“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”
—Daniel J. Boorstin

Krugman Ignores IPCC on Climate Economics

krugmanKrugmanOne of the recurring themes in my posts here at IER is that apologists for government intervention in the name of fighting climate change routinely ignore what the “consensus” says. Then these same people have the audacity to wag their fingers at the “deniers” out there who disagree with them.

Today’s example is a recent essay by Paul Krugman. As we’ll see, he confidently tells his readers “what we know” about the economics of climate change, even though he’s just making it up. The latest IPCC report repudiates Krugman’s statement.

What Do You Mean “We,” Krugman?

Krugman opens his column in his characteristically confident style:

There are three things we know about man-made global warming. First, the consequences will be terrible if we don’t take quick action to limit carbon emissions. Second, in pure economic terms the required action shouldn’t be hard to take: emission controls, done right, would probably slow economic growth, but not by much. Third, the politics of action are nonetheless very difficult.

We can stop right there, and safely disregard the rest of Krugman’s column. Why? Because his first two points don’t fit together. If Krugman thinks immediate action “done right” wouldn’t slow economic growth by much, then delaying such action will not “be terrible.”

“Global Warming, the Movie” Starring: Freezing

SnowpiercerA funny thing happens when Hollywood tries to portray the horrific negative consequences of global warming: they tend to end up showing an Earth that has frozen over.

I noticed this the first time in 2004′s The Day After Tomorrow, where global warming supposedly leads to a global atmospheric inversion that buries New York City under a mountain of snow. It was a striking image: a global warming movie whose poster features the hand of the Statue of Liberty poking out of the top of a glacier. The image was seemingly repeated from Stanley Kubrick’s A.I., when our future robotic progeny (I would apologize for the plot spoiler, but no one ever watches a Kubrick movie for its plot) unearth the film’s protagonist, who was last seen in a New York City swamped under rising oceans but is now at the bottom of a glacier.

Obama gas plan misfires

cartoon volcanic co2 emissionsYou only need to know one number about the Obama administration’s much-ballyhooed restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions: 1.8 percent.

That’s how much the restrictions will reduce global CO2 emissions: 1.8 percent.

That’s not nothing, but it’s not much. And it’s that number that we need to keep in the back of our minds as we consider the massive costs the president is asking you, me and every other American to bear if his proposed regulations are enacted.

That’s the number on the benefit side of the equation. But what about those costs?

The GHG regulation would result in a reduction in U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by $51 billion on average every year through 2030, 224,000 fewer U.S. jobs on average every year through 2030 and an expected $289 billion increase in electricity costs through 2030.

Obama Continues his Attack on U.S. Energy

cartoonThe delay of the Keystone XL pipeline is a perfect example of the way President Obama and his administration has engaged in, not just a war on coal, but on all forms of energy the nation has and needs. Even his State Department admits there is no reason to refuse its construction and, as turmoil affects the Middle East, there is an increased need to tap our own oil and welcome Canada’s.

The latest news, however, is that Canada has just approved the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, a major pipeline to ship Canadian oil—to Asia.

The pure evil of the delay is compounded by the loss of the many jobs the pipeline—that will not require taxpayer funding—represents to help reduce the nation’s obscene rate of unemployment and to generate new revenue for the nation. That’s what oil, coal, and natural gas does.

NYT: Scientists 'Startled' at Great Lakes' Rise; Another Warmist Prediction Is Biting the Dust

GreatLakesWideAn undated but clearly recent page at the National Wildlife Federation breathlessly warns readers, in a section entitled "Threats from Global Warming," that "Lake Erie water levels, already below average, could drop 4-5 feet by the end of this century, significantly altering shoreline habitat." A Thursday Huffington Post Canada Business entry observed that "the (Great Lakes) basin has experienced the longest extended period of lower water levels since the U.S. and Canada began tracking levels in 1918." Of course, it's because of "climate change."

Friday, Julie Bosman at the New York Times reported (HT Powerline) that "The International Joint Commission, a group with members from the United States and Canada that advises on water resources, completed a five-year study in April 2013 concluding that water levels in the lakes were likely to drop even farther, in part because of the lack of precipitation in recent years brought on by climate change."

Infilling Is Massively Corrupting The US Temperature Record

There are two buildings here. According to USHCN, there are actually three.Only two buildings are actually shown. According
to USHCN, there are three (green area).
Several people on both sides of the debate continue to criticize my averaging of the entire measured USHCN data set.

The graph below shows the average of three different USHCN groups of data since 1990, which was the year they started exponentially losing data.

The raw data is green. It shows a small warming since 1990, all of which occurred before 1998. The final adjusted data is blue, and shows much stronger warming. The fabricated data (temperatures marked with an “E”) shows a very strong warming, and is the component of the final data which creates almost all of the difference between final and raw.

Clive Palmer triggers the warmest scream

Gore with PalmerGore with PalmerTWO sentences neatly and completely capture the total irrationality and sheer, raging religious fervour of the global warming true, true believers.

They both came as deep primeval screams in delayed reaction to Clive Palmer’s climate change twostep with Mr Climate Hysteria himself, the man who used to be the next president of the US, until he found religion and fortune could be combined in very convenient climate untruths, Al Gore.

The initial reaction of true believers was one of almost euphoric rapture. Al and Clive had seemingly united to defeat the Climate Anti-Christ Abbott; Julia Gillard’s carbon tax and Gaia would be saved.

Nowhere was this reaction more extensive or ecstatic than at Climate Central Downunder, The Age. The paper revelled in the Anti-Christ’s coming discomfort.

Prince Charles ‘Consorted With Labour’ To Change Climate Policy

cartoonThe Prince of Wales “consorted” with Labour ministers to get tougher Government policies on climate change, it has been claimed. The claims were made in a BBC programme that sheds new light on how far the Prince is said to have gone to lobby ministers to adopt his pet policies on health and the environment. [Former environment minister] Michael Meacher said the Prince helped him push Tony Blair for more radical action on climate change and to block GM foods. “We would consort together quietly in order to try and ensure that we increased our influence within government. There were always tensions within government. And I knew that he largely agreed with me and he knew that I largely agreed with him,” Mr Meacher told BBC Radio 4’s The Royal Activist. “I know he spoke to Tony Blair, obviously he would regularly speak to the Prime Minister, and I’m sure he told him his views, so we were together in trying to persuade Tony Blair to change course.” --Matthew Holehouse, The Daily Telegraph, 29 June 2014

Government by fiat: A constitutional lesson

cartoon-obama-dictatorThe Supreme Court this week admonished the Environmental Protection Agency for overreaching in regulating greenhouse gases. The Clean Air Act covers polluters that emit 250 tons per year (or in some cases, 100 tons). This standard makes no sense if applied to greenhouse gases. Thousands of establishments from elementary schools to grocery stores would be, absurdly, covered. So the EPA arbitrarily chose 100,000 tons as the carbon dioxide threshold.

That's not "tailoring," ruled the Supreme Court. That's rewriting. Under our Constitution, "an agency has no power to 'tailor' legislation to bureaucratic policy goals by rewriting unambiguous statutory terms."

It was a welcome constitutional lesson in restraint, noted The Wall Street Journal. One would think -- hope -- that an administration so chastened might reconsider its determination to shift regulation of the nation's power generation to Washington through new CO2 rules under the Clean Air Act.

Global Warming Study Ridiculed After Temperatures DROP

sunA UK Met Office study that predicted temperatures would rise by up to half a degree centigrade over the past 10 years faces ridicule after it was revealed that temperatures actually dropped over that period.

The peer-reviewed study by Doug M. Smith et al, entitled “Improved Surface Temperature Prediction for the Coming Decade from a Global Climate Model” – and which featured in the journal Science – also incorrectly predicted that several years over the past decade would see record heat.

The paper says:

Michael Oppenheimer: Father of the Rhetorical Bomb

Remember this? Sharon Begley is back!Remember this? Sharon Begley, global warming agitprop, is back!A hundred years ago we called it summer. Wealthy New Yorkers fled to the Berkshires and upper New York state to escape the heat. Now we call summer the harbinger of doom, the new bogeyman in the MSM's attempt to scare you witless so you don't actually pay attention to what the data actually shows: you've been sucker-punched by the greatest hoax in modern history.

Our writerly global-warming agitprop, Sharon Begley of the now-defunct Newsweek, is flapping her gums for Reuters as she finds the scariest scenarios to beat the heat into you. Daisy Dukes are making a comeback and humidity has just been discovered in her thrilling new column, "With heat and humidity, areas will be 'unsuited for outdoor activity'".

But if it all sounds eerily familiar, or ripped from Gore's tremendously unhelpful pontification he publicly exposed with his inconvenient truths, you just scored a couple of points.

"As temperatures rise, toward the end of the century, less than an hour of activity outdoors in the shade could cause a moderately fit individual to suffer heat stroke," said climatologist Robert Kopp of Rutgers University, lead scientific author of the report. "That's something that doesn't exist anywhere in the world today."

Note the cherry-picking dates:

Outer Banks Sea Level Rise: Worth Getting Exercised Over?

disaster movieThe Washington Post, yesterday, fanned the flames of a dispute over how much sea level rise the residents of the North Carolina Outer Banks should plan upon for this century.

The dispute arose when, a few years ago, politicians in Raleigh decided to get involved in the business of climate forecasting,  and decreed that the Outer Banks region should expect a 39-inch sea level rise by the year 2100 and that people need to plan for a  future based upon this number. Some of the rumored plans include abandonment of the region’s major roadways, stopping new construction, and re-zoning the land to declare all property at an elevation less than 39 inches to be uninhabitable. The state government under then-governor Beverly Perdue (D) was “helping” by preparing a website that showed all property that would be under water by the year 2100, deep-sixing the equity held in many beach houses.

It’s no surprise that there’s a pushback against the state’s 39-inch forecast, which was based on a selection of outdated science that foretold a much more alarming story than newer scientific studies.

How A Coal Baron Fooled Al Gore And The Greens

goreAustralia will be left without a major scheme to cut greenhouse gas emissions after Clive Palmer last night backed the repeal of the carbon tax without supporting any concrete alternative. The Palmer United Party leader sounded the death knell for the carbon tax last night by confirming his senators would vote to abolish the impost after the new Senate takes shape next week. In an unlikely pairing with former US vice-president Al Gore, one of the world’s leading climate change campaigners, Mr Palmer held a press conference in Parliament House to declare the carbon scheme dead. --David Crowe, The Australian, 26 June 2014

3902163
Today
Yesterday
This Week
Last Week
This Month
Last Month
All days
13014
14476
39197
2249978
330003
406069
3902163
Your IP: 54.89.138.238
Server Time: 07-22-2014 21:29:13
Visitors Counter