Global warming is a cause embraced by scoundrel politicians and politicized scientists. They all have something to gain, and you have your freedom to loose. The “science” is an illusion and a transparent lie based on doctored data and corrupted computer models.
This is a message for my children and grandchildren on Fathers Day.
Remember when Mary Nichols, Air Resources Board Chairman, came to Nevada City to tall us how important it was to reduce CO2 and Ozone to save the children from global warming. She assured us that AB-32 Cap and Trade funds would be used to reduce CO2 and not as a political slush fund. But, that is not what is happening.
SAN FRANCISCO, June 12 (Reuters Point Carbon) – A California budget conference committee late Monday threw its support behind Governor Jerry Brown’s plan to borrow $500 million raised through the sale of greenhouse gas emission permits to help close the state’s budget deficit.
What happened to all the concern about the children? Where we lied to during the Prop 23 debates? Not really, we were just debating with some our local clueless lefties, who have no idea about how science and government works. Now that global warming has stopped the children are not longer in danger, it is only your wallet that is in danger from the political fraud in Sacramento.
Wow! New York Times finally admits that global warming has paused, even while CO2 emissions continue to rise. While here in California the Public Utilities Commission approves rate hikes to cover the cost of California’s global warming prevention initiatives.
The California Public Utilities Commission approved large rate hikes in electricity prices due in part to high costs associated with the state’s global warming restrictions.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a 12 percent hike in San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (SDG&E) rates and a 10 percent hike in Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) rates. CPUC and power company officials said the rate hikes were necessary to install smart grid technologies, comply with federal and state environmental restrictions, maintain infrastructure, and comply with global warming restrictions.
More Here from Heartland Institute
This is just the first of a long line of future increases, as alternative energy initiatives fail, and the CPUC passes the cost on to consumer and business struggling to remain competitive in global markets. Perhaps even more important cost of electrical energy is the reliability. In the digital age companies cannot deal with brown outs and rotating black outs. California companies are moving manufacturing and data centers to states with reliable fossil and hydro generation capacity. This will have an economic impact on California’s recover from a prolonged recession. Combine that with a refusal to embrace fracking in our extensive shale formations, farther driving up the cost of energy, the cost of bad climate change policy with have a huge economic impact.
When will the idiots in Sacramento learn that global warming has stopped, even though CO2 is increasing like the New York Times, and repair their damaged climate change policies. Not likely! The opportunity extract carbon taxes from consumer is too great. Only a complete economic collapse will bering these idiots up short!
About 10 years ago the cost would be about 25 million per mile to build, with a route 20 miles long the cost would be $500 million dollars to build. Who is going to pay for this folly?
How could the cost ever be recovered? These people are the reason that Nevada County has a reputation for being populated by fruits and nuts.
The Economic Unintended Consequences of PRISM
You may or may not have heard about the UK Guardian and the Washington Post dropped news that the NSA is collecting your data from multiple internet providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.
While they are denying they are supporting these NSA spying efforts, these high tech companies may have to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, or suffer the economic consequences. Thinks about this from a story at Popular Mechanics:
If you lived in Japan, India, Australia, Mexico, or Brazil, and you used Gmail, or synced your photos through iCloud, or chatted via Skype, how would you feel about that? Let’s say you ran a business in those countries that relied upon information services from a U.S. company. Don’t these revelations make using such a service a business liability? In fact, doesn’t this news make it a national security risk for pretty much any other country to use information services from companies based in the U.S.? How should we expect the rest of the world to react?
Here’s a pretty good guess: Other countries will start routing around the U.S. information economy by developing, or even mandating, their own competing services. In 2000, the European Union worked out a series of “Safe Harbor” regulations mandating privacy protection standards for companies storing E.U. citizens’ data on servers outside of the E.U. For U.S. companies, that means applying stronger privacy protection for European data than for our own citizens’ data. And now there is considerable reason to believe that Prism violated our Safe Harbor agreements with the E.U.
How will these NSA fellow travelers react once they start loosing business due to their association with these data mining activities of the Obama administration? I think there are some serious economic unintended consequences for these companies, regardless if they are guilty or not. They are now guilty by association and they are going to have to correct that public image, or accept the consequences.
More Here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/why-the-nsa-prism-program-could-kill-us-tech-companies-15564220?click=pm_latest
There is no significant relationship between human CO2 emissions and temperature!
On June 5, the HadCRUT4 temperature dataset was updated through the end of April 2013.
This most recent update confirms what has become patently obvious to the majority of the sentient public: that the global warming alarmists’ predictions of ‘temperature-hell’ on Earth is without any scientific merit or empirical validation.
The accompanying plot of HadCRUT4 global temperature trends and atmospheric CO2 growth trends makes it unambiguously obvious why billions of taxpayer monies have literally been wasted on enriching the Al Gores and James Hansens of the world:
1. Examining just the last datapoint (the last 5 years ending April 2013) on the chart, it is clear that the largest atmospheric CO2 growth trend (a 215ppm per century growth rate) is directly associated with the lowest global warming (largest cooling) per century trend (a -0.73 degrees per century rate)
2. Obviously, over the last dozen years, or so, the global warming trend has morphed into a global cooling trend…robustly and significantly different than the anti-CO2 IPCC’s projected 2-6°C global warming increase forecast
3. Accelerating, rapid and “runaway, tipping point” global warming does not exist, nor is it even remotely and/or feasibly “imminent”
4. Unequivocal, irrefutable and undeniable “global warming” and related catastrophe scenarios are nothing but the pure b.s. hucksterism pushed by both the anti-CO2 jihad fanatics and the money-loving recipients of government funding (ie, research grants, subsidized green pricing, tax credits & deductions and etc.)
5. The UN’s IPCC and the other immensely taxpayer-funded climate “science” agencies (e.g., NOAA, NASA, UK’s MetOffice, Australia CISRO, etc.), continue to claim that CO2 levels act as the globe’s thermostat, which will allow politicians and bureaucrats to “dial-in” the desired Earth’s temperature… this claim is demonstrably a flagrant, anti-science falsehood, per the actual depicted temperature/CO2 evidence above
More at C3 Headlines HERE.
When will the idiots that you may have elected in Sacramento wake up to the facts, CO2 is increasing, while the temperatures are declining. Where is the connection? You are paying for this failure to recognize reality. How long are you going to put up with this fraud?
Viewpoints: Climate debate is settled; carbon tax is vital
Special to The Bee
Last month, a team of international citizen scientist volunteers published the results of a survey of more than 12,000 peer- reviewed climate science papers published over the past two decades. They found that among climate research that takes a position on what’s causing global warming, 97 percent agree that humans are responsible. Surprisingly, the survey found that the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming had already formed in the early 1990s, and has steadily grown stronger since then.
ooo
Now that the science is settled that humans are causing global warming, we need to settle on a policy to solve the problem. Right now, the damage done by American carbon emissions via climate change is not reflected in the price of the fossil fuel products they come from. We have established a price on carbon emissions in California, but we need the federal government to follow our example.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/05/5471547/climate-debate-is-settled-carbon.html#storylink=cpy
The only trouble is that the study referenced in the Sac Bee article has been soundly ripped to shreds by Dr. Richard Tol who discovered that using Cook’s own data, the consensus number Cook should have published is 98%, rather than 97%.
But,there is even more Dr Tol also noted:
In fact, 34.6% of papers that should have been rated as neutral were in fact rated as non-neutral. Of those misrated papers, 99.4% were rated as endorsements. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the volunteers were not neutral, but tended to find endorsements where there were none. Because rater IDs were not reported, it is not possible to say whether all volunteers are somewhat biased or a few were very biased.
Tol also says this about the 97% scientific consensus claim:
It is a strange claim to make. Consensus or near-consensus is not a scientific argument. Indeed, the heroes in the history of science are those who challenged the prevailing consensus and convincingly demonstrated that everyone thought wrong. Such heroes are even better appreciated if they take on not only the scientific establishment but the worldly and godly authorities as well.
The Bee Article is not about science, it was just more political census crap being spread about by the liberal Sac Bee.
Dr Tol Paper can be found here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bz17rNCpfuDNM1RQWkQtTFpQUmc/edit
Dr. Tol’s conclusions can be found here:
What do you think?
