Washington, D.C. – The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology today held a hearing to examine the various scientific, economic and other policy issues surrounding President Obama’s recent pledge to the United Nations-led effort to curtail greenhouse gas emissions. The president pledged that the United States will cut its greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 28 percent over the next decade and by 80 percent or more by 2050.
In face of intense criticism from alarmist scientists, Dr. John Christy went to great lengths in a Tuesday congressional hearing to detail why satellite-derived temperatures are much more reliable indicators of warming than surface thermometers.
“That’s where the real mass of the climate system exists in terms of the atmosphere,” Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama and Alabama’s state climatologist, said in a Wednesday hearing before the House science committee.
Hacktivist group Anonymous recently breached NASA, stealing somewhere between 100 and 276GB of data, the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology says. The data was stolen from NASA’s servers and drones, and include drone video and radar footage, flight logs and employee information.
Anonymous claims NASA is not telling the truth about global warming – it wants the agency to disclose the ‘actual’ amount of radioactive chemicals in the upper atmosphere, and threatens to release the data unless NASA complies within a month.
The world is facing a public-health emergency. According to the World Health Organization, the Zika virus, a horrific disease that causes malformation of infants, is now “spreading explosively.” A cure for Zika is not known, and it could take decades to find one. But there is something that can be done now to stop the epidemic. Zika is spread by mosquitoes, which can be exterminated by pesticides. The most effective pesticide is DDT. If the Zika catastrophe is to be prevented in time, we need to use it. So now the question is: Will the environmental bureaucrats continue to block the use of essential life-saving pesticides, and thereby cause an even worse global catastrophe that will go on for generations? The outlook isn’t hopeful. As history shows, to the leaders the Green movement, black lives don’t matter. They have chosen to allow millions of the world’s poorest to continue to suffer and die from malaria, and they are doing everything they can to stop the elimination of vitamin-deficiency diseases by genetically enhanced foods. --Robert Zubrin, National Review, 30 January 2016
released this week showing nearly 91 percent of Americans do not believe global warming is very serious issue. This runs counter to President Obama's belief that it is the biggest threat facing the U.S. The president even said the Paris Climate Talks—held in early December 2015—were a powerful rebuke to ISIS, but that message didn't gain any traction with the poll's respondents, or with Americans.America's top concern is global terrorism, and not global warming. That's according to a new global survey
If the world is serious about halting the worst effects of global warming, the renewable energy industry will require $12.1 trillion of investment over the next quarter century, or about 75 percent more than current projections show for its growth.
That’s the conclusion of a report setting out the scale of the challenge facing policymakers as they look for ways to implement the Paris Agreement that in December set a framework for more than 195 nations to rein in greenhouse gases.
Three feet of snow on the streets of New York and Washington is mocking global warming alarmists. The natural sciences tell us that the alarmists got everything wrong: anthropogenic carbon release is not dangerous or even harmful, but extremely beneficial. 15% of the world’s agricultural production is due to the increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the air. What’s more, the global mean temperature has not been increasing for 19 years, and the slight warming expected from the emission of the infra-red absorbing gases is expected to be beneficial in itself.
And contrary to the alarmists’ claims, ocean water is alkaline, not acidic.See this short summary of science for more.Listing all the scientific errors made by the alarmists would take many pages, not to mention their logical fallacies, economic delusions, civic blunders, etc. So how did it happen that such a worthless agenda became so powerful?In large degree, it’s because it was worthless!
Communities could lose the right to block fracking wells as part of a UK Cabinet plan to create a shale gas industry within a decade, the Telegraph can reveal. The 10-page plan, leaked to anti-fracking campaigners, sets out a timeline for the expansion of the shale gas industry in Britain. Three Cabinet ministers put their names to the scheme which would see fracking wells classified as ‘nationally significant infrastructure’. Instead unelected planning inspectors would be given the power to decide if shale gas drilling sites got the go-ahead, paving the way for a huge uptake in fracking. The move would also speed up the planning process. --Christopher Hope, The Sunday Telegraph, 31 January 2016
The Global Warming Policy Forum welcomes the proposal by Cabinet ministers Amber Rudd, Greg Clark and Liz Tuss to classify fracking wells as ‘Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP)’ which is clearly in the national interest. The GWPF, who advocated exactly this policy last May, is calling upon the Government to turn the ministers’ proposal into law in order to speed up shale gas exploration in the UK. “Shale exploration is clearly in the national interest and the proposal by the Cabinet ministers would certainly enhance Britain’s energy future and security,” said GWPF director Benny Peiser. --Global Warming Policy Forum, 1 February 2016
Donald Trump loves to tout his poll numbers. But if he’s doing so well, why does he pander to Iowa’s ethanol interests?
The gambit might garner a few caucus votes among corn growers and ethanol producers. It certainly brings plaudits from renewable energy lobbyists and their political enablers. But it could (and should) cost him votes in many other quarters – beyond the Corn Ethanol Belt and even in Iowa.
The fact is, the 14.5-billion-gallon-per-year ethanol mandate prolongs policies that are bad for consumers and the environment. And yet many presidential candidates and other politicians support it.
The ethanol mandate forces refiners to blend ethanol into gasoline. It’s the epitome of feel-good government programs run amok. Congress enacted the steadily expanding ethanol blending requirement to stave off the “imminent” depletion of crude oil worldwide, decrease US imports of oil whose price was “only going to increase,” reduce gasoline costs for motorists, and prevent manmade climate change.
Noam Chomsky is in the news this week because of his latest interview with Al-Jazeera's UpFront, which is set to air on Friday. But Chomsky, who is regarded by some as one of America's foremost leftist intellectuals, isn't discussing the "horrors" of U.S. foreign policy, as he normally might. This time, he's advising that people vote Democratic in the upcoming presidential election, including even for that pillar of establishment politics, Hillary Clinton.
In the interview, Chomsky cites what he calls "enormous differences" between the two parties, especially on the issue of climate change. "I've always counseled strategic voting," he says, "Meaning, in a swing state… if there's a significant enough difference to matter, vote for the better candidate—or sometimes the least bad." Republicans, who are either "climate change deniers or…skeptic[s] who [say] we can't do it" pose a "serious danger to human survival," Chomsky says. His solution? Vote Hillary!
The extended 'pause' appears to have finally rattled the scientists at NOAA. They seemingly chose to robustly adjust thousands of past monthly temperature observations to make sure the embarrassing pause would be no longer.
Bernie Sanders has made fighting climate change a central part of his message, and he’s not about to hold back when challenged by someone who questions the scientific consensus that human-caused emissions are behind global warming — even if it’s a teenager.
The Vermont senator, old enough to be the grandfather to many of the attendees at a town hall at Roosevelt High School Thursday, was asked by a 17-year-old about his position on climate change. She said that she was not convinced it was caused by humans.