The global warming scandal

I called ClimateGate “the global warming scandal of the century” back on November 20. Deeper and deeper it goes. Over the weekend, University of East Anglia global warming cultist Phil Jones conceded that there has been no statistically significant warming over the last 15 years:

Hackers Steal Millions in Carbon Credits

OMG, I hope they don't come after my credits. As many of you know I have a carbon credit web site
where I'm selling and trading credits on a small scale. Nothing of course like this article, In The Millions.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/02/hackers-steal-carbon-credits
But I wouldn't be surprised if they come after mine next.
Better get your few extra credits (for house hold use) before they come and steal all I have left.
http://www.towncarron.com/CarbonCredit.html

Ron

The EPA, Not Carbon Dioxide, Is Hazardous To The Public

The EPA, Not Carbon Dioxide, Is Hazardous To The Public
NPCA Expert Says EPA Shouldn't Control Greenhouse Gases until Congress Passes Bill on the Specific Issue

Dallas (December 8, 2009) - The EPA's announcement yesterday declaring carbon dioxide a hazard and a danger to public health is the administration's attempt at extortion, according to NCPA Senior Fellow, H. Sterling Burnett. President Obama is telling Congress to act soon or he will, and they won't like the result, he said.

"The administration and the Democratic leadership is basically saying that this bad climate bill will need to be passed or they will enact, purely through regulation, even worse carbon controls on the economy," Burnett said. "This is truly a choice between two evils."

The EPA is considering rules that would restrict emissions from large sources of CO2 such as power stations, chemical plants and refineries. The EPA also has the option to regulate other emitters such as trucks, lawnmowers, airplanes, and large buildings.

"Congress should act to suspend the EPA's rule making authority over CO2 by halting any EPA action on greenhouse gases unless and until Congress passes a bill specifically dealing with this problem," Burnett said. "But, neither the Democratic leadership nor the administration would allow this because it takes away their leverage in negotiating the cap and trade bill."

To read Sterling Burnett's testimony on this topic, log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/031209_WM_Burnett.pdf.

Climate-gate

Obama Administration Underestimates Severity of Climate-gate

NCPA: This is a bad time to make hasty decisions about climate change, need to reevaluate science

Dallas (December 7, 2009) - The Climate-gate scandal, which revealed that scientists attempted to suppress inconvenient data, used tricks to change reported outcomes, suppress dissent, and undermine the peer review process, should serve as a major red flag to the Obama administration and other government delegations, according to NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett.
"Even though the science used to justify the need for a costly climate treaty is unraveling, the Obama administration is shrugging off the emails, parroting the claim that the science is settled and it's time to act, which couldn't be further from the truth," Dr. Burnett said. "Instead of the administration choosing to slow down and make sure the science is solid, it feels the need to push harder for an agreement to set new greenhouse gas emissions targets."
Supporters within the Obama administration who support moving forward with a climate treaty are underplaying the importance of scientific data and the critical nature that this small group of scientists has played in shaping public perception of the causes and consequences of global warming, Burnett said.
"With literally trillions of dollars at stake, now is not the time to take dramatic action just for the administration to say that they are 'doing something' about global warming," Burnett said. "Rather, we should get the science right, then determine if we need to do anything at all. Surely we can come up with a solution better than the cap-and-trade scam currently dominating the policy discussion."
Burnett has developed several sensible ideas to effectively address global warming. To see the list of "no regrets" policies, log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st321.

CLIMATE-GATE - THE AGENDA

Reasonable Responses to Climate Change

Reasonable Responses to Climate Change

New NCPA Study Examines Policies that Effectively Address Climate Change


Dallas (September 30, 2009) - The cap-and-trade bill that Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry are slated to introduce today could cost taxpayers more than $1,761 per family annually and will not reduce global warming temperatures anymore than one-tenth of a degree by 2050, according to a study released today by the National Center for Policy Analysis.
"The bill will do nothing to effectively address global warming, will cause more harm than it prevents, and will impose enormous costs on American families," said H. Sterling Burnett, Senior Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis and author of the study.
For example, the study concludes that:

• Cap-and-trade would cost an average of $314 billion a year in lost GDP or $9.4 trillion over the period from 2012 to 2035.
• It would increase the cost of residential electricity 31 percent to 50 percent by 2030
• Job losses would total 2.5 million by 2030

"Climate change is mainly projected to add to existing problems, rather than create new ones," Burnett said. "No-regrets policies that provide benefits beyond their effects on climate as well as policies that help us to adapt to future climate change should be implemented."
The new NCPA study examines several policies that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reduce America's dependence on foreign oil and reduce energy prices for consumers.
These "no-regrets" policies include:

• Eliminating fuel subsidies
• Reducing regulatory barriers to building new nuclear power plants.
• Encouraging breakthroughs in new technology by fostering competition

"Taken together, these policies could do a great deal to minimize the risks of global warming while at the same time promoting economic growth and global development, not to mention providing sustainable financial support for Americans and their families," Burnett said.
To read the full study, "Reasonable Responses to Climate Change," log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st324.pdf. To arrange an interview with H. Sterling Burnett, contact Leah Gipson.              

New CAFE Standards

President Obama’s New CAFE Standards May Cause More Harm Than Good

NCPA Expert Explains New Standards Will Reduce Consumer Choice, Increase Auto Price and Increase Fatalities

Dallas (May 19, 2009) - The Obama Administration's announcement today of new mileage and pollution standards is a disgraceful attempt to court environmental votes by reducing consumer choice, according to H. Sterling Burnett, Senior Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis. Because the government now has so much control over two of the major companies it can extort the industry into not objecting.

President Obama's tightening of national program for higher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards is part of his plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change and ease U.S. dependence on oil. These new standards include an increase in fuel efficiency targets to 35.5 miles per gallon for new passenger vehicles and light trucks by 2016, four years earlier than required under the 2007 energy bill.

"People have the choice to purchase fuel efficient cars if they want them," Burnett said.

From the NCPA. read it here

Clean up the environment

For years the Bush Administration was criticized for not cleaning up enough of the nation's most contaminated waste sites. The O administration has plans for doing even less.
Environmental groups and some democratic lawmakers railed against President George W. Bush's cleanup record. But this time, they're shying away from speaking out.
Golly Mr. Bester Tester I wonder why? Aren't they non-partisan? Don't they view the environment the same now as before or is it just more of the extreme leftist partisan hack politics.