1. 1. the threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing (there is no threat from climate change, as warmer is much better – there is no urgency, and therefore there is no growing threat. Any changes in the climate are purely from natural causes such as solar activity, ocean basin temperature oscillations, volcanic activity, the earth's orbital variations, cloud cover. The earth has been through many climate changes before man ever discovered fire, let alone coal-fired power plants).
2. 2. we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe (nothing is irreversible except for entropy; ice ages come and go every 100,000 years, and nothing will stop the coming ice age – and it will come. )
3. 3. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline (sea level is dropping off the coast of California, and many other places)
4. 4. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent (hurricanes world-wide are fewer in number and intensity, droughts were much worse in the past, and so were floods)
5. 5. More frequent drought and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive. (there were bumper crops in the U.S. in the last three years; poor land management practices are causing crop failures and famines in under-developed nations)
6. 6. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees. (no islands are losing real estate, the oceans are not rising any more than in the recent past 100 years – see Hilo, Hawaii data on my blog)
7. 7. It is true that for too many years, mankind has been slow to respond to or even recognize the magnitude of the climate threat (nope, an absence of a threat requires no response, and the magnitude of man-made global warming is zero; plus, only 30 years ago the climate alarmists were shrieking that global cooling is imminent and disaster is about to overwhelm us – and look how that turned out! ).
8. 8. the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history. (Nope, commercializing oil, and especially natural gas in the early 20th century did much more – it freed us all from choking to death from coal soot, and air-borne dried particles of animal manure.)
9. 9. national policy aimed at both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks -- a standard that will also save consumers money and our nation oil (nope, the high mpg cars will cost consumers much more, and will never pay for the additional cost via fuel savings).
10. 10. [The U.S. passed an] energy and climate bill in June that would finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy for American businesses (nope, energy prices will rise much more than energy use will decline, resulting in cost increases that will be passed along to customers, making each business un-competitive and forcing many into bankruptcy or to close their doors; Obama himself has stated publicly that his policies will cause electricity prices to skyrocket)
11. 11. There is no other way [referring to all nations working together to reduce GHGs] (nope, there is no need to cut GHGs, rather, there is a need to allow the free market forces to reward innovation so that renewable energy sources gradually supplant high-cost energy sources. This especially applies to oil, which is manipulated into artificially high prices by oil-rich nations hoarding, denying access to oil reserves, and only gradually selling oil so as to maintain the high prices.)
2 comments:
Mr. Lane wrote in an email: I can’t log on to your blog to make a comment so I will e-mail this to you: Mr. Sowell, I cannot disagree with you more on this column. "Obama lies" is a statement that only radical right wingers make not people with honest disagreements. Every one of your points is a 'viewpoint' not a fact. It can be debated and argued and is not about lies but about difference of opinions. I would even argue that the science is not on your side. My question, then, is why use such inflammatory language? Is it to attract right wing clients? I respect your insights on the cost of nuclear power but am shocked when I read rubbish like this, especially since I use you as a source of information as we battle the nuclear industry here in South Texas. Eric Lane
My reply: Mr. Lane, you are quite wrong that "only radical right-wingers" say that Obama lies. It is a fact that he lies. Many of my liberal friends also agree that he lies regularly. A quick search on the internet will easily confirm this - just search for "Obama lies." Every one of my points is a fact, not a viewpoint. You can find many others who acknowledge these facts,especially that CO2 is not the cause of climate change, it is instead an effect.
To take just one point, do you actually believe that there is an "irreversible catastrophe" in store? Are you aware of the 100,000 year ice age cycle? And the roughly 12,000 year warm period between ice ages, which is presently in roughly the 12,000th year?
You argue that the science is not on my side. Which science would that be? The one where scientists, such as Mann and Briffa, deliberately lied then hid their raw data for many years so no one could refute their conclusions? That recently changed as Briffa was forced to reveal his raw data, much to his embarrassment.
You suggest that I attempt to attract “right-wing clients” by using "inflammatory language." Quite the contrary. It is perfectly acceptable, indeed, a Constitutional right, to criticize the President, within certain limits.
I do not accept your premise that calling a liar a liar is inflammatory. Would you also object to calling a convicted felon a felon? Or a slut a slut? The fact is that Obama is touted as being super-smart. He must surely, therefore, know that none of the IPCC predictions have come to pass, and indeed, the IPCC models are hopelessly incorrect. If he is unaware, then he is worse than a liar, he is incompetent. Yet he persists in the face of such knowledge to say the 11 things I pointed out in this article. That is the definition of a liar - he knows one thing to be true and says the opposite.
I am still an engineer to a certain extent, with a degree and great experience in chemical engineering. Engineers deal in facts, and when we get it wrong, people die. I have no patience for liars - especially those in public office. The AGW farce is falling apart rapidly on all fronts, as the oceans refuse to grow hotter, hurricanes refuse to grow more intense or more frequent, the sea levels refuse to rise, the ice caps refuse to shrink, and the global temperatures refuse to increase, to list just a few.
In California there is a global warming law already on the books, AB 32, which will impose such huge changes in the economy that millions of innocent, hard-working, decent people will be forced out of their jobs. We see it happening already, yet the politicians repeat the lie that CO2 is bad and will cause harmful changes.
I do all that I can to spread the word that AB 32 is wrong, and I give speeches to professional societies on these matters. My audiences applaud with great enthusiasm, and shake their heads with amazement that California's politicians could be so easily duped by agenda-driven scientists.
Thank you for the kind words on my writings on the cost of nuclear power, and I wish you the best in averting the expansion of the STNP. A liar is a liar, whether trying to scare the gullible on AGW, or deliberately low-balling the cost estimate of a new nuclear power plant. Best regards.
More on others who state that Obama lies. see
http://www.tokenconservative.com/2009/09/14/the-latest-joe-wilson-controversy/
A quote from the article: "The experience of the states and the feds with Medicaid expenditures shows how illegal aliens benefit from government programs even when such programs are generally restricted to those who are here legally. That experience is likely to be replicated with ObamaCare. . . . However, the administration must in fact know the truth about Medicaid, since various government agencies have detailed what has happened. Moreover, the Democrats in Congress have voted down Republican efforts in committee to have express prohibitions of subsidized government health care for illegal aliens."
In short, Obama lied, and everyone knows it.
And more from the tokenconservative article: "Then there is the President himself. Shortly before he was called a liar, he had said that the claim that “death panels” were part of the health care bill was a “lie, plain and simple.” Without explicitly mentioning her name, he had called Sarah Palin a liar, and people who had been following the back-and-forth over this knew what he was doing. So the use of the word “lie” in the speech was started by Obama himself. Whether or not he is correct about that being a lie is irrelevant, as there are many who believe that Obama, too, was, in fact, lying."
A liar is a liar. Even when he is the Liar-in-Chief.
Post a Comment