water. Within 12 months, leading politicians with real power were on board. Germany's Angela Merkel, dubbed the "climate chancellor" by her country's press, arranged a Greenland photo op with a melting iceberg and promised to cut Europe's emissions by 20 percent by 2020. British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who called climate change a scourge equal to fascism, offered 60 percent by 2050. In December 2007, the world got its very first green leader. Harnessing the issue of climate change, Kevin Rudd became prime minister of Australia, ready to take on what he called "the biggest political, economic, and moral challenge of our times." Now, almost everywhere, green politics has fallen from its lofty heights.
Following two of the harshest winters on record in the Northern Hemisphere--not to mention an epic economic crisis--voters no longer consider global warming a priority. Just 42 percent of Germans now worry about climate change, down from 62 percent in 2006. In Australia, only 53 percent still consider it a pressing issue, down from 75 percent in 2007. Americans rank climate change dead last of 21 problems that concern them most, according to a January Pew poll. Last month Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper, blasting climate change as a "sideshow" to global economic issues, canceled the meeting of environment ministers that has preceded the G8 or G20 summit every year but one since 1994. Merkel has slashed green-development aid in the latest round of budget cuts, while in Washington, Barack Obama seems to have cooled on his plan to cap emissions. In perhaps the most striking momentum reversal for environmental politicians, last month Rudd became the first leader to be destroyed by his green policies. Flip-flopping over planned emissions cuts as the opposition exploited Australian voters' flagging support for climate measures, he was finally ousted by party rebels.
Read the rest of the article.
Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com
Top elitist and Harvard Professor Kenneth Rogoff has shamefully called for the BP oil spill disaster to be exploited in order to create political momentum behind a carbon tax, even going to the lengths of embracing the nightmare scenario of hurricanes pushing the oil onshore as a way to create political momentum behind Obama's dreaded "green economy".
In an opinion piece for the Korea Times, Rogoff sensationally warns that failure to exploit the tragedy for political ends would represent a "lost opportunity," a startling display of mercenary indiscretion, and a shining example of what we warned about from the very beginning, that elitists would waste little time in pointing to heart-rendering images of oil-covered birds and dead wildlife as part of a crass stunt to push their consumption tax agenda.
Read the rest of the article.
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones, Prison Planet.com
Mounting evidence shows disaster was deliberately contrived either through conscious negligence or outright sabotage and is being allowed to worsen.
There can now be no doubt whatsoever that the BP oil spill was purposefully contrived, either through deliberate negligence or outright sabotage, and is now being used to further the Obama administration's political agenda. Criminal investigations into the government and BP's role in the disaster need to be launched by state authorities in Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi immediately, while local authorities also need to call emergency legislative sessions in order to take over emergency response efforts from the feds before the crisis gets much worse.
By Elmer Beauregard
The Good: Obama Did Not Mention Global Warming Once. He didn't say anything about a consensus or overwhelming evidence, we seem to be winning on this issue
The Bad: He still calls the energy bill a "Climate" bill. Even though Global Warming is a dead issue Obama is still going to tax us for emitting CO2.
The Good: No Mention of "Peak Oil". It's hard to say we're running out of oil when its covering most of the Gulf of Mexico (from one well). Just like its hard to believe in Global Warming when your freezing to death.
The Bad: Obama did say that there is no more oil on dry land. Excuse me, what about ANWR?
& The Ugly: Said he will have to tax energy! Sure Obama is going to make BP pay for their misdeeds, but BP will also benefit greatly from the new energy bill. BP is a huge player in "Green" energy, so what they lose on the oil spill side they will more than make up for on the Cap & Trade side. Plus, when gas goes to $5 a gallon BP will double their profits without lifting a finger. And who is going to pay for all this? The American people.
When evaluating in an honest way all factors that contributed to the current pollution of the Gulf, we must ask why BP was drilling in 5,000 feet of ocean when there are so many other accessible and safe alternatives. There are large deposits of oil shale in Western Colorado that could easily and safely be extracted as it is now in Western Canada. We have all heard of the huge deposits of oil in ANWR, on Alaska's North Shore. Because of improved drilling technology, all available oil in ANWR can be extracted by using only 2,000 of its roughly 19,000,000 acres.
BP now drills in 5,000 feet of ocean because these better alternatives have been foreclosed to the oil industry. Environmental groups have effectively stymied this safe and relatively easy production of oil in the name of some higher but more nebulous good. Where they once rationalized their campaign against oil companies based upon the threat of environmental degradation, environmental groups now use the increasingly dubious claims of global warming to justify their obstruction.
Rest of the article.
$6 million study is used to lobby for cap-and-tax
With public faith in the global-warming myth on the wane, leftist zealots are desperate to spin a new tale - and they're spending your tax money to do it. Three years ago, Congress appropriated $5,856,600 for the National Academy of Sciences to complete a climate-change study. This bureaucratic attempt to cook the books, which was completed last week, may be too late to save this dying religion.
The academy now offers the taxpayer-funded research for download in three separate sections for $44 each. The first volume presents the case that human activities are warming the planet and that this "poses significant risks." A second report urges that a cap-and-trade taxing system be implemented to reduce so-called greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The final section of the study explores strategies on adapting to the "reality" of climate change, meaning purported "extreme weather events like heavy precipitation and heat waves."
None of the big-government recommendations are worth the 1,089 pages of presumably recycled paper on which they are to be printed if planetary warming is actually a phenomenon beyond human control, so the first volume is of primary interest. "Advancing the Science of Climate Change" asserts that the Earth's temperature has risen over the past 100 years and that human activities have resulted in sharp increases in carbon dioxide. The coincidence of these facts on their own, of course, proves nothing. The Earth has been as warm or warmer in past periods, such as the medieval and Roman warm periods, long before the internal combustion engine and coal plants were around to take the heat for a particularly sweltering summer day.
He discusses his new book Power Grab plus other recent events on the Alex Jones Show.
Attorney and author Christopher C. Horner, a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Mr. Horner has represented CEI as well as scientists and members of the U.S. House and Senate on matters of environmental policy in the federal courts including the Supreme Court. He writes for legal and industrial trade journals and online opinion pages. Mr. Horner is the author of two best-selling books: Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, which spent half of 2007 on the New York Times bestseller list.
Power Grab: How Obama's Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America
Listen to his radio Interview here.
Regulations: Call it cap-and-trade or bait-and-switch, but John Kerry and Joe Lieberman continue to tilt at windmills with a bill to restrain energy growth in the name of saving the planet.
The bill introduced Wednesday and sponsored by the two senators is called the American Power Act, an Orwellian phrase if ever there was one. Like President Obama's offshore drilling program, for every "incentive" there is a restriction. It's as if Hamlet were to be appointed Secretary of Energy.
The legislation has little to do with developing America's vast domestic energy supply. It's cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending. It's about regulations, restrictions and research. It does not deal with exploiting America's vast energy reserves but with finding ways to mitigate their alleged harmful effect.
Rest of the article.
By Roger F. Gay, mensnewsdaily.com/
It's official. Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman have signaled the end of their political careers. The two have introduced what they've titled the "American Power Act." Yep, it's a global warming bill - Cap-n-Trade, Cap-n-Tax, etc. The premise for this bill is that the industrial emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) are causing global temperatures to rise and to prevent global catastrophe the industrialized world must reduce its emissions of CO2.
A pork and power bill based on global warming propaganda has been a priority for the Obama administration. Given that it has already been established, absolutely, that predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming are a scam, you might question the two senators' sanity for introducing one. But new benefits to Israel have recently been negotiated, which might be all it takes to make Joe Lieberman happy. And it's very easy to imagine a chat between John Kerry and Al Gore that ends with Al Gore saying, "Yah, but the money is good."
Kerry's term isn't over until 2014, when he will be 71 years old, so retirement isn't an unreasonable choice anyway. Lieberman is about the same age with his current term ending two years earlier.
Investor's Business Daily describes the bill as "cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending." It's about regulations, restrictions and research. The bill creates some 60 new agencies and projects to eat up our tax dollars and buy support.
By Elmer Beauregard
The problem with the Senate's New Climate Bill is that it still uses the word "Climate".
This bill was written with the false assumption that CO2 is responsible for Global Warming and we now know that it isn't. 12 out of 13 scientists don't believe in Global Warming anymore but Kerry and Lieberman still do. They must get their news from NPR.
The Kerry and Lieberman's bill aims to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and ultimately, 80% below those levels by mid-century. Doing this will have no effect on the climate, but it will put a burden on the U.S. economy based on a fictitious problem.
The bill does have some provisions for nuclear plants and offshore drilling to lure conservatives into supporting this bill, but the main thing this bill does is install an Enron style form of Carbon Credit Trading or "Cap and Trade".
The bill also allows states to opt out of offshore drilling in their own waters if they wish, but it doesn't allow states the autonomy to drill on their own dry land if they want to.
To avoid disasters like the oil spill in the Gulf, I think states like Alaska should be allowed to drill for their own oil on dry land and maybe use American companies, instead of having foreign companies drilling in our waters a mile deep.
If our Government would have allowed drilling in ANWR, we wouldn't need any oil from the middle east and the Gulf disaster could have been avoided. Plus, it would have a smaller footprint than one wind farm or solar plant.
Reminds me of the Yo-Yo Master if you ask me.
By Brian Sussman, American Thinker
Cap-and-Trade Is Back
On Wednesday, Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) plan to introduce legislation designed to inflate the cost of energy, strain family budgets, and decimate America's manufacturing sector -- all in the name of supposedly saving the climate.
Kerry and Lieberman have been revamping legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last year. The House bill imposes oppressive limits on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and establishes a complex cap-and-trade scheme in which the federal government determines how much CO2 a business may emit. If a business exceeds its allowance, it may purchase additional "carbon credits" from an exchange, where the credits will be traded like a commodity. Rules for the exchange of carbon credits, including the trading of carbon derivatives, are addressed in the House bill, and my sources tell me that the Senate version will include these same stratagems.
n an e-mail sent to the media last week regarding their plans, Kerry and Lieberman said, "We can no longer wait to solve this problem which threatens our economy, our security and our environment."
My insiders also say the new Kerry-Lieberman proposal will keep the House bill's goal of attaining a 17-percent reduction of greenhouse gases (below their 2005 level) by 2020. Apparently the Senate bill will allow cap-and-trade to hit power companies first, and then within six years include the manufacturing sector.
Rest of the article.
(Reuters) - Organizers of a California ballot measure that would suspend the state's landmark climate change law, possibly for years, said on Monday they had enough signatures to qualify it for the November ballot.
The initiative would put the state's Global Warming Solutions Act, signed into law in 2006 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, on hold until the state's unemployment rate falls below 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters.
Currently the state's unemployment rate is 12.6 percent and hasn't dropped below 5.5 percent since 2007.
The Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as AB 32, is one of the most ambitious climate change laws in the United States in the absence of federal legislation to cut greenhouse gas emissions. It also figures to be a key part of Schwarzenegger's legacy as governor.
Organizers of the California Jobs Initiative say they have submitted more than 800,000 signatures to the state's Registrar of Voters -- or nearly twice the 435,000 needed to get it on the ballot.
The Registrar of Voters has until June 24 to count and certify the signatures.
Continue reading California may vote to freeze landmark climate law.
By Gene J. Koprowski, FOXNews.com
A leading global warming skeptic recruited a group of concerned citizens to fact-check the sources referenced in the U.N.'s latest climate-change bible -- and gave the report an "F." Now she's planning the nail in the coffin: a comprehensive audit of the entire report.
Following a series of scandals that led to doubts about the accuracy of the United Nations' most recent climate-change report, Donna Laframboise of NoConsensus.org gathered a group of citizens online and proved that the U.N. over-relied upon so-called "gray literature," rather than using exclusively peer-reviewed scientific reports as the organization was supposed to do.
Now Laframboise and her colleagues are taking the next step, FoxNews.com has learned. They are building an online database that will let everyone see exactly what the report claims -- and precisely how it came to those conclusions.
"There's a pile of work that can and should be done on this report," Laframboise told FoxNews.com.
The Canadian watchdog is working with a computer programmer in Australia whose software will let her and her colleagues further analyze the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N.'s climate arm.
"It's starting to look good, and he is linking in all sorts of other material, including IPCC reviewer comments to various parts of the text -- at the moment they aren't easy to access by the average person -- as well as the entire Climate-gate e-mail database," Laframboise said.
A long-awaited climate change bill that would put a price on excessive carbon emissions and generate billions of dollars has been postponed indefinitely.
US Senator John F. Kerry's 20 years of climate change plans hit the bottom Saturday after Senator Lindsey Graham, who had allied himself with Kerry on the issue, abandoned the effort in an unprecedented move.
The South Carolina Republican suddenly decided to switch priorities, claiming that that the Senate's Democratic leadership might proceed with a controversial immigration bill first.
"Moving forward on immigration -- in this hurried, panicked manner -- is nothing more than a cynical political ploy,'' Graham said. "I know from my own personal experience the tremendous amounts of time, energy, and effort that must be devoted to this issue to make even limited progress.''
Continue reading Climate change bill collapses in Senate.
By Kim Chipman and Simon Lomax, Bloomberg Businessweek
April 22 (Bloomberg) -- When Tea Party activists began protesting last July, it wasn't the health-care overhaul that set them off. The target was a cap-and-trade bill, designed to limit carbon emissions, that had passed the U.S. House of Representatives a few days before.
Their anger, along with opposition from some Democrats, stalled the bill in the Senate. By winter, polls showed more Americans were questioning whether climate change was even a concern. Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who favors climate action, told reporters March 2 that "cap-and- trade is dead."
Now Graham, John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut are preparing to introduce a compromise bill in the Senate. They have indicated it will include a mandatory, declining limit on carbon emissions in the electric-power industry while giving utilities the right to buy and sell carbon allowances.
The senators aren't calling it "cap-and-trade," though. The legislation is about "pricing carbon," Graham told reporters in Washington last month.
By Elmer Beauregard
After being up for one day the new version of "Hide the Decline" hosted on The No Cap-and-Trade Coalition's channel was pulled by youTube, along with all the other copies of the original version of the video made by Minnesotans For Global Warming.
When you click on the movie to play it you get this message.
This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by JibJab Media Inc..
It is true the original version did contain JibJab content, the claymation video with Michael Mann's head on it was made on JibJab's website. I also put a disclaimer at the beginning of the website that JibJab was not responsible for this content.
The new version "Hide The Decline II" did not, however, contain any JibJab content or the image of Michale Mann that was in dispute in the letter from Mann's attorney. So I'm wondering why it got yanked. I'm sure it was a little like playing Whack-A-Mole for youTube, everybody and their sister was uploading the original version to their youTube channel. Maybe in their zeal youTube inadvertently wiped out the new version.
Continue reading YouTube Yanks All Versions of 'Hide The Decline'.
The No Cap and Trade Coalition is now hosting a new version of the 'Hide the Decline' video.
Instead of focusing just on Mann the new video presents a generic scientist that represents all scientists embroiled in the Climategate controversy. The coalition has developed a white paper entitled, "Dr. Michael Mann: Defamed or Defined by Hide the Decline," which defends the video.
Continue reading No Cap And Trade Coalition Unveils "Hide The Decline II".
[ This is unbelievable, they want to HELP line my pockets mwuah hah hah - Al Gore]
The U.S. should consider a tax on carbon or a value-added tax if it can't tackle the deficit by cutting government spending, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker said in an interview to be aired Tuesday and Wednesday on PBS.
"I think if we can't do it on the cost side, we've got to go on the revenue side and it's too early to do it, but it's not too early to begin wondering," Volcker said in an interview on Charlie Rose. "One possible approach, as people have talked about is a tax on carbon, tax on energy, that's a big revenue producer if you're willing to do it. Not very popular to say the least."
Volcker is a chair of the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, or PERAB. An offshoot of that group is due to present President Barack Obama a set of options on potential changes to the tax code by Dec. 4.
Volcker suggested a tax on consumption should be among the changes under consideration if expenditures aren't brought under control. He said "there are many choices" beyond a value-added tax or an energy tax.
Continue reading Paul Volcker: Carbon Tax, VAT Should Be On The Table... what?.
One shows flooding the other a drought, kids aren't sure what they are supposed to be afraid of!
As usual the global warming fear mongers display both sides of the spectrum to cover their butts, so no matter what happens they can say Global Warming caused it.
Climate Change ExaminerTony Hake
Scare tactic newspaper advertisements from Britain's Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) have been banned by a government advertising watchdog agency. Two ads in a series which used child nursery rhymes to warn about the purported dangers of manmade climate change were found to have unsubstantiated claims in them.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) reviewed the ads after receiving more than 900 complaints from British citizens - the most complaints it received on any ad last year.
The two offending ads were based on the nursery rhymes of 'Jack and Jill' and 'Rub a Dub Dub' and warned of the effects of extreme weather, a claim which has long been disproven.
Without a background in climate science, the ASA relied on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) reports to determine the accuracy of the ads. In its conclusion, the ASA said the ads failed to meet code based on a lack of substantiation, truthfulness and their environmental claims.
Continue reading Global Warming Fear Mongering Ads Confuse Children.
