Comments on: Why is the Party in Power So Fearful of Copenhagen? (Is a 'death spiral' for climate alarmism ahead?)

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:48:25 +0000

Anyone who thinks China, or any other developing country, will agree to cut CO2 emissions would probably believe in the Tooth Fairy. The developing world will do nothing until their GDP per capita approachs the West – which means 30years at the earliest.
Even if the West cuts emissions it will only be slightly. Overall CO2 emissions will just keep rising – fortunately it has only a slight effect on the climate and that is becoming more and more evident.

By: Bob R Geologist

Bob R Geologist — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:17:00 +0000

I can hardly express my delight in seeing a return to sanity regarding the absurd climate fiasco (AGW) that literally shook the world of science. I still cannot believe the number of academic geologists that were lured into supporting this terribly flawed hypothesis by the prospect of lush research grants to prove its validity. I can only blame the political pressure of fanatic environmentalism on our Government to fund this futile effort to the tune of over $30 billion. An action I hope our voting public will long remember the misguided political party still pushing Waxman / Markey, ostensively to cure a now proven mythical disease.

By: Carbonicus

Carbonicus — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:42:43 +0000

Thanks for a great article.

It is only a matter of time until enough of the the public gets enough exposure to the Mann incident, the IPCC makeup, political, and peer-review process, continually-evolving science showing that CO2 isn’t the driver for warming, the lessons that geology, anthropology, paleoclimatology, and other sciences teach us about the variability of the earth’s climate over millenia, credible cost/benefit analyses of what we get for these policies (e.g., as Chip Knappenberger pointed out using the MAGIC-C model, about 1/10 of a degree Celsius by the year 2100 at an ANNUAL cost of 1-4% of GDP), etc. and the walls propping up this political science hoax will come crashing down. Thanks to the work of Master Resource and many others, this is already occurring. One of the benefits of the internet is that the state teat-sucking mainstream media isn’t the only group putting out information.

And regarding the fate of the Wacky Marxism American Carbon Elimination and Serfdom Act, don’t let your guard down and get complacent. The same machine that would have happily rammed through healthcare ruination in 2 months tried to do the same thing with Wacky Marxism. It was only upon seeing the wrath of the people raining down on House members who voted for the bill that the Senate put the brakes on the debate and vote in the Senate. And EPA has sent their “Endangerment Finding” to the administration, so the administration isn’t making an about face just yet, but will use the sword of damacles of the “Finding” to continue to push for Wacky Marxism.

But alas, let us not forget that the last time the Senate voted on binding CO2 legislation:

a) they voted 97-0….and there were NOT 97 Republicans in the room;
b) there now exists REAMS of science countering the anthropogenic GW catastrophe hoax that didn’t exist then, nor did we have the Mann and many other episodes of scientific fraud and/or plain error which more than cast doubt on the AGW hypothesis.

Keep up the pressure. This game ain’t over. America can’t afford to lose this battle, unless you want America to become, as Anadarko’s CEO put it, “the cleanest 3rd world country in the world”.

By: Cooler Heads Digest 3 September 2009 | GlobalWarming.org

Cooler Heads Digest 3 September 2009 | GlobalWarming.org — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:28:10 +0000

[...] Is a ‘Death Spiral’ for Climate Alarmism Ahead? Kenneth Green, MasterResource.org, 1 September 2009 [...]

By: Climate Alarmism on the Hot Seat: Eric Berger, Houston Chronicle Science Writer, Wants to Know What’s Up — MasterResource

Mon, 07 Sep 2009 06:02:41 +0000

[...] his post at MasterResource last week, Ken Green spoke of a potential “death spiral” for climate [...]

By: Marlo Lewis

Marlo Lewis — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 19:47:00 +0000

Insightful column, Ken. Robert, I think the blather about passing Waxman-Markey to be credible at Copenhagen is more than just another talking point to sell a bad bill. If Congress says no to cap-and-trade this year, then the Euros may have to go it alone under Kyoto II as they did under Kyoto I. The EU picked the 1990 baseline for Kyoto in hopes of gaining competitive advantage vis-a-vis U.S. industry. Instead, because Bush said no, Kyoto became a gun aimed solely at their own feet. Moreover, if the United States again rejects cap-and-trade, there’s no prospect of roping in China and India. There is only so long European industry will put up with a treaty that tilts global trade in favor of the United States, China, and India. If Waxman-Markey fails, the Kyoto process is in deep trouble. I do believe the Obama folks worry about this.

By: Larry Hoffmann

Larry Hoffmann — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:13:05 +0000

With no scientific evidence that CO2 causes global warming, with costs for Cap and Trade approaching the trillions of dollars, with no measurable impact of Cap and Trade on global tenperatures with adverse impact of our quality of life, it appears that we must again follow the money. Somebody is hoping to reap some heavy dividends using alarmism as a tactic.

By: Bob R Geologist

Bob R Geologist — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:35:42 +0000

To almost any geologist, who by training and experience has a better understanding of how our world operates, than all the lawyer / politicians, put together. And that includes that idiot Al Gore’s infantile alarmism. The above drivel about politics and meetings about controlling the weather by controlling a vital gas in our atmosphere is naive beyond belief. CEI has recently reported on the results of 20 years and $30 billion of our Gov’t funded scintific research on CO2′s role in weather control that found not a scrap of “empirical evidence” that man-made CO2 had a significant effect on global climates. That should render moot further plans for carbon control. What is obvious to me is that weather is a geologic process, far beyond man’s puny prowess. We should be studying how to improve man’s adaptability to changing climates. A uniform, sustainable climate, exists only in the fevered brain of inadequately educated, fanatic environmentalists.

By: Travis Monitor

Travis Monitor — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:01:25 +0000

“The hapless public is witnessing the playing out of a classic “good cop” vs. “bad cop” energy drama. The “good cop” is the Obama Administration and its Congressional supporters of a tax-and-charade (cap-and-trade) make-energy-more-expensive scheme. The “bad cop” is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has managed to define the natural, trace gas, carbon dioxide as a legal “pollutant.””

Nah, more like 2 gang members taking turns at a ‘wilding’ initiation.

By: Travis Monitor

Travis Monitor — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:00:05 +0000

“(a) Obama loses any more popular support
(b) Additional data comes in confirming the fact that global
temperatures have stopped rising
(c) People have time to review the bill and the facts”

Correct.

The liberals want to regulate. They dont care what the Chinese will do, they dont care that the regulations dont work. They apparently dont even notice that the models are not matching temp data lately. Dont care. This is a rush to legislate for the sake of getting a chokehold on the energy industry before the “opportunity” is lost. Once you have that power and control, you can figure out how to get the most contributions, what you want to do regulation-wise, etc.

The Obama/Democrat agenda is about taking control NOW, dammit, with extreme legislation before they lose that super-majority and they are forced to actually play nice and win broad consensus on their bills (which will never exist in favor of cap&trade taxes and regulation).