One of the biggest problems with our economy is our energy policy. The biggest reason for this is the threat of “Global Warming”. Even though 96% of scientist DON’T Believe in Global Warming our energy policies are based on this scare tactic.
But then, miraculously, you discovered a large stash of money you had completely lost sight of, but which would easily take care of all your family’s expenses for the rest of the year, giving you plenty of precious time to figure out how best to deal with your long-term financial situation?
The government is using the usual scare tactics to strong-arm the people into going along with more spending. Remember the rhetoric surrounding the big bailout of October 2008? We were told, not that this would be calamitous for the banks, but for the people, who would continue to experience massive job losses and foreclosures. We were told that the economy would sink into a deep recession if this money was not handed out to too-big-to-fail corporate cronies. So, after much hand-wringing, leaders from both parties, against unprecedented public outcry, agreed to shower money on the banks and increase the debt. The banks learned nothing, except that Washington will come to their rescue, no matter what. The people, however, continued to lose their jobs and houses anyway, and here we are, still in a deep recession.
he dead polar bear guy, Charles Monnett, who was put on leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, is in charge of a $50 million grant.
In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
What if we did just that, forgave ALL loans? I think it would give our economy a huge boost, just think how many cars and houses would be sold in the first year alone. Food for thought.
So let’s do the math 97% of 1,372 is 1,330 who still believe in global warming compared to 31,487 who don’t. That’s only 1 out 24 or 4% of scientists who still believe in global warming.
Newt Pelosi now regrets sitting on a couch with Nancy Gingrich in a commercial promoting Cap-and-Trade.
“Your position as Secretary of Energy and your world-renowned stature as a scientist mean you are in a unique position to speak with authority about the science of climate change and the frightening consequences of inaction,” he said. “Given the stakes, I believe you have a responsibility to do so.”
“I don’t know that a wind farm has ever been built that didn’t result in some bird or bat mortality,” he said.
Going back and reviewing the data from the Moorhead Airport, it would appear at first blush the data is accurate. Accurate, but not representative. Verifying the data will take some time however. There are several reasons to question the precision of the dew-point sensor.
In other words, Heuer doesn’t want the data to circulate freely in the public domain because it presumably contradicts the notion that man is the main driver of climate change.
By Elmer Beauregard I am happy to say that there are no frost warnings anywhere in Minnesota today, in fact yesterday Minnesota was the hottest place on the planet. Yesterday Moorhead Minnesota had a record dewpoint off 88ºF and a heat index of 133.5º F. So for today only we …
Last Thursday, in town hall held in Derry, New Hampshire, Romney argued that carbon emissions shouldn’t be regulated as pollutants by the Environmental Protection Agency. The candidate’s admission that “I don’t think carbon is a pollutant in the sense of harming our bodies” was caught on tape by Think Progress and, yesterday, Politico reignited debate about his limited climate change support. The remark also revived the long-running liberal charge that Mitt Romney paradoxically believes in global warming yet won’t do anything to help combat it.
Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, discusses the latest clean air regulation the EPA has proposed, as well as what’s coming up from the agency and the political reaction in Washington.
Proponents say the intent of the bill is to restore state’s rights and curb the
regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency to create regulations
that kill jobs and harm the economy.
“The EPA is currently conducting a campaign against coal fired power plants… (with new rules) that mandate utilities to install ‘maximum achievable control technology.’ By the EPA’s lowball estimates, it is the most expensive rule in the agency’s history.”
The reality is despite all of his efforts to con people into believing a trace gas in the atmosphere is causing the planet to warm, fewer and fewer are buying it.
The legislation, promoted by Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is being considered under a procedure requiring a two-thirds majority to pass. With Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee urging their colleagues to oppose it, that won’t be easy to achieve, and the bill faces dim prospects in the Democratic-controlled Senate. A House vote could come Tuesday.
“The core of this is those big polluters will pay a price, they’re smart business people, when a bill comes in for carbon pollution they’ll say, ‘How can I reduce that bill, how can I change my processes so I generate less carbon pollution?’.”