A measured response to the Progressive Attorney's General climate change litigation abuses6/18/2016 AG’s striking back at #ExxonKnew and #RICO20 say – “we can come after climate alarmists for fraud, too”
"If Democratic attorneys general can pursue climate change skeptics for fraud, then also at risk of prosecution are climate alarmists whose predictions of global doom have failed to materialize. The “cuts both ways” argument was among those raised by 13 Republican attorneys general in a letter urging their Democratic counterparts to stop using their law enforcement power against fossil fuel companies and others that challenge the climate change catastrophe narrative." This clearly delineates these AG's as religious adherents to a malignant secular religion, who will brook no apostasy, heretics, or unbelievers. Your ideas will conform or you will be sanctioned, today, tomorrow, re-educated, and the day after murdered. This path is well trod, and clear. Below the fold is the full text of the letter:
Comments
Dr. Tim Ball Saddles up and rides his charger through the climate alarm religion's heartland5/30/2016 A Major Malaise of Climatology is Pervasive in Science
This is an excellent piece, you should read the whole thing. An Overheated Climate Alarm
. . . there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Matthew 13:42. The climate alarmists, it's always wailing, gnashing of teeth, sack cloth, and ashes, and above all the Earth as a furnace of fire. I am usually exhausted after reading anything from these madmen racing about with their hair on fire. Lomborg, as usual, drops the boom. "The Obama administration released a new report this week that paints a stark picture of how climate change will affect human health. Higher temperatures, we’re told, will be deadly—killing “thousands to tens of thousands” of Americans. The report is subtitled “A Scientific Assessment,” presumably to underscore its reliability. But the report reads as a political sledgehammer that hypes the bad and skips over the good. It also ignores inconvenient evidence—like the fact that cold kills many more people than heat." But science is not the point of this the President's missive, control is the point, control of you, and your money. "Consider a rigorous study published last year in the journal Lancet that examined temperature-related mortality around the globe. The researchers looked at data on more than 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 areas: cold countries like Canada and Sweden, temperate nations like Spain, South Korea and Australia, and subtropical and tropical ones like Brazil and Thailand. The Lancet researchers found that about 0.5%—half a percent—of all deaths are associated with heat, not only from acute problems like heat stroke, but also increased mortality from cardiac events and dehydration. But more than 7% of deaths are related to cold—counting hypothermia, as well as increased blood pressure and risk of heart attack that results when the body restricts blood flow in response to frigid temperatures. In the U.S. about 9,000 people die from heat each year but 144,000 die from cold." Give them 5 minutes and they will be arguing it will cause cold, and that will kill as well. It is an unfalsifiable theory, it causes everything, it is responsible for everything. A Comically long "Complete" List Of Things Supposedly Caused By Global Warming. Geez, after that I need a nap. I think the global alarmist have been busy! "In pushing too hard for the case that global warming is universally bad for everything, the administration’s report undermines the reasonable case for climate action. Focusing on only the bad side of the ledger destroys academic and political credibility. Although there is a robust intellectual debate on heat and cold deaths, there is a much simpler way to gauge whether people in the U.S. consider higher temperatures preferable: Consider where they move. Migration patterns show people heading for warm states like Texas and Florida, not snowy Minnesota and Michigan. That’s the smart move. A 2009 paper in the Review of Economics and Statistics estimates that because people seek out warmth, slightly more die from the heat, but many fewer die from the cold. In total, the actions of these sun-seekers avert 4,600 deaths in the U.S. each year. You won’t be surprised to learn that the study wasn’t mentioned in the administration’s half-baked report." We discussed this issue this past week! Read the whole article, and then buy a few of Lomborg's books, they are very well worth a read (Mr. Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, is the author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist” (Cambridge Press, 2001) and “Cool It” ( Knopf, 2007)). Renewables are useless: The Evidence is Overwhelming
. . . Climate Pope goes ballistic! The Climate Pope: "I really believe that years from now, this convening by attorney general Eric Schneiderman and his colleagues today, may well be looked back upon as a real turning point, in the effort to hold to account those commercial interests that have been, according to the best available evidence, deceiving the American people, communicating in a fraudulent way, both about the reality of the climate crisis and the dangers it poses to all of us, and committing fraud in their communications about the viability of renewable energy and efficiency, and energy storage, that together are posing this great competitive challenge to the long reliance on carbon based fuels." Of course he believes, it's a religion. And this is but one of its inquisitions. I wonder who will wear the Torquemada Red? So, what is the real status of renewable in the real world, the one outside of Al Gore fervent imagination? James Hansen, Kerry Emanuel, Ken Caldera and Tom Wigley, alarmist climate scientist all, said this: "To solve the climate problem, policy must be based on facts and not on prejudice. The climate system cares about greenhouse gas emissions – not about whether energy comes from renewable power or abundant nuclear power. Some have argued that it is feasible to meet all of our energy needs with renewables. The 100% renewable scenarios downplay or ignore the intermittency issue by making unrealistic technical assumptions, and can contain high levels of biomass and hydroelectric power at the expense of true sustainability. Large amounts of nuclear power would make it much easier for solar and wind to close the energy gap." Imprison them!!! Google engineers have this to say: "At the start of RE<C, we had shared the attitude of many stalwart environmentalists: We felt that with steady improvements to today’s renewable energy technologies, our society could stave off catastrophic climate change. We now know that to be a false hope … Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach." There is more, so go read the article. What's the problem? "The key problem appears to be that the cost of manufacturing the components of the renewable power facilities is far too close to the total recoverable energy – the facilities never, or just barely, produce enough energy to balance the budget of what was consumed in their construction. This leads to a runaway cycle of constructing more and more renewable plants simply to produce the energy required to manufacture and maintain renewable energy plants – an obvious practical absurdity." The is the same problem with always see with the green energy crowd. Ethanol is a foolish "alternative" energy source. Each gallon of ethanol produced requires input of so much fossil fuels that it eliminates any savings. It is also a more problematic polluter than gasoline. Yet we use it because the green lobby was foolish enough to be coopted by the agricultural lobby. Now the subsidies, and fuel problems are nearly impossible to eliminate. First thing we should do is ignore the Climate Pope and his inane ideas, and "solutions." If we decide, outside of the climate nonsense, that we need to move away from carbon fuels, there are valuable alternatives. This should happen through the free market, without the intervention of politicians, government, or that old fool, Al Gore. Hat tip: Bird Dog over at Thursday morning links - Maggie's Farm Punishing Climate-Change Skeptics
. . . is all about controlling you, your thoughts, and your actions. "Galileo Galilei was tried in 1633 for spreading the heretical view that the Earth orbits the sun, convicted by the Roman Catholic Inquisition, and remained under house arrest until his death. Today’s inquisitors seek their quarry’s imprisonment and financial ruin. As the scientific case for a climate-change catastrophe wanes, proponents of big-ticket climate policies are increasingly focused on punishing dissent from an asserted “consensus” view that the only way to address global warming is to restructure society—how it harnesses and uses energy. That we might muddle through a couple degrees’ of global warming over decades or even centuries, without any major disruption, is the new heresy and must be suppressed." Welcome to the 15th century, please check your civil liberties at the door. If the study of climate were a science this would be outrageous, but it is no more science than is the study of astrology, tarot card reading, or palmistry. "The Climate Inquisition began with Michael Mann’s 2012 lawsuit against critics of his “hockey stick” research—a holy text to climate alarmists. The suggestion that Prof. Mann’s famous diagram showing rapid recent warming was an artifact of his statistical methods, rather than an accurate representation of historical reality, was too much for the Penn State climatologist and his acolytes to bear." The reality of this is delicious. Mann published the Hockey stick graph, which was quickly held up as proof of catastrophic anthropomorphic climate change (CACC). But Mann did not publish any of the data, or algorithms, or other internals necessary to verify this new data, nor would he release the data. It seems he and others were afraid that others would subject the data to scrutiny, which might disprove their position, and they couldn't have that, so they simply did not release the data. But, hung on his own petard, the data was found by a statistician. It was apparently inadvertently published. The data, according to the statistician, did not support the claim, and here we are, with Mann incensed that someone would presume to contradict him, with his own data! Mr. Mann’s lawsuit divided climate scientists—many of whom recognized that it threatened vital scientific debate—but the climate Inquisition was only getting started. The past year has witnessed even more heavy-handed attempts to enforce alarmist doctrine and stamp out dissent. Assuming the mantle of Grand Inquisitor is Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.). Last spring he called on the Justice Department to bring charges against those behind a “coordinated strategy” to spread heterodox views on global warming, including the energy industry, trade associations, “conservative policy institutes” and scientists. Mr. Whitehouse, a former prosecutor, identified as a legal basis for charges that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, the federal statute enacted to take down mafia organizations and drug cartels." And scientists, and statisticians who have the temerity to point out that some climate science data is bupkis. I am old enough to remember when the point of science was experimentation, and new discoveries. Once something new was discovered the scientists published their findings so others could vet their work, and then continue with further research, and experimentation. It was all in the hopes of finding new unknown scientific truths, and the system worked cooperatively, and competitively. But today with the pseudoscience of climate change, all of that is off the table. Mann, and his cronies work in secret, and when they "discover" something new, they issue an edict, which is to inform you what to believe. This is, of course, not science, this is religion. Religion is, after all, any integrated world view, whether whole or partial, which relies in significant portion on faith or belief. This, comically, brings the discussion full circle, with the climate alarmist taking the role of the Catholic church. Delicious! Read the rest of the article it is worth your time. Climate change's time on this earth is limited. Pseudoscience always succumbs to the ravages of rational thought eventually, and these apocalyptic religions all collapse the same way. The book, When Prophecy Fails can help one understand this religious experience, and the collapse of the institution. "When Prophecy Fails [1956] is a classic text in social psychology authored by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken, and Stanley Schachter. It chronicles the experience of a UFO cult that believed the end of the world was at hand. In effect, it is a social and psychological study of a modern group that predicted the destruction of the world, and the adjustments made when the prediction failed to materialize." Necessary book to understand the world we live in today. |
AuthorMaddog Categories
All
|