"Read about William Ruckelshaus crimes against humanity." NY Times op-ed 'Republican' climate terror advocates like Christine Todd Whitman and anti-science William Ruckelshaus apparently get all their news from broadcast tv.
8/3/13, "On climate change, politicians should stick to politics," NJ Star Ledger, Paul Mulshine
"Our former governor (Christie Whitman) recently had her name on this op-ed piece in the New York Times calling for action on carbon-dioxide emissions.
The piece nicely illustrates two of my major objections to the "consensus" argument advanced by the alarmists.
The first is that the consensus among scientists extends only to agreement that CO-2 has a measurable, but minor, role as a greenhouse gas. To get to the apocalyptic scenarios endorsed by Al Gore, among others, you must make all sorts of unsubstantiated predictions about cloud activity. As I noted here, that question is very complex and the issue is far from settled.
My second obection is that the alarmists tend to rely on that alleged consensus rather than doing the research necessary to understand the issue.
Christe Whitman certainly hadn't when she took over the reins at the Environmental Protection Agency in 2001.
"When it comes to atmospheric pollution, Christie's a bit of an airhead, said Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute. He directed me to look up Whitman's response to a New York Times reporter's question about global warming at the time of her nomination to the EPA.
"Clearly there's a hole in the ozone, that has been identified. But I saw a study the other day that showed that that was closing," she told the Times.
When informed by the reporter that she was talking about the wrong issue, Whitman refused to acknowledge her mistake. She insisted the greenhouse effect and the ozone layer are interrelated.
Which they are, but only in the sense that both take place up there in the sky. As one environmentalist put it, "That's a little bit like the Treasury secretary being asked about currency fluctuations and answering about interest rates.""
Whitman is far from the only alarmist to make that mistake. The same error was made by the leading Democratic legislator in the area of climate change, Assemblyman John McKeon of West Orange.
Even though McKeon sponsored a bill in 2007 that enrolled New Jersey in the failed Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, as recently as last year he still confused the climate-change issue with the ozone issue.
Consider the recent (8/1) Times op-ed in that light:
"EACH of us took turns over the past 43 years running the Environmental Protection Agency. We served Republican presidents, but we have a message that transcends political affiliation: the United States must move now on substantive steps to curb climate change, at home and internationally.
There is no longer any credible scientific debate about the basic facts: our world continues to warm, with the last decade the hottest in modern records, and the deep ocean warming faster than the earth's atmosphere. Sea level is rising. Arctic Sea ice is melting years faster than projected.
The costs of inaction are undeniable. The lines of scientific evidence grow only stronger and more numerous. And the window of time remaining to act is growing smaller: delay could mean that warming becomes ''locked in.''
A market-based approach, like a carbon tax, would be the best path to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, but that is unachievable in the current political gridlock in Washington. Dealing with this political reality, President Obama's June climate action plan lays out achievable actions that would deliver real progress. He will use his executive powers
to require reductions in the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the nation's power plants and spur increased investment in clean energy technology, which is inarguably the path we must follow to ensure a strong economy along with a livable climate."
.
Inarguably? Nonsense. It's one thing to say that it might be a good idea to reduce carbon emissions to avoid the risk of climate change. But there's no proof that will actually work.
Meanwhile we know for certain that banning such cheap energy sources as coal will make electricity rates higher and harm competitiveness with such countries as China and India that do not subscribe to climate-change hysteria.
And permitting the president to act unilaterally to effectively ban coal sets a terrible precedent. These four should have stopped with that sentence about a carbon tax. If Barack Obama would push for such a tax combined with a reduction in income-tax rates, then the Republicans might come along....
Of course, if they really cared about carbon, they'd be pushing nuclear power, the sole source of massive amounts of carbon-free energy.
Below is another column I did on the subject back in 2001. That was before I had a blog, so this has not been online before. Note the many mistakes by politicians that went unchallenged. Also note the way in which a Washington Post columnist actually boasts about his ignorance.
It was headlined "It's not the air; it's the airheads:" (2001)
"I'm about to start an office pool on how long Christie (Todd Whitman) lasts.
Not very is my guess. Christine Todd Whitman is the most dangerous type of politician, one who places more importance on feelings than on facts. You can get away with this type of thing when you're the boss, as Whitman was when she was New Jersey governor. You can have your underlings take the heat for your policy failures, a job Peter Verniero is performing admirably at this very minute.
But when you're the underling, you've got to know the facts. Forget the sound bites. The ideal Environmental Protection Agency administrator would be some total policy wonk who would speak in 500-word sentences filled with technical terms that few journalists understand.
Terms like "carbon dioxide."
This doesn't sound like a real complex term. But ever since I wrote about Christie's global warming gaffe last week, I have been amazed by the response. Whitman supporters have called me up to demand that we clean up the air and get all of that nasty carbon dioxide out of it. That this would end life on Earth doesn't seem to have occurred to them.
My fellow journalists aren't much better. I've spoken with several who believe that carbon dioxide depletes the ozone layer. Nope, that's chlorofluorocarbons. Even Whitman knows this by now - though she didn't back in January when she gave that infamous interview to the New York Times in which she confused the two issues.
The truly amazing thing is the way some journalists will brag about their ignorance while at the same time telling us how we should feel about some environmental issue. Star-Ledger readers saw an excellent example of this on this very page the other day when Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen made an impassioned plea for Al Gore to share his feelings with us on such issues as global warming:
"I confess that I am a little out of my depth when discussing such matters. Greenhouse effect? CO2? Puh-leeze!" Cohen wrote." ...
It would be even funnier if its author were aware that what he has proposed is a biological impossibility. Every time our lips move, we emit carbon dioxide.
This is a crucial fact in the debate over global warming: Carbon dioxide is a perfectly natural substance. It is not a pollutant. If it were, we'd be poisoning ourselves every time we exhaled. We humans emit carbon dioxide at the rate of about 15 liters per hour. That goes for journalists, too, though few seem to realize it.
If they did, Christie Whitman wouldn't be the only moderate Republican from New Jersey who's become a laughingstock. Reps. Marge Roukema and Mike Ferguson proved that with a letter to Bush last week in which they said of Whitman, "As a former Northeastern governor, she understands this issue on a scientific basis . . . "
Huh? Global warming is just that, global. Being from the Northeast confers no special knowledge of the problem. The duo went on to prove this:
"We are asking the President to put health and safety first. Global warming is an important reason to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, but its consequences won't be seen for many years. Here in the Northeast we have a more immediate concern - carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants and factories in the Midwest drifts eastward on the prevailing air currents and contributes significantly to air pollution in our region."
No it doesn't. Carbon dioxide emitted from a coal-fired plant in the Midwest has no more effect on air pollution in New Jersey than carbon dioxide exhaled by a porpoise in the Pacific. Global warming and air pollution are two separate issues, though none of the journalists reporting on the statement noticed that. The news stories made it appear as if Roukema and Ferguson knew what they were talking about.
If they had known, they could have contributed to the debate by noting the recent observations of the scientist credited with popularizing the global warming threat, James Hansen of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. He recently published a paper suggesting carbon dioxide might not be the main culprit in global warming after all.
"Our paper presents evidence that global warming of the past century has been driven by non-CO2 greenhouse gases," Hansen said. He went on to suggest a strategy for slowing global warming by focusing on reducing emissions of tropospheric ozone, methane and soot.
Unlike carbon dioxide, those emissions really are pollutants. Controlling them would improve air quality, and it could be done without destroying the American economy or requiring us to give up our cars. A smart EPA administrator would have dropped the unworkable Kyoto approach and instead endorsed Hansen's approach.
In fact, a smart EPA administrator will probably be doing exactly that in the very near future. It will be fascinating to see who it is." via Junk Science
==============================
Broadcast television censors climate science:
WSJ: Broadcast television networks from Jan.-June 2013 never once mentioned the scientific consensus that global warming has "paused" for at least 15 years. Not a single one of those stories mentioned the "warming plateau" reported even by The New York Times on June 10."...
7/11/13, "Networks Do 92 Climate Change Stories; Fail to Mention 'Lull' in Warming All 92 Times, ABC, CBS and NBC ignore 'mystery' warming plateau in favor of alarmism about sea levels, allergies, weather." Wall St. Journal, Julia A. Seymour
"Just since Jan. 1, 2013, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news programs have aired 92 stories about "climate change" or "global warming." Not a single one of those stories mentioned the "warming plateau" reported even by The New York Times on June 10."...
---------------------------------
Scientific consensus that global warming has 'paused':
4/25/2013, Congressional testimony citing 15 year global warming pause:
Dr. Judith Curry, 4/25/13, "STATEMENT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hearing on “Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context," Judith A. Curry, Georgia Institute of Technology
p. 3, "Since 1998 there has been no statistically significant increase in global surface temperature."...
================================
UN IPCC Chief notes 17 year pause in global warming:
2/21/13, “IPCC Head Pachauri Acknowledges Global Warming Standstill,” The Australian, Graham Lloyd
"The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office."...
-----------------------------------
UK Met Office notes pause in global warming since 1998:
1/18/13, “Climate change: scientists puzzle over halt in global warming,” Der Spiegel, by Axel Bojanowski (translation from German)
"The British Met Office forecast even more recently that the temperature interval could continue at a high level until the end of 2017 - despite the rapidly increasing emissions of greenhouse gases . Then global warming would pause 20 years."..."The exact reasons of the temperature standstill since 1998, are not yet understood, says climate researcher Doug Smith of the Met Office."...
UK Met Office chart via Der Spiegel
=================================
UN climate official freely admits global warming movement is redistribution of wealth:
11/14/10: ""But one must say clearly: We distribute by climate policy de facto the world's wealth around. ...This has to do with environmental policy... almost nothing....The climate summit in Cancun end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War."...
 |
| Ottmar Edenhofer |
"Climate protection has hardly anything to do with environmental protection, says the economist Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which it relates to the distribution of resources."
====================
"Climate action?" Massive US government climate action was mandated by George Bush #1 in 1990 against human caused atmospheric and environmental change. The 1990 law bound at least 13 federal agencies. And trillions of taxpayer dollars mandated to be sent around the world for 'climate' purposes in perpetuity. For example, in November 2012, the US took 'climate action' by giving $6 billion US taxpayer dollars to the Sultan of Brunei who owns 5000+ cars and to the Pres. of Indonesia, a country so corrupt even the World Bank says crime adds 20% to costs. Below, one of the Sultan's cars.
7/24/12, "The Sultan's Cars," wheel to wheel blog.
======================
6/4/12, "Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006," Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage
"Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord....Here is the biggest shocker of all: the average American's CO2 emissions are down to levels not seen since 1964 -- over half a century ago.... It is exactly America's historical role of biggest and dirtiest that makes their sharp decline in CO2 pollution so noteworthy and potentially game changing at the global level."...
======================
11/19/12, “More than 1,000 New Coal Plants Planned Worldwide,” UK Guardian, Damian Carrington .
.
“India is planning 455 new plants compared to 363 in China, which is seeing a slowdown in its coal investments after a vast building program in the past decade.”…
==========================
8/1/13 NY Times 'Republican' climate terror op-ed headline and credentials of authors:
8/1/13, Op-Ed Contributors, "A Republican Case for Climate Action," NY Times
By WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS, LEE M. THOMAS, WILLIAM K. REILLY and CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN
"And despite critics’ warnings, our economy has continued to grow."...
"The writers are former administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency: William D. Ruckelshaus, from its founding in 1970 to 1973, and again from 1983 to 1985; Lee M. Thomas, from 1985 to 1989; William K. Reilly, from 1989 to 1993; and Christine Todd Whitman, from 2001 to 2003. "
====================
8/2/13, "DDT genocide instigator William Ruckelshaus urges GOP to surrender on climate" Junk Science, Steve Milloy"William Ruckelshaus’ anti-science DDT ban helped lead to the deaths of tens of millions in Africa — now he wants to do the same via energy bans.
Ruckelshaus, Lee Thomas, Bill Reilly and Christine Todd Whitman write in the New York Times."...--------------------------
"Read about William Ruckelshaus crimes against humanity."
9/21/2006, "Day of Reckoning for DDT Foes?" Steve Milloy, Fox News, Junk Science
"Last week’s announcement that the World Health Organization lifted its nearly 30-year ban on the insecticide DDT is perhaps the most promising development in global public health since… well, 1943 when DDT was first used to combat insect-borne diseases like typhus and malaria.
Overlooked in all the hoopla over the announcement, however, is the terrible toll in human lives (tens of millions dead — mostly pregnant women and children under the age of 5), illness (billions sickened) and poverty (more than $1 trillion dollars in lost GDP in sub-Saharan Africa alone) caused by the tragic, decades-long ban.
Much of this human catastrophe was preventable, so why did it happen? Who is responsible? Should the individuals and activist groups who caused the DDT ban be held accountable in some way?...
"It was, of course, then-Environmental Protection Agency administrator William Ruckelshaus who actually banned DDT after ignoring an EPA administrative law judge’s ruling that there was no evidence indicating that DDT posed any sort of threat to human health or the environment. Ruckleshaus never attended any of the agency’s hearings on DDT. He didn’t read the hearing transcripts and refused to explain his decision.
None of this is surprising given that, in a May 22, 1971, speech before the Wisconsin Audubon Society, Ruckleshaus said that EPA procedures had been streamlined so that DDT could be banned. Ruckleshaus was also a member of — and wrote fundraising letters for — the EDF."...
===========================
NY Times 8/1/13 op-ed 'Republican' climate terror advocates ignorant or in denial about CO2:
6/10/13, CO2 emissions chart from IEA report, p. 2
—————————————————–
.
NY Times op-ed writers are ignorant or lying about climate scientists. Just one example:
.
NY Times op-ed writers are ignorant or lying about climate scientists. Just one example:
.
11/29/12, 134 scientists write to UN Sec. Gen. Ban Ki-Moon, asking him to desist from blaming climate disasters on global warming that hasn't happened: "Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years."...“The NOAA “State of the Climate in 2008”
report asserted that 15 years or more without any
statistically-significant warming would indicate a discrepancy between
observation and prediction. Sixteen years without warming have therefore now proven that the models are wrong by their creators’ own criterion.”…(2nd parag. fr. end of letter). “Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years.”…"Policy actions that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely
to influence future climate. Policies need to focus on preparation for,
and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events, however caused."...Special to Financial Post, 12/10/12
=========================================
30 year peer reviewed study finds CO2 lags global air and water temperatures. CO2 doesn't cause warming:
.
Jan. 2013, “The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature,“ Global and Planetary Change, Ole Humluma, b,
, 
,Kjell Stordahlc, Jan-Erik Solheimd
“Fig. 1. Monthly global atmospheric CO2“
"In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets:
1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data,
2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data,
3) GISS surface air temperature data,
4) NCDC surface air temperature data,
5) HadSST2 sea surface data,
6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series,
7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and
8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions....
Changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature."...
=======================
More science:
NOAA study says US 2012 weather extremes due to natural causes, not global warming:
4/12/13, “Study Reveals Global Warming Not To Blame For Last Year’s Crippling Drought,” stlouis.cbslocal.com with AP
.
“A new federal study reveals that global warming is not to blame for last year’s extreme drought that crippled the central Great Plains. The study conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Drought Task Force places the blame on natural variations.“…
--------------------------------------------
5/28/13, Peer reviewed NASA study says Superstorm Sandy not due to man-caused global warming or climate change:
.
5/28/13, "On the impact angle of Hurricane Sandy's New Jersey landfall," Geophysical Research Letters, Hall and Sobel
"Hall and Sobel report their findings in a paper published last week (29 May 2013) in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union."...
============
Two more reports on the Sandy finding:
6/3/13, "Hurricane Sandy took highly unusual path, but climate change doesn’t get the blame – yet," blogs.AGU.org, by Sarah Charley
7/12/13, "Hurricane Sandy Was 1-in-700-Year Event," LiveScience.com, Elizabeth Howell
============================
Thanks to decades of federal gov. personnel like the NY Times op-ed "Republicans," no further need for conspiracy theories:
5/18/13, "Last Week’s Conspiracy Theories are This Week’s Reality," Erik Rush, Canada Free Press
"It is now safe to say that if one cannot see the abject evil of the Obama administration as well as the endemic corruption and criminality in our federal government, it is only because they are refusing to look.
Due to what some are calling a “perfect storm of circumstances, three scandals have rocked Washington, but these are only the grossest symptoms of the systemic infection that has been festering there for decades."...
==============================
The 4 op-ed authors exemplify why the GOP is deservedly defunct. The GOP ceased to exist after the Nov. 2008 election and was fine with it, have merged with the democrats and are happy. GOP establishment types on Fox News or elsewhere shouldn't be mistaken as a sign the GOP actually exists. Those people are only to prevent real opposition to the democrat party from gaining traction, to ensure the Silent Majority (Tea Party) remains silent. Massive, centralized government out of reach of voters is the goal. A criminal mob like the EU.
No comments:
Post a Comment