Saturday, July 11, 2009

Dunce Cap 'n Trade

Newt Gingrich:

"The sponsors of Waxman-Markey are telling Americans that not only will the legislation save us from calamitous climate change, it will also produce new jobs and new prosperity by transitioning America to new forms of 'green' energy. In other words, there's no trade-off necessary to save the planet; no price to be paid. It's a win-win-win.

Right. And 2+2=5. The reality is that the bill before the House today imposes what could be the largest tax increase in history on the American people. And every single one of us who heats a home, drives a car, and manufactures or consumes products made in America will pay the price."



You have recently received an Open Letter from the Woods Hole Research Center, exhorting you to act quickly to avoid global disaster. The letter purports to be from independent scientists, but that Center is the former den of the President's science advisor, John Holdren, and is far from independent. This is the same science advisor who has given us predictions of “almost certain” thermonuclear war or eco-catastrophe by the year 2000, and many other forecasts of doom that somehow never seem to arrive on time.

The facts are:

The sky is not falling; the Earth has been cooling for ten years, without help. The present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them.

The finest meteorologists in the world cannot predict the weather two weeks in advance, let alone the climate for the rest of the century. Can Al Gore? Can John Holdren? We are flooded with claims that the evidence is clear, that the debate is closed, that we must act immediately, etc, but in fact


The proposed legislation would cripple the US economy, putting us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors. For such drastic action, it is only prudent to demand genuine proof that it is needed, not just computer projections, and not false claims about the state of the science.


Finally, climate alarmism pays well. Alarmists are rolling in wealth from the billions of dollars floating around for the taking, and being taken. It is always instructive to follow the money.

Robert H. Austin
Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
American Association of Arts and Science Member National Academy of Sciences

William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
Member National Academy of Sciences

S. Fred Singer
Professor of Environmental Sciences Emeritus, University of Virginia
First Director of the National Weather Satellite Service

Roger W. Cohen
Manager, Strategic Planning and Programs, ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Fellow APS

Harold W. Lewis
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of California at Santa Barbara
Fellow APS, AAAS; Chairman, APS Reactor Safety Study

Laurence I. Gould
Professor of Physics
University of Hartford
Chairman (2004), New England Section of APS

Richard Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Fellow American Academy of Arts and Sciences, AGU, AAAS, and AMS
Member Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
Member National Academy of Sciences

From Patriot Post US.


  1. Please link to a source describing the last decade's cooling. All I have read indicates otherwise.

  2. Do they not teach students at State to do their own research anymore?

    Do it yourself .....there's plenty of ways to do it, if you'd get off your lazy intellectual ass and actually put some effort into it.

    I am not obligated to make you wise.

    One further note of caution: I'm getting VERY tired of your childishness.

    Pick up your game, or don't come here any more.

    Do I make myself clear?

  3. I've done plenty of research on it and found little to nothing on the matter. I don't know about you but I was raised to be accountable for what I say. If it's such common knowledge, it shouldn't be so difficult for you to throw a link up here. If you can't, I can only assume that it's BS.

  4. I took at class at Guilford College "back in the day" titled "Climate and Man." That may have been the name of the textbook as well.
    At any rate, the most lasting fact I took away from that class was that the earth has warming and cooling periods and they are measured in thousands of years. Not years, not decades, not centuries--but millennia.
    I believe it's as useless to look at one decade's worth of weather and draw a conclusion as it is to formulate investment strategy based on one day's Dow Jones performance.

  5. "I haven't been playing any games."

    You're not welcome here anymore.

    Do not post anything further. It will be summarily deleted.

  6. Here is more on the subject, jaycee. Stuff that our agenda -driven rocket Scientist little buddy couldn't find:

    "Well, one would be foolish to challenge space-born satellites that gauge Earth's mean temperatures ---cold, hot, and average. Here again, evidence of global cooling accumulates like snow drifts.

    ****'There has been no significant global warming since 1995, no warming since 1998, and global cooling for the past few years,' former U.S. Senate Environment Committee spokesman Marc Morano writes at Citing metrics gathered by University of Alabama, Huntsville's Dr. Roy Spencer, Morano adds: 'The latest global averaged satellite temperature data for June 2009 reveal yet another drop in Earth's temperature ... Despite his dire warnings, the Earth has cooled 0.74 degrees F since former Vice President Al Gore released "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2006.'****

    Earth's temperatures fall even as the planet spins within what global-warmists consider a thickening cloud of toxic carbon dioxide.

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory at Mauna Loa, Hawaii consistently and reliably has measured CO2 for the last 50 years. CO2 concentrations have risen steadily for a half-century.

    For December 1958, the Laboratory reported an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 314.67 parts per million (PPM). Flash forward to December 1998, about when global cooling reappeared. CO2 already had increased to 366.87 PPM. By December 2008, CO2 had advanced to 385.54 PPM, a significant 5.088 percent growth in one decade.

    This capsizes the carbon-phobic global-warmist argument. For Earth's temperatures to sink while CO2 rises contradicts global warming as thoroughly as learning that firefighters can battle blazes by spraying them with gasoline."

    It took all of 10 seconds on Google to find this.

  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  8. He doesn't read very well, does he?

  9. wow! The intellectual capacity of NC State Students has really gone down hill since I attended. It is so sad.

  10. "wow! The intellectual capacity of NC State Students has really gone down hill since I attended. It is so sad."

    nah, Bubba's lacks so much confidence in what he posts that he must delete my comments. All I am is curious.

  11. I would have expected better if you are truly curious. Just Google some of the scientists names to see what others are saying, Bubba has them listed. You may even be able to find someone from NCSU who is a skeptic as well. You need not be stuck with the same mass media sources that are into the whole "climate change" religion view.

  12. I've been doing mostly journal searches via NCSU's online databases. You'd know that had Bubba not deleted my comment. Previously I've read pretty detailed critiques of global warming, which believe it or not, have tempered my view.

    I only ask Bubba for sources so that I can read what he is reading. As much as I google, I can never be sure we're reading the same things unless he shows me what he's been reading. Whenever I ask for a source, I don't mean it in any sarcastic or mean way...I just really want to know what other folks are reading.

    Consequently, if I ever make a claim and you want the source, just ask.

  13. also, thanks for the suggestion, it didn't occur to me to do a journal search on the letter signer's names. I'll get around to it.