What he said:
My current concern with the emissions trading scheme is that a religious fervour has built up around the altar of global warming. Those who serve at the altar have become ruthless in their denigration of alternate views. This fervour has now received its imprimatur by reason of a new tax, or should it be tithe to be paid to the Rudd Labor Government.
The similarity in this newest forte of socialism can be defined by the ultimate purpose of divesting the individual of their asset or income stream on the premise of an apparent greater moral good.
But who becomes the benefactors of this divestment? The administrators and the traders. Their pockets are lined with the property and income of others.
Aussie senator denounces global warming scheme.
Ok… another global warming post. Ok… it turns out that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have endorced an 80 by 50 (80% recution in CO2 emissions by 2050) CO2 plan. Let’s look at what this would actually mean for Americans… (via WSJ.com)
By the year 2050, the Census Bureau projects that our population will be around 420 million. This means per capita emissions will have to fall to about 2.5 tons in order to meet the goal of 80% reduction.
It is likely that U.S. per capita emissions were never that low – even back in colonial days when the only fuel we burned was wood.
If that comparison seems unfair, consider that even the least-CO2 emitting industrialized nations do not come close to the 2050 target. France and Switzerland, compact nations that generate almost all of their electricity from nonfossil fuel sources (nuclear for France, hydro for Switzerland) emit about 6.5 metric tons of CO2 per capita
Today, the average residence in the U.S. uses about 10,500 kilowatt hours of electricity and emits 11.4 tons of CO2 per year (much more if you are Al Gore or John Edwards and live in a mansion). To stay within the magic number, average household emissions will have to fall to no more than 1.5 tons per year. In our current electricity infrastructure, this would mean using no more than about 2,500 KwH per year. This is not enough juice to run the average hot water heater.
If this goes to prove ANYTHING… it is that Democrats are so out-of-touch with facts and reality that neither facts nor reality matter to them in the slightest. They are completely willing to believe that we can have lower carbon footprints in 2050 than we did in 1700… even though there was next to NO industry in the 1700′s. The Democrats who want or believe this is possible suffer from a severe mental impairment. They are delusional. To even suggest this as a matter of public policy is laughable…
Are these the minds we want RUNNING the country? (oh! let’s allow these minds to manage the economy too…)
Once again… it looks as if global warming is not really global ‘warming’ anymore… per dailytech.com
Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile — the list goes on and on.
you know… I’m sick and tired of time and time again needing to correct the destructive ideological belief system that is the environmentalist movement. Their words are taken with the utmost seriousness by politician and reporter alike… and they have nothing substantive to show that this “warming” is anything more then a natural, cyclical change in the earth’s environment. Well, I might as well turn the tables here and call all you environmentalists “global cooling deniers”.
from Canada’s National Post:
Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.
China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.
And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its “lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.
The ice is back.
According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona — two prominent climate modellers — the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.
“We missed what was right in front of our eyes,” says Prof. Russell. It’s not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind’s effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.
Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as “a drop in the bucket.” Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to “stock up on fur coats.”
The good people over at Arts & Letters Daily (my favorite web resource) have outdone themselves with the creation of a new site designed to highlight the debate over global warming. The articles on the right portion of the climate site are particularly revealing.
Also, If you were not already familiar with aldaily, allow me to introduce you to the best resource for intellectual thought on the internet. Best of all, it’s using the same site design from 2001. We can almost call this a “retro” design. Enjoy!
“We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.“
It’s good to finally hear an honest liberal out there. Does it surprise anyone that The ends of the global warming movement are the SAME ends liberals had before the global warming crisis was invented? Am I the only one who notices this?
Is it not also ironic that global warming proponents are now shifting gears, covering their tracks, by warning against global climate “change”? This way, if the numbers don’t show the warming they predicted… it won’t matter to their cause. If the planet starts cooling… the same people will still be espousing the same solutions — big government regulation.