Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The Great Global Warming Sell-out is near
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Or at least that is what the Washington Times is claiming the Bush administration is poised to do:
"This is an attempt to move the administration and the party closer to the center on global warming. With these steps, it is hoped that the debate over this is over, and it is time to do something," said an administration source close to the White House who is familiar with the planning and who said to expect an announcement this week.
Good grief, just when the debate is actually beginning, these yahoos are ready to throw in the towel and commit this nation to something which may, in fact, be the biggest scam ever foisted upon the world.
Still, Republican members of Congress who were briefed last week let top administration officials know that they think the White House is making a mistake, according to congressional sources and others familiar with the discussions. Opponents said Mr. Bush could be setting off runaway legislation, particularly with Democrats in control of Congress.
With global temps cooling for the last 10 years, calculations, models and conclusions being scientifically called into question and more and more scientists claiming there is no consensus on AGW, the Republican administration is ready to capitulate in order, it seems, to curry favor with the rest of the world - to go along to get along.

What a total lack of leadership this displays.

Not that it matters I suppose given the 3 presidential candidates. It will just move the clock forward a couple of years, since Obama, Clinton and McCain have already indicated their willingness to buy into the voodoo science of AGW and spend trillions of your dollars to "stop" it's effects.
_________

Linked by The Thunder Run - Thanks!
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Can you say "Harriet Ellan Miers" ?
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
How is congress going to regulate the dominant green house gas, water vapor?

This is absolutely absurd.
 
Written By: Arch
URL: http://
With these steps, it is hoped that the debate over this is over, and it is time to do something
Yes! WE! MUST! DO! SOMETHING!

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
South Park needs to revamp their song...

Blame China
 
Written By: Jay
URL: http://
Someone explain to me again why the Two Party system is the way to go.
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
Global temps have not been cooling the last ten years. It spiked in 1998, went back down in 1999, and have been generally rising since. 1998 was just an abnormal spike, but the trend is consistently upward (there are over the last century up and down spikes, the trend line is clear though). No matter how you try to spin it, the evidence is strong that global warming is real, ice is disappearing, and most scientists believe we need to do something. You can cherry pick opposing views and pretend they are more convincing than they are, but ultimately those who have to make the decisions can’t live in spin world, they have to deal with reality. Whether or not these policies make sense is a legitimate question — focus there, rather than trying to make the argument that global warming isn’t real — that argument has already lost.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Erb, apparently you spent this past winter in the tropics. You are also an idiot.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Boris:
the trend line is clear though
Yeah, it sure is.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Then there is this video (scroll to the bottom of the post), purportedly produced by Greenpeace, which shows another sort of trend line.

That’s a whole new level of dementia.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Erb, apparently you spent this past winter in the tropics. You are also an idiot.


Grimshaw, you are ignorant. First, a cold winter does not mean global warming isn’t happening any more than a hot summer mean it is. Here is the global trend line for the last century. Notice anything? Yup, the temperatures are going up. Note how 1998 was a huge spike upward, followed by one more in line with the trend, and continued movement upward. Yet McQ wrongly claimed we’d been cooling since 1998 — clearly that is not the case.

Here the temps
(below the most recent years):

1996 -14.39
1997 -14.41
1998- 14.72
1999 -14.46
2000 - 14.42
2001 —14.57
2002 -14.69
2003 -14.67
2004 -14.60
2005 -14.76
2006 -14.66
2007 -14.73

Note the spike in 1998, then resumption of the basic trend? Also, do you deny the ice melt?

Global warming is without a doubt happening. When I teach about critical review of data, I use global warming as an example (including studies and arguments put in Q & O) of how people with a bias can self-select certain things and convince themselves that only an idiot would think differently. Then you end up thinking that the vast majority of scientists, and now President Bush are somehow all obviously wrong about something, you can’t understand how they cannot see what seems so clear to you! It’s because you are viewing this with such a warped, biased lens that you have lost the capacity for objective, critical thought.

It may even be intentional, for McQ to say something as patently absurd and easy to refute as "we’ve had global coolilng since 1998, suggests volition.

So go on in your nice little conspiracy theory mentality — you know the truth, everyone else is deluded (eyes rolling). I’ll deal with reality, and the reality is that global warming is real, and there is a good chance humans are causing some of it, but a lot of dispute over that part. Then we can talk policy. If you stick with your denier mentality, you’ll lose the policy debate because you won’t make the good arguments about the danger of government over-regulation; instead, you’ll make the denier argument that people will laugh off. So perhaps you should worry more about the unintended negative consequences of regulation, as well as the uncertainties. Because otherwise, you’ll certainly be able to reinforce each others’ biases, and you’ll give me fodder to demonstrate how a bias blinds some people to reality, but you’ll lose the political fight completely.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
And note that ICECAP is a year old this month, and has seen impressive gains in readership:
This month marks the first anniversary for Icecap. We have been growing steadily, almost exponentially. We had 500,000 hits in 2007 and 2,000,000 already in 2008.
I thought that I saw a broad counterforce developing over the last year, and the success of ICECAP is one sign of it. All sorts of Warmist nonsense has already been debunked, including the "Hockey Stick" and the idea that the ’90s had most of the hot years of the 20th Century (the claim was something like 7 of the warmest 10 years). But with Warming becoming the main shrine of the Environmentalist religion (and I’m not making a metaphor there, but calling it exactly what it is) the nonsense that has been dispelled will never be disincorporated from the belief structure of the faithfull.

Though the shelling (switching now to metaphor) is beginning to be heard in the bunker.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
And Boris left out some of the earlier temperatures, like the first one in that record, from,

1880 - 13.88

Or, showing that over the span of 128 years the global temperature has increased by less than a degree C.

And in 1880 the world was just emerging from the Little Ice Age.

Again, see the Bob Carter presentations for how the Warmists have misrepresented temperature trends.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Are erb’s temps the same temps that Bob Carter showed to be completely merit less because of the way they were collected?

Scott - did you watch the Carter video’s? Did you? Or have you already made up your mind?
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Carter first shows that there is absolutely nothing unusual, from the point of view of this entire interglacial period (i.e., app. the last 10,000 years and called the Holocene), about the temperature trends of the past century.

He shows that temperatures in the Holocene are "homeostatic," or self-regulating, that the only thing certain is that when there is some warming it will be followed by cooling, which is a lot harder to endure than the warming (Cf. the settlement of Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period).

His secondary remarks about the way that temperature stations are situated suggests a bias toward the high side caused by poor placement.

Richard Lindzen, at MIT, has been saying much the same thing all along, i.e., What’s the Big Deal? You have a slight warming trend and flimsy correlations, weak computer models, and hysteria — no reason to shut down human progress.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Scott - did you watch the Carter video’s? Did you? Or have you already made up your mind?
I haven’t even seen Gore’s movie yet! I find videos to be mostly propagandistic, including Gores, so I avoid them. They appeal emotionally and rely on half truths, whether from the right or left. I focus on reading a variety of perspectives where I can check sources and compare. I’ve concluded: a) the evidence is very strong that global warming is real; b) there is mixed evidence about the impact of humans on global warming, though the large increase in C02 in recent years is very likely a partial cause; and c) the knee jerk response to fight this through government regulation is dubious. There are unintended consequences of increased regulation, and a lot of uncertainties. One reason I’m so frustrated by the "denier" mentality is that it essentially avoids the real policy problems with regulation. It turns into a dichotomy: you either believe in global warming, and thus embrace regulations, or you reject the idea of global warming or the chance of humans being at least partially a cause. If that dichotomy defines the debate, the deniers have already lost. Not only are most scientists against them, but McCain, Bush, Obama, Clinton, and most of the industrialized world has decided against them. Unless you create an option whereby one can believe global warming likely real and that humans quite likely play a part, but nonetheless do not turn to intensive regulation as the main response, then the game is already over.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Boris:
I haven’t even seen Gore’s movie yet! I find videos to be mostly propagandistic, including Gores, so I avoid them. They appeal emotionally and rely on half truths,
Well, that’s strange, Boris. For starters, if you haven’t seen Gore’s movie, how do you find it "propagandistic?" (Just by the word of mouth here at QandO?)

Further, if you "find videos to be mostly propagandistic," then I assume that you would go through some sort of transformation between your live lectures and their replay on video. When you speak live it’s scholarship, but on replay it’s propaganda? (This is, of course, a theoretical point, since everyone here knows what you do and how you do it.)

Anyway, Bob Carter isn’t making a video, he’s giving a presentation. Someone made a video of it. He’s a geologist who has published more papers in scientific journals than you could even dream of publishing in your field. He’s not propagandizing, he’s debunking propaganda, i.e., the stuff that you read every day about global warming, in this case.

He is neither the first nor the last real, honest to God scientist, with bona fides up the wazoo, who takes the supposed "consensus" apart.

The point at which the supposed "consensus" can no longer be repainted (and the paint is getting pretty thin with the full-scale resort to attacking skeptics) will be the point at which the Environmental religionists will move on to the next shrine (or perhaps back to rainforests, or acid rain).

 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
When I teach about critical review of data, I use global warming as an example (including studies and arguments put in Q & O) of how people with a bias can self-select certain things and convince themselves that only an idiot would think differently.
Perhaps, you could use the Global Cooling advocacy of the 1970’s as your next example of how to review critical data and how only via bias or idiocy were people able to convince themselves that the meteorological community’s consensus interpretation of the data was not correct.

Personally, I am skeptical of surface temperature trends that do not match that of the troposphere. But, even accepting this current warming of the surface, there is hardly anything unique about current CO2 levels or surface temperatures today relative to human or geologic history. Believe it or not, objective scientific thought can lead one to a different conclusion than the one that you have. For example, I did my undergraduate study at UAH. Dr. John Christy of my alma mater has differing ideas than you on AGW. His opinions are based upon his scientific analysis, not biases or idiocy. Stating that one must be an idiot to believe differently is the most arrogant statement I have ever read.
 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
Whoops! There’s the final nail in the "Global Warming Causes More and More Ferocious Hurricanes" ruse.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
"I find videos to be mostly propagandistic, including Gores, so I avoid them"

"I focus on reading a variety of perspectives where I can check sources and compare"


LOL.



 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Boris:
If that dichotomy defines the debate, the deniers have already lost. Not only are most scientists against them, but McCain, Bush, Obama, Clinton, and most of the industrialized world has decided against them.
Once Warmists result to calling skeptics "deniers" and by implication try to put them into the category of Holocaust deniers, the Warmists have already lost, Boris.

Once it becomes nothing but public relations, as it clearly has already, global warming becomes nothing more than another environmentalist fad.

Michael Crichton has spoken magnificently on the point of how "global warming" comes on the heels of a whole string of manufactured crises, only this time it has a religious experience attached to it.

But maybe you think that the violence implied in this ghastly video (at the bottom of the post) will succeed where your pale faith has failed.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Stating that one must be an idiot to believe differently is the most arrogant statement I have ever read.
Exactly my point — that was reference to Grimshaw calling me an idiot because I argued that it was reasonable that many believe global warming is real and some are caused by humans.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
taken from the link in
Whoops! There’s the final nail in the "Global Warming Causes More and More Ferocious Hurricanes" ruse.
Emanuel’s work uses a new method of computer modeling that did a reasonable job of simulating past hurricane fluctuations. He, therefore, believes the models may have predictive value for future activity
Hey, wait! You mean this Emanuel guy used past data to see if his model could reasonably simulate known past results? What a concept!

Erb, notify ’most scientists’ their modelling programs need to be able to do this before they’ll convince most thinking people their models for the climatic future aren’t useless crap.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
But maybe you think that the violence implied in this ghastly video (at the bottom of the post) will succeed where your pale faith has failed.
fear not Martin, the little bugger in the video’s troops will probably be aborted before they can become a problem.

As for him, I wonder if he’s willing to give up his XBOX 360?
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
looker:
Erb, notify ’most scientists’ their modelling programs need to be able to do this before they’ll convince most thinking people their models for the climatic future aren’t useless crap.
I guess my hurried reading caused me to miss Boris offering one of his favorite cites: "most scientists." Sometimes, he goes a bit looser and cites "most scholars," you know, when it’s a matter of history or political theory.

Both are derivative of the founding cite of the modern academic scholar: "They" of the well-known authority "They say."
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
As for him, I wonder if he’s willing to give up his XBOX 360?
I know I’m not! I enjoy sniping headshots on Gears of War too much. Let the planet fry!
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Erb, notify ’most scientists’ their modelling programs need to be able to do this before they’ll convince most thinking people their models for the climatic future aren’t useless crap.
McCain, Obama, Clinton, Bush, most world leaders and world media seem convinced that global warming is real, and something needs to be done. So it seems the scientists have convinced the people who matter. The fact others are unconvinced probably isn’t relevant to the real issue.

Alas, I disagree with the view that massive regulations are the best response, but the way the issue has been debated, it seems one has to be a denier in order to have that view, and politically, the deniers have already lost.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
McCain, Obama, Clinton, Bush, most world leaders and world media seem convinced that global warming is real, and something needs to be done.
In other words, it’s simply a propaganda war. And no one convinced the media, it’s the reverse, and they did it because it constitutes a newsworthy ’crisis’ they can generate endless circulation with.
I know I’m not! I enjoy sniping headshots on Gears of War too much. Let the planet fry!
I like the fact that they allowed you to randomly ’spray and pray’ over barriers without sticking your head up to do it. Not very effective, but it makes ya feel good!
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Boris:
it seems one has to be a denier in order to have that view, and politically, the deniers have already lost.
Said like a true loser.

The fact is that the skeptics are now winning the debate, and impressively so, because they bring both hard science and perspective to it, as opposed to the bad data, false correlations, computer models that don’t work and mislead, and aggressive propaganda that the Warmists offer.

And the surest sign that the Warmists know they’ve been backed into a corner is when they start calling skeptics "deniers."
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
In other words, it’s simply a propaganda war.
It’s not even that any more. Bush, McCain, Obama, Clinton, all are on the same page basically on this issue, as are most world leaders. It’s not even a war, the debate about the "if" is over, now the debate has moved on to "what do we do."
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
now the debate has moved on to "what do we do."
And since the rational for AGW was crap, I fully expect ’what do we do’ will also be crap since I don’t believe ’we’ can do a damn thing other than needlessly savage our economy.

But...I like to say when you don’t really know where you’re going, it doesn’t much matter how you get there.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Boris:
Bush, McCain, Obama, Clinton, all are on the same page basically on this issue,
All on the same page?

Well, Obama and Clinton might be on the same page. And Bush might be on some sort of page. And McCain another.

But the bottom line here is that given enough time, by which I mean a few more years, global warming will become the biggest joke since New Coke, and those foolish enough to stake their reputations on it will look exactly like that: fools.

So, "what do we do" is in fairly short order going to become "how can we change the subject."

And change the subject they will. If the Warmists are lucky, sane people will have wasted enough time debunking this nonsense and won’t want to waste more energy on it. And it will go up there on the wall with Piltdown Man in the museum of incredible human stupidity in the name of science.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
that was reference to Grimshaw calling me an idiot because I argued that it was reasonable that many believe global warming is real and some are caused by humans.
Erb - I called you an idiot because every time this topic is mentioned here, you pop up and toss out the same tired lines to an audience that you know is largely if not completely opposed to what you’re saying. That’s what an idiot would do. That’s not ad hominem, it’s logical. We don’t care what you think. We don’t care. Normally I don’t bother replying to your silliness because it’s a waste of time but I’m feeling saucy today.

Furthermore, your arguments are completely unpersuasive. Why anyone should consider what you have to say on this topic as having merit is beyond me. Just because you’ve read some journals and spoken with some hard science friends doesn’t mean anything. That any sort of coalition of people all think the same way is also beside the point.

Those of us who are skeptics (whom you hyperbolically call ’deniers’) don’t believe there is remotely close to enough evidence to take any significant action, especially about one of the most complex systems of which we are aware.

History has repeated itself over and over again with respect to humans drawing overwrought and false conclusions about any number of things. If history is any guide it’s that many humans abandon rationality (if they ever had it) and panic at a mere whiff of change.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
No matter how you try to spin it, the evidence is strong that global warming is real, ice is disappearing, and most scientists believe we need to do something. You can cherry pick opposing views and pretend they are more convincing than they are, but ultimately those who have to make the decisions can’t live in spin world, they have to deal with reality.
You’re a hoot, dude! Yeah, ice is disappearing — from my cup. It’s also thickening in other places. So I guess you’re cherry-picking as well. Hey everyone, it’s harvest time!
Not only are most scientists against them, but McCain, Bush, Obama, Clinton, and most of the industrialized world has decided against them.
Appeal to authority — check. Another hallmark of the doomsayers. As a card-carrying elitist, you couldn’t oppose these people even if you had your doubts. So this means little.
McCain, Obama, Clinton, Bush, most world leaders and world media seem convinced that global warming is real, and something needs to be done. So it seems the scientists have convinced the people who matter. The fact others are unconvinced probably isn’t relevant to the real issue.
Wow, more of the same. The fact that our elite lords have decided that "something needs to be done" is not surprising considering it involves increased power and control over the lives of citizens using coercion fueled by fear. This is part and parcel of our legislative system as it operates today. Socialism by increments is still socialism. It should be duly noted that you are resigned to comply based on the "importance" of the decision-makers. Normally, they are the gang who can’t shoot straight. Now they’re sages and visionaries. So bow to your makers.
there is a good chance humans are causing some of it, but a lot of dispute over that part. Then we can talk policy.
No, sorry, we can’t. See, your friends have already made the jump to humans are THE major cause. Or at least they act like it with their policy proposals. They jumping into this as if people are spontaneously combusting all over the world. And you defend them because, well, they’re on the right side. Never mind that they were wrong in the 70s, wrong in the 50s, wrong in the 30s, and wrong in the 1890s.

It’s funny that we have a sputtering economy with the lingering babyboomer bomb down the road a piece, but everyone’s ready to save the planet from certain imminent, massive not-at-all-subtle destruction. Folks are already starving from the increased food costs associated with biofuels, not long ago the "savior" we’ve all been waiting for. Oops. Oh for one. Credibility waning. At least we can feel good about driving our Pious.

Let me know how it all works out.
 
Written By: rob
URL: http://
Grimshaw:
Just because you’ve read some journals and spoken with some hard science friends doesn’t mean anything.
It’s doubtful that he’s done that much. Maybe he read about AGW in an issue of Discovery or caught an episode of something on the National Geographic Channel.

Boris is very lazy. Too lazy to bother even thinking about something before he discusses it. That’s why you get the canned repetitions, over and over again. Along with those detailed "most scientists" and "most scholars" cites.

Besides, Boris is too busy chatting to pay any real attention to anything.

This is an annoying person, not an intelligent one.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Appeal to authority — check.
No, simply a statement of fact. The debate about "if" this is happening is essentially over. Remember, I’m arguing against massive regulations, and noting that by making it an argument about if global warming is happening, you’re basically conceding the policy to the other side. It’s a self-defeating tactic.

Grimshaw, you can call people ’idiots’ for stating opinions different than yours, but you’re not making sense. I have no problem with the fact you haven’t been convinced. But you have to accept that other people have been convinced, including McCain, Bush, Obama and Clinton — and much of the population. That’s OK. If you actually read what I wrote my argument is not about global warming as much as how by focusing on the "if" question you lose the capacity to actually make a cogent argument about policiy that can even convince those who disagree with you on the "if" question. Because, whether you agree or not, reasonable people can disagree with you.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Grimshaw, you can call people ’idiots’ for stating opinions different than yours...
That’s not what I said.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
No, simply a statement of fact. The debate about "if" this is happening is essentially over.
The debate has really just started Scott. Any debate needs two sides, and this one is finally being covered from all angles.
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Boris:
The debate about "if" this is happening is essentially over.
The debate about whether AGW was happening or not did not even begin until recently. Critics were derided and ignored. The IPCC was politicized and dissenters airbrushed out of the reports. The debate still hasn’t "taken place" in any sense of a real exchange, because by the time the skeptics realized that good science wasn’t the objective of the Warmist movement, and mounted a counteroffensive, the Warmists had taken to calling them names. Too much research money, too much prestige, and too much political commitment were at risk to allow a real debate.

But given that there are many top flight scientists who still hold their scientific integrity above mob bullying, the inevitable movement toward authentic scientific inquiry is now underway. The skeptics enjoy the benefit of having a coherent perspective on their side, and you see things now like the superp hurricane expert William Gray being vindicated in his rejection of the attempt to force the "global warming is causing more and worse hurricanes" theory onto the scientific community, much less the public.

AGW science has been Iron Curtain science, but now the Berlin Wall is coming down.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
This is another in a long line of political missteps for the Bush Administration. They are are probably the most politically inept group to inhabit the White House in my life time. As one of hundreds of examples, they publicly stated that the inclusion of the "16 words" about African uranium in the State of the Union speech had been a mistake. After all the dust had cleared and all the facts had been investigated, however, the statement proved to be accurate and truthful. They needlessly shot themselves in the foot by giving their political enemies the fodder of an apparent admission of malfeasance.

Now, just as we are starting to see stories creeping into the main stream media that poke holes in AGW theory (as usual, lagging behind the blogosphere), Bush wants to throw in the towel. I am starting to agree with his critics that he is an idiot. I understand that the Bush Admin’s apparent rationale is that they don’t want AGW fanatics to use the Endangered Species Act and the EPA, etc. to impose haphazard regulation on carbon emissions. They correctly point out that that approach will lead to a complex morass of regulation that would be worse than one regulatory scheme imposed by Congress. However, any regulatory scheme will impose a needless cost on our economy for which we will receive no benefit.

Instead of conceding the point to AGW fanatics, Bush should be a real leader and tell the truth. AGW is a theory with more holes than swiss cheese and the science underlying AGW is beginning to fall apart. Hurricanes aren’t stronger or more frequent, the oceans aren’t warming, (contrary to Erb’s assertion) there has been no statistically significant warming since 1998, Greenland’s ice sheet is not melting faster than in the past, etc. etc.

 
Written By: jt007
URL: http://
AGW science has been Iron Curtain science, but now the Berlin Wall is coming down.
That’s because prior to this, the guys on the other side of the wall were doing a lot of bullhorn speechifying and prancing about, working themselves up to conviction in their beliefs.

Now they’ve gotten round to the ’we’re gonna pass a law’ stage the formerly passive skeptics are more motivated to aim a fire hose at their rally to cause a little cooling.
The debate about "if" this is happening is essentially over
Why, because you declare it so?

It’s people like you, smugly assuring us you’re against regulation, that will happily, and I do mean happily, let it take place because to paraphrase Jack Nicholson’s character ’deep down inside, you WANT it to be true’.
You’re not upset about regulation because it will help your favorite meme of America in Decline come to pass.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
jt007:
This is another in a long line of political missteps for the Bush Administration. They are are probably the most politically inept group to inhabit the White House in my life time.
And the thing about the "16 words," too.

Very perplexing, how the Bush WH operates.

JFK said "I don’t want to get into any battles that I can’t win."

I think that the Bushies prefer — and I think this comes from the President himself — to backcheck (ice hockey term) rather than rush to fight in one battle after another. They prefer fights that they think they can win. But their real problem is that they play awful defense. Awful.

Bush is by no means an idiot, even though your specific case of the "16 words" surrender would help make the argument that he is. My sense of the man is that he knows that he can fight on five fronts, but not ten. I’ll wait to see how much he offers the Warmists before judging how seriously awful he’s being on this. But I don’t doubt that it could be very bad.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Why, because you declare it so?
I’m making an observation of political reality. I notice you can’t deny it.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Boris:
I’m making an observation of political reality. I notice you can’t deny it.
The political reality, Boris, consists of a flawed theory, a flawed treaty, a lot of barking dogs, and China pumping CO2 and everything else out into the atmosphere until the Second Coming.

Then there’s the matter of having to destroy development in the underdeveloped world so that the Euros and the Ivy Leaguers can drink their lattes without falling prey to an attack of the vapors.

That is political reality. The other thing you’re not capable of understanding is the now formidable challenge to AGW, as fact and as theory.

 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
The debate about "if" this is happening is essentially over. Remember, I’m arguing against massive regulations, and noting that by making it an argument about if global warming is happening, you’re basically conceding the policy to the other side.
These statements are disjointed. As you’ve conceded the "if", you’ve ostensibly declared the "massive regulation" brigade the victors, as they are the de facto pro-"if" faction, sowing fear in a neighborhood near you. Any support you forward to their foundation of "fact" promptly puts you in the camp supporting said economic strictures. You’ve indeed become a true "useful idiot" as you’ve been used to up the fear factor. What you need to do, if you truly don’t want Kyoto-cubed to occur, is foster an atmosphere of doubt as to how much we truly know about a) whats happening and b) the anthropomorphic factor and c) if the scary results will occur. ’Cause you really don’t know. It may be a net positive for all you know.

You got the self-assured smarminess required of the elite set. All I have on my side is history.
 
Written By: rob
URL: http://
You got the self-assured smarminess required of the elite set.
And you’ve got the bitter resentment of someone who clings to guns and the bible ;-)
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider