Another Scam On The Way

Obama creates climate change task force

By Perry Chiaramonte

Published November 01, 2013

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter LinkedISatellite image from October 2012 of superstorm Sandy on the eastern seaboard. Many say the monster storm was a result of climate change while skeptics say that weather patterns give no real indication of changes in the climate.NOAA

Through the stroke of a pen, President Obama on Friday used his executive powers to elevate and take control of climate change policies in an attempt to streamline sustainability initiatives – and potentially skirt legislative oversight and push a federal agenda on states.

The executive order establishes a task force of state and local officials to advise the administration on how to respond to severe storms, wildfires, droughts and other potential impacts of climate change. The task force includes governors of seven states — all Democrats — and the Republican governor of Guam, a U.S. territory. Fourteen mayors and two other local leaders also will serve on the task force.

All but three of those appointed are Democrats. The task force will look at federal money spent on roads, bridges, flood control and other projects. It ultimately will recommend how structures can be made more resilient to the effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels and warming temperatures.

“We're going to need to get prepared.  And that’s why this plan will also protect critical sectors of our economy and prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change that we cannot avoid,” Obama said last June, when he first launched a Climate Action Plan.

“States and cities across the country are already taking it upon themselves to get ready… And we’ll partner with communities seeking help to prepare for droughts and floods, reduce the risk of wildfires, protect the dunes and wetlands that pull double duty as green space and as natural storm barriers.”

The White House added in Friday’s statement that even as the United States acts to curb carbon pollution, officials also need to improve how states and communities respond to extreme weather events like last year’s Superstorm Sandy. Building codes must be updated to address climate impacts and infrastructure needs to be made more resilient.

Critics of the order charge, among other things, that it groups together everything from forest fires to heavy rains as evidence of climate change - despite scientific testimony from both sides of the debate.

“The devil is in the details,” a former senior government official said to FoxNews.com earlier this month, referring to a recently released study that proposed the streamlining between federal and state agencies. “Who gets to decide what sustainability is? Or what its outcome means?”

The chair of the study, Thomas Graedel, a professor of chemical engineering, geology and geophysics, and currently head of the Center for Industrial Ecology at Yale University, said at the time of its release that the study “provides encouragement for parts of the government to get together on projects of concern. There is no formula for how it all works out.”

Officials for the EPA released a statement on Friday afternoon praising the order, saying it will be vital in their attempts to help local-level communities “adapt to a changing climate.”

“To meet our mission of protecting public health and the environment, EPA must help communities adapt to a changing climate,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in the statement. “These Implementation Plans offer a roadmap for agency work to meet that responsibility, while carrying out President Obama’s goal of preparing the country for climate-related challenges.”

But critics say the order has the potential to do much more, including:

•  Hold back money to communities unless they meet new standards on various items and agendas set by the federal government. For example, using new policies that will encourage communities to rebuild to pre-disaster standards instead of stronger ones.

•  A possible mandate to bring sweeping new changes to land use and resource policies.

•  More control and refocus of climate change data and use of it to push a new agenda into every priority of the federal government.

•  Create the need for a new internal organization for coordination efforts during a government sequestration and possible future shutdowns.

The task force includes Govs. Jerry Brown of California, Jay Inslee of Washington and Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, as well as Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn. The panel also includes several big-city mayors, including Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter and Houston Mayor Annise Parker. All three are Democrats.

The task force builds on efforts Obama announced for his Climate Action Plan last June, which include the first-ever limits on climate pollution from new and existing power plants.

The plan is intended to reduce domestic carbon dioxide emissions by 17 percent between 2005 and 2020. The plan also would boost renewable energy production on federal lands, increase efficiency standards and prepare communities to deal with higher temperatures. The 12 hottest years on record all have occurred in the past 15 years.

Climate change skeptics argue there is no proven link between extreme events and global warming. Indeed, Roger Pielke, Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, argued recently that -- heat waves aside -- there is little evidence for an increase in extreme events themselves.

Others find small links between climate change and some specific natural disasters, saying storms like Sandy were worsened by rising sea levels. But for other events, notably droughts and downfalls, there’s no evidence of a global warming effect.

 A Sept. 2012 editorial in the prestigious journal Nature urged caution in drawing any such connection: “Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.”

Gore's Global Warming Fraud Exposed

NATURAL SCIENCE

New study says threat of man-made global warming greatly exaggerated

By Doug McKelway

 Published September 19, 2013

FoxNews.com

A peer-reviewed climate change study released Wednesday by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change finds the threat of man-made global warming to be not only greatly exaggerated but so small as to be “embedded within the background variability of the natural climate system” and not dangerous.

Armed with the new findings, Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee grilled administration environmental policy officials about the economic consequences of its aggressive regulatory crackdown on the fossil fuel industry.

The 1,000 page study was the work of 47 scientists and scholars examining many of the same journals and studies that the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (UNIPCC) examined, producing entirely different conclusions.

 "This volume provides the scientific balance that is missing from the overly alarmist reports from the IPCC, which are highly selective in their review of climate science," the authors write.

The study was done under the auspices of the Heartland Institute, which claims it "has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or governmental agency."

The Heartland Institute’s president, Joseph Bast, said of the study, "The big issue in the global warming debate is how large is the human impact on climate. And this report shows that it is very small, that natural variability, the variability that's caused by natural cycles of the sun and other factors, way outweigh anything the human impact could have."

The report comes in advance of the expected release later this month of a new U.N. report on climate change. Leaked drafts of that report show surface temperature increases have been statistically insignificant for the last 15 years, and that Antarctic sea ice is increasing, not decreasing.

In addition, new satellite measurements of Arctic sea ice show it has increased this year.

At the House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday, Republicans particularly wanted to know what President Obama planned to do to address those fossil fuel workers who've lost their jobs as a result of administration policy. 

 In a major address at Georgetown University last June, Obama promised there would be a special plan for those workers.

"So I would ask either one of you what are the special plans in the president's action plan to help address these people who are losing their jobs, " Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) asked EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz.

"I'm not familiar with the details of those plans, but I am familiar from reading the climate action plan that the president sees this as both a challenge and an economic opportunity," McCarthy replied.

That exchange led to a testy retort by Ralph Hall (R-Tex.). "You got a better answer than I received from Mrs. McCarthy about a year ago before the science committee," Hall told McCarthy. "I may have asked you a question you didn't like and your answer was, ‘I'm not in the business of creating jobs.’”

Committee Democrats, along with McCarthy and Moniz, set out to counter Republican skepticism about the impact of climate change.

"The evidence is overwhelming and the science is clear," said Moniz. "The threat from climate change is real and urgent. The basic science behind climate change is simple. Carbon dioxide makes the earth warmer, and we are admitting more and more of it into the atmosphere."

Moniz added that any stabilization of surface temperatures in recent years was an indication of a "hiatus" of global warming, not an end to global warming.

Told of Moniz's remarks, astrophysicist  Willy Soon, one of the NIPCC's leading scientists, reacted incredulously. "So tell us when is it going to rise again?” he asked. “This is a question that not only me, as a scientist, is asking , but all the lay persons should begin asking."

The Heartland Institute's Bast told Fox News that there are no climate models used by proponents of global warming that predict a lull in warming.

 "Point to the model that predicted this hiatus," he said. "No increase in violent weather , no increase in hurricanes. All of this and we're still supposed to believe the models... models they picked because they supported their political interests, not because they represented good science.
"

Global Warming BU!!S#!T

You Be The Judge
[Adult Language]

Global Warming Controversy

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming
Published September 14, 2011| FoxNews.com

The global warming theory left him out in the cold.

Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation Tuesday, Sept. 13, from the premier physics society in disgust over its officially stated policy that "global warming is occurring."

The official position of the American Physical Society (APS) supports the theory that man's actions have inexorably led to the warming of the planet, through increased emissions of carbon dioxide.

Giaever does not agree -- and put it bluntly and succinctly in the subject line of his email, reprinted at Climate Depot, a website devoted to debunking the theory of man-made climate change.

"I resign from APS," Giaever wrote.

Giaever was cooled to the statement on warming theory by a line claiming that "the evidence is incontrovertible."

"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?" he wrote in an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society.
"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period," his email message said.

A spokesman for the APS confirmed to FoxNews.com that the Nobel Laureate had declined to pay his annual dues in the society and had resigned. He also noted that the society had no plans to revise its statement.

The use of the word "incontrovertible" had already caused debate within the group, so much so that an addendum was added to the statement discussing its use in April, 2010.

"The word 'incontrovertible' ... is rarely used in science because by its very nature, science questions prevailing ideas. The observational data indicate a global surface warming of 0.74 °C (+/- 0.18 °C) since the late 19th century."

Giaever earned his Nobel for his experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in superconductors. He has since become a vocal dissenter from the alleged “consensus” regarding man-made climate fears, Climate Depot reported, noting that he was one of more than 100 co-signer of a 2009 letter to President Obama critical of his position on climate change.

Public perception of climate change has steadily fallen since late 2009. A Rasmussen Reports public opinion poll from August noted that 57 percent of adults believe there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming, up five points from late 2009.

The same study showed that 69 percent of those polled believe it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs. Just just 6 percent felt confident enough to report that such falsification was "not at all likely."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/14/nobel-prize-winning-physicist-resigns-from-top-physics-group-over-global/#ixzz1Y2I9CIN9

Note: It is my opinion as well as others that the so-called global warming issue has been created specifically to extract money from corporations and citizens through the sale of 'carbon credits' thanks to the greed of a minority including former president, Al Gore

Global Warming Scam

Texas Sues to Block Bizarre "Global Warming" EPA Rules

lawsuit says science behind 'global warming' claims is junk, discredited

By Jim Forsyth
Thursday, September 16, 2010

The state of Texas today sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in a federal appeals court in Washington DC, claiming four new regulations imposed by the EPA are based on the 'thoroughly discredited' findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and are 'factually flawed,' 1200 WOAI news reports.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott says the rules are illegal and if imposed, will cost Texans in higher energy costs and tens of thousands of lost jobs.

"The state explained that the IPCC, and therefore the EPA, relied on flawed science to conclude that greenhouse emissions endanger public health and welfare," Abbott said. "Because the Administration predicated its Endangerment Finding on the IPCC's questionable facts, the state is seeking to prevent the EPA's new rules, and the economic harm that will result from these regulations, from being imposed on Texas employers, workers, and enforcement agencies."

The IPCC has become the target of criticism from other climate scientists, with numerous revelations of sloppy research, junk science, and allegations of cronyism, lack of transparency, and attempts to suppress contradictory opinions in the research which contributed to the IPCC's 2007 findings.

"The IPCC had the objectivity, reliability, and propriety of its scientific assessments called into question after a scandal erupted late last year," Abbott said.

One of the rules imposed by the EPA would extend clean air regulations to the tailpipes of personal cars and trucks, but Abbott says the pollutants which the EPA aims to restrict by this rule aren't even found in internal combustion vehicles.

One of the rules, the so called 'Tailoring Rule,' would require that all Texas clean air regulations be 'tailored' to match federal rules by January 2, 2011, or the US EPA will impose it's rules on Texas.


"Today's court filings challenge the EPA's attempts to ignore federal law, impose their federally mandated deadlines and force Texas to spend millions of dollars advancing the Administration’s regulatory agenda," Abbott said.

http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=119078&article=7606198

Selling Smoke

Creating Markets to Sell Things That Don't Exist

The best example I can think of is the insurance industry. Carnelius Vanderbilt had a shipping interest in New York, but also had several competitors. His plan was to either buy out, drive out, or make other ship owners pay to play.

So, he began sabotaging and otherwise causing his competition major problems. He carried out acts of vandalism for many months. But his competitors were tenacious, albeit to the point of surrender.

Then, Carnelius had a bright idea. He would create an insurance policy for shippers which they could buy and live life supposedly free of further harrassment. No need to waste his energy burning and wrecking if they would pay to not be burned and wrecked.

Carnelius' reputation and contacts in government made it smooth sailing for him after that. When he later moved into other industries the competition just moved over, sold out, and otherwise cooperated.

Today we see laws requiring you to buy insurance, but few laws requiring insurance companies to pay up when valid claims are filed. Thanks Carnie!

My point is that we are about to see the largest gang rape of all time in the embodiment of a created market called Carbon Credits. Laws will be passed to require you and me to pay for industrial carbon emissions. Al Gore and his fake global warming scare are softening us up for the coming tariffs. The recent volcanic eruptions in Iceland have set back any reduction in carbon emissions we puny humans can achieve by more than 100 years, but Al soldiers on ...

The Chicago Carbon Exchange will coordinate the transferrance of Carbon Credits from one entity to another, but no carbon will disappear.

This is set to be a $10 Trillion rip off, so players like Goldman Sachs are getting in early to rake off as many coerced dollars as possible. Fanny Mae is currently trying to patent a device to monitor and shut off your electrical outlets in the event you fall behind on payments. Why the hell is a mortgage company in the electrical business? Huge profits from selling something that does not exist, and the ability to foreclose if you get too far behind, that's why.

So, laws will be passed alloting a set amount of 'carbon credits' to corporations and individuals. Then, more laws will be passed requiring companies and individuals to buy 'carbon credits' according to their calculated average usage. The Chicago Carbon Exchange will broker the deals. No emissions will be lessened, no global warming gasses will be depleted, money will change hands for doing absolutely nothing more than keeping track of the money that changes hands.

You wanted Change? You got it ...

Global Warming

Does A Volcano Need Carbon Credits?

For all of you out there in America and across the globe who have fought so hard to tackle the hideous enemy of our planet, namely carbon emissions, that bogus god you worship named "Climate Change" or "Global Warming", there is some really bad news that will be very painful for you to process. But it is my duty to pass it on to you anyway.

Are you sitting down? Okay, here's the bombshell. The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, since it first started spewing volcanic ash a week ago, has, to this point, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet. Not only that, this single act of God has added emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.

I know, I know.... (have a group hug)...it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up til midnight to finish your kid's "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, going on vacation to a city park instead of Yosemite, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs ...well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just the past week.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in the past week has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And, those hundreds of thousands of American jobs you helped move to Asia with expensive emissions demands on businesses... you know, the ones that are creating even more emissions than when they were creating American jobs, well that must seem really worthwhile now.

I'm so sorry. And I do wish that there was some kind of a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is that the brush fire season across the western U.S.A. will start in about two months and those fires will negate your efforts to reduce carbon emissions in our world for the next two years.

So, grab a Coke, OR A COCKTAIL, give the world a hug, and have a nice day!

…AND THINK HOW RICH AL GORE IS GETTING OFF THIS HOAX!

Global Warming ... Really?

Let's Promote Global Warming

Since global warming is rapidly being disproved, and Al Gore along with his science pals may be on their way to prison for fraud, we here in the northern climes have decided that maybe it would be to our benefit to actually warm things up a bit. After all, warmer temperatures would increase the growing season and make property values rise. That's a huge benefit, right?

While Al and friends would have us fear global warming as being a precursor to the death of us all, a more realistic view would be to examine the health and welfare benefits of it. While only Al and friends would profit from the fear of a warmer globe, all the rest of us would profit from actual global warming.

Here's how Al plans to profit from the global warming scam. He sets up a corporation which sells "Carbon Credits" or "Carbon Offsets". If you are a big company with a big "Carbon Footprint" then you can pay Al to offset your big footprint by transferring some amount of your emissions to a company that has a small amount of emissions. In other words he takes your money and makes a note on a file in his computer. Nothing changes, except Al gets richer.

Here's a better idea. Send me $1,000 and I will plant a couple trees in your name. At least a tree or two will be out there working to clean up the air.

Have you heard that the US Government has actually (I am not kidding) designated CO2 as a poison gas! Yes, CO2 is the stuff you breathe out, the stuff trees absorb and convert to Oxygen, which is the stuff we breathe in. CO2 is necessary for plant growth, but the wizards in Washington have decided it will kill you, eventually. So, to summarize, eliminating CO2 would kill the plants, which in turn would kill us.

Another crack-pot scare du jour is that melting ice caps will drown us all. Really! Most of the ice at the polar caps is floating. Ice which is floating will not raise the water level when melted. Otherwise your iced tea would run over. The ice that is not floating amounts to less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the water on the planet. If it all melted we might see a rise of an inch or two. We routinely see much more flooding from rain than melting ice caps could ever produce. Maybe Al and Pals should find a way to make it stop raining!

So, bring on the global warming! Turn Anchorage into a tropical paradise and watch the economy grow to historic proportions!