-
Throw the Book at Him
June 13, 2013 | 196 comments
-
Testimonial to a Great American
June 6, 2013 | 39 comments
-
A Close Call at the Newseum
May 30, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Obama’s Imbroglios
May 23, 2013 | 45 comments
-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
The Current Crisis
Cap-and-Trade Socialism
A monstrosity in the offing.
WASHINGTON — Thank God winter is almost over. It has been another cold one. I hope Al Gore wore his hat and brought along his galoshes whenever he made an appearance against Global Warming. Better yet, I hope he scheduled his jeremiads in warmer climes, say Miami Beach or Antigua. As I reported a while back, scientists have not been able to measure any increase in global warming since the end of 1998. That, despite their lunkheaded computers forecasting the opposite. Over the past two years temperatures have actually dropped by more than 0.5 degrees Celsius. Button up!
I mention all this because 1) it is always amusing to kid Mr. Gore and 2) the price tag for Prophet Obama’s climate plan has just jumped to $2 trillion. That is three times the White House’s initial estimate for its Cap-and-Trade monstrosity. It is also a huge tax on corporations and consumers at a time when both are in recession. Only government thrives. Given the fact that it is increasingly unclear that there is such a thing as Global Warming and the fact that Cap-and-Trade is an expensive and dubious remedy for it might not the Prophet Obama hold back. He has plenty else to do.
Cap-and-Trade has been tried in Europe by the signers of the Kyoto Protocol and according to the Heritage Foundation’s Ben Lieberman, “Nearly every European country participating has higher emissions today than when the treaty was first signed in 1997….emissions in many of these nations are actually rising faster than in the United States.” Yet perhaps the Obama Administration has its eye on something other than limiting emissions. Possibly it sees Cap-and-Trade as a great way to gain control of still more of the private sector.
As mentioned above, the huge amount of money mulcted from the private sector and handed over to the public sector has got to please every collectivist in the White House. Moreover there is the huge bureaucracy that will have to be set up to oversee Cap-and-Trade. Those of us who have followed the economic crisis and the Ponzi schemes of Bernard Madoff are familiar with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). If the Administration’s climate legislation is passed, we shall have the Cap and Trade Commission (CAP). It will be vast.
To begin with, CAP’s agents will have to go to every factory and office building and presumably even public buildings and decide their allowable amount of emissions. That is to say, their cap. Next the agency will auction off and oversee the sale of the documents that certify emissions allowances . Call them coupons. Then the agency will have to monitor the exchange of these allowances and the ownership. Finally the agency will have to monitor compliance and presumably punish those who fail to comply.
In this setup there will be countless opportunities for corruption as polluters try to bribe CAP’s agents, or the agents try to elicit bribes. As with the SEC, there will be incompetence and lax enforcement. Finally, there will be senators and members of Congress making special pleadings for corporations in their regions, labor unions, special pleaders of all sorts.
Finally, there is the economics of the legislation. It will take $2 trillion from the private sector and dump it into the public sector. That is to say, a large tax on the private sector will transfer money to the public sector. So how is the private sector to grow itself out of this recession? The Administration’s answer is that the government will return the money to worthy endeavors, healthcare, green technology — again still more opportunities for corruption and for special favors to pleading solons and numas on Capitol Hill.
The Prophet Obama was very disturbed recently when asked if he was a socialist. Socialism is government control of the means of producing and distributing goods and services. What I have just described is a powerful instrumentality toward socialism. Along with Cap-and-Trade, the Obama Administration is calling for a sufficient number of these instrumentalities to socialism that by the next election the United States will be very close to being a socialist state. There is no point in Obama arguing against that observation. He ought simply to come out and say it. He is for socialism. What could possibly be wrong with that?
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (188) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/19/cap-and-trade-socialism
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Once Upon a Time in the West
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- There’s Something About Cambridge
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 6:55AM
What is wrong with that?...well,if Obozo openly admitted that he was just another run of the mill socialist, he wouldn't be able to keep tap dancing through the watermelon patch promising all the plantation gimmecrats that he is going to make Mister Charlie pay for ALL the pork chops any more...he would be admitting that their ain't no Santa Claus
scott| 3.19.09 @ 6:57AM
forced taxation: it's all that's left. Gov't debt crowding out the credit market, declining dollar making foreign investment here unlikely, inflation making unemployment likely for some time, inflation destroying purchasing power, high interest rates coming.......
they gotta get money somehow, so they're gonna take it.
Dean| 3.19.09 @ 7:00AM
Cap-and-trade will create an artificial market of "paper" that will be artificially inflated by speculators looking to make easy money. Eventually, this artificial market will crumble and we will see a collapse similar to what just happened to housing. The only difference is that with housing at least there was an asset with some value. With cap-and-trade, there are no assets and no value to be found.
There are ways to reduce emissions. However, creating a "fake" economy as the Obama administration is attempting to do is not the right way to achieve that.
Siegfried Xanten| 3.19.09 @ 7:35AM
John McCain strongly favors cap & trade, and will probably be Obama's Republican floor leader for it (like amnesty).
That's why this conservative won't be motivated by the endless anti-Democratic demonization propaganda like this column. Never again will I vote against someone, or for the lesser of two evils. For the Republican Party to get my vote again, they'd need to both talk AND ACT as a conservative party. I'm not holding my breath.
stu.b.con| 3.19.09 @ 7:37AM
David matthews bedtime story "Chicken Little"
It's hard to even begin to comment on your inanities and your ad hominem except to say you are a complete fool..."creationists" WTF does that have to do with this?
Perhaps you, my good buffoon, should look at ACTUAL scientific evidence before you mortgage the future (hopefully you haven't found a similarly addled traveler and procreated) to socialist ends based on alarmist nonsense. Christ, what a TOOL!
stu.b.con| 3.19.09 @ 7:52AM
Like I said, miss mathews, you are TOOL, a useful idiot lemming who I have no more time for.
F off!
Oh, if you want socialism so f'ing bad why don't take the slow boat to Europe or Venezuela, I'll stay here and try to make things better, not worse.
TOOL
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 7:59AM
I don't know what intellectual toilet David Mathews has been inhabiting lately,but his bigotry is on full display for all to see.....personally I have had no problem at all reconciling the Bibical account of creation with the scientific record of geology and cosmology....the fact that Mr Mathews is unable to do so says more about his on intellectual shortcomings than it does about 'creationists'....he just hasn't done his homework on this....as for 'deniers',it's not very hard to 'deny' something that isn't even happening....that is to say that there has been no measurable heating of the planet for the last decade....so if all Mr Mathews can come up with is ad hominen insults,he belongs in the same little baliwick as anAL GOREtentive and his chorus of climate cassandras whose only real interest is politicizing 'science' for the greater glory of their own dystopian socialist ideology....but,of course,that is axiomatic now
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 8:07AM
If you really believe that,Davey boy,then why is it that you aren't capable of correlating the scientific record with the Bible's account of creation...I can....many people can who are open minded.....your hostility to that concept merely exposes you for the sophist that you are
Trackback| 3.19.09 @ 8:09AM
The American Spectator : Cap-and-Trade Socialism, on PunditKix, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Kevin Kearney| 3.19.09 @ 8:13AM
Am enjoying Mr. Matthews final spasms of self-rightousness. As a scientist, I have been studying global warming issue for over a year now, and have found zero traction in trying to convince even one alarmist that global warming is readily accounted for by natural means. This is a RELIGION to these people, and science is the last thing they want to hear about. I have a new tack, and recommend the readers of this fine web site take it as well: Ask the alarmists to point to actual scientific data supporting their claims. I have looked and looked, and cannot find it! Do not allow them to cite the summary report of the IPCC. This is a political statement - from the UN for gods sake. Don't we think they might be a "little bit" biased? No, demand the science. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Do not allow them to cite consensus either. Scientists do not behave this way: There has yet to be a consensus statement from a group of scientists on Newtonian gravity, let alone climatology. Most statements made by the scientific societies are also political, often in violent disagreement with their own membership.
So where is the proof? Computer models do not count. Proof is what science is based on. Not consensus. Not politics. Not theory. Proof.
Phil Hoey| 3.19.09 @ 8:15AM
The only thing left to tax is to figure out everyone's lung capacity and then tax you for breathing.
Atlas Shrugged| 3.19.09 @ 8:16AM
I think it will be time for the moderator to take David Mathews off the site if he hijacks the discussion like he did yesterday. For those involved in a discussion here, it is very tedious to have to scroll through his dozens of posts of rubbish.
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 8:22AM
Davey boy is now sulking in his bedroom since it never occurred to him that it was even possible to match Bibical creation with the scientific record....he always ASSUMED the two were mutually exclusive.....foolish boy
Robert Rosencrans| 3.19.09 @ 9:55AM
Cap and trade will turn the Obama reign of terror into a one term Presidency. People vote their wallets. Most of the citizenry is not scientifically savvy enough to wade through all the facts to make a proper determination about alleged man made climate change.
American family budgets have been rocked over the last 3 years by massive increases in utility bills. If the cap and trade is approved, that will sign the end of the age of Obama. Family budgets will be hit by 30 to 40% increases in their utility bills, and the cost of many manufactured food items will also skyrocket.
Goodbye Obama.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.19.09 @ 10:10AM
Thoughts for the day:
"You can't win an argument with a crazy man."
"When an argument flares up, the wise man quenches it with silence!
"If you argue and rankle and contradict, you may achieve a victory sometimes. But it will be an empty victory, because you will never get your opponent's good will!"
Bram| 3.19.09 @ 10:10AM
Dear Dave,
Please look up "Scientific Method" and apply it the question of man-made warming. Then debate the issue civilly.
ncatty| 3.19.09 @ 10:18AM
Bernie Sanders, the self-identified Socialist Senator from Vermont, says Obama is doing "...a very good job..". Yep.
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 10:18AM
Well,of course Davey had it coming....but let's not be too hard on Obozo for this cap and trade scheme....after all,he's the best President we've had since GW
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 10:18AM
Keven K.
"Proof"
Fair enough. How are these?
CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Proven.
It's responsible for between 10 and 30 percent of the greenhouse effect, depending on circumstances and how it's measured. Proven.
The greenhouse effect warms the Earth by an average of 33 degrees C. Proven.
CO2 atmospheric content is rising at a rate never seen before. Proven.
The vast majority of the rise is due to industrial emissions. Proven.
Oh, yes, and the greenhouse is nowhere near its upper limit of heat trapping capacity. Proven.
Given the six proven facts above, if the current situation re: carbon emissions is allowed to continue without restraint, what do you think will happen?
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 10:24AM
Well Freya,given that the earth is now in a mild cooling cycle and has been for nearly a decade in spite of a continued increase in carbon dioxide emissions, I would deduce that by using your 'logic'.that increasing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmostphere at the same rate will likely put us into another ice age in very short order
Gill O’Teen| 3.19.09 @ 10:55AM
A few years ago, an inebriated young man was seen dancing nude, blowing a trumpet and tossing ping pong balls into the Mississippi on the St. Louis riverfront. Curious, a police officer asked the drunk just what the heck he was doing. The man hiccupped that he was scaring the sharks away. The law man incredulously stated that there are no sharks in Mark Twain’s favorite stream. Said the fool, “See! It works!”
However much obumah’s cap and trade plans resemble the above shark prevention concept, it is a brilliant idea. Ten years from now, as we all sit shivering in our homes because we cannot afford to heat them in spite of record setting cold, obumah’s teleprompter can bray “See! It works!”
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 11:12AM
1998 was characterized by a very strong El Nino, which causes a temperature spike. Proven.
2008 was characterized by a La Nina, which causes a short-term temperature dip. Proven.
2005 was the warmest year ever recorded, surpassing even 1998. Proven (at least according to NASA).
Jeremiah| 3.19.09 @ 11:21AM
Cap and Trade is modeled on the legal requirements that rid N. America of acid rain -- probably the most successful campaign against pollution ever fought (and won).
This program harnesses market forces and promises to reduce sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere by millions of tons a year, in addition to its other benefits.
The conservatives will bray and honk about it, but like always, they and their children will benefit from it, just as they do their (relatively) clean drinking water and (relatively, despite Bush's neglect of the FDA) safe food.
Kevin| 3.19.09 @ 11:35AM
Freya:
CO2 is a trace atmospheric gas, and exhibits very little "greenhouse" characteristics. Water (the next thing Al Gore will try to regulate) is a far more powerful greenhouse gas.
Any effect that CO2 has on warming has already saturated. The teeny tiny effect is already behind us.
Rising temperature produces more CO2. This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what AlGore tells us. In his imbecility, has confused an effect with a cause. Causality is one of the foundations of science, and can be found in a dictionary. Since the earth is warming (we are exiting an ice age), CO2 levels are increasing. All is well.
Warming is overwhelmingly due to solar activity. Everyone knows this. You seem sincere, and there are may web sites that can make this understandable.
You make the statement: CO2 is "responsible for between 10 and 30 percent of the greenhouse effect, depending on circumstances and how it's measured. " Let us focus on "how it is measure". Climate scientists agree that CO2-driven global warming will produce a tell-tale atmospheric signature. The CO2 will trap heat, and the atmosphere will show temperature striations.
Dr. David H Douglas, a physicist at the University of Rochester, and a Fellow of the American Physical Society (a position which cannot be attained by any level of BS whatsoever) has shown (INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY : 10.1002/joc.1651 A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions) that the atmospheric measurements are totally incosistent with the theory of CO2-driven "greenhouse" effects. You can read the paper yourself.
http://spider.pas.rochester.edu/mainFrame/people/pages/Douglass_David_H.html
This is one of many many pieces of EVIDENCE that support the natural variability hypothesis. Your statements are unsupported. Your claim of an extraordinary event is not supported by any verifiable facts.
This will have no effect on your thinking whatsoever, as you are driven by ideology. Fine. I'm a physicist, and have spent decades mastering my craft. I resent you and your ilk trying to hijack science to drive your anti-capitalist agenda.
Dustoff| 3.19.09 @ 11:51AM
Guys....
Please quit wasting your finger time with DM.
He' s on his own little eco-trip and you can show him the truth all day long and it doesn't matter.
Peter McGrath| 3.19.09 @ 12:05PM
Cap and Trade, government expansion being masked as "stimulus," bail-outs as cover for government takeover of whole industries - all of the above was easily anticipated from a radical leftist like the current POTUS. The spectacle of an army of lobbyists greasing the palms of corrupt legislators and bureaucrats will soon cause Washington to resemble a roach infested, seedy, motel. Americans will be revolted at the display.
Gratefully, Obama has lurched too far to the left, far too soon. His agenda will damage the private economy but not destroy it. His cohort of incompetents in Congress is now in real danger of being swept out of power in 2010.
Sadly, the misery caused by this misguided fool's policies could have easily been avoided had Republicans nominated a candidate with stones. The same mistake will not be repeated.
Dustoff| 3.19.09 @ 12:05PM
Freya
2005 was the warmest year ever recorded, surpassing even 1998. Proven (at least according to NASA).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NASA's run by Dr. Hanson hasn't had the best tract record lately.
They have had to go back and fix their satellite errors.
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 12:08PM
This will represent the largest sum ever spent to solve a problem that does not exist.
It won't pass though: despite a majority having voted to put this fool in the White House, we are not in the aggregate suicidal.
The socialists will complain because the one and only purpose it serves is to increase and entrench their power. But would anyone be surprised at their whining?
+++
Kevin| 3.19.09 @ 12:12PM
Jeremiah:
You are attempting to justify Cap and Trade based on the indirect effect of reducing sulfur dioxide emissions. I am all for a science-based effort to identify and ameliorate real pollutants. The cap and trade scheme is no such thing. We can't do things because they feel good, we need to do things that work. Believe it or not, I am an environmentalist, but I wait in vain for real information to penetrate the fog. Best I can tell, solar cells require 7 years of operation to payback they oil consumed in making them, and hybrid cars must go 100K miles to do the same (and then we have a toxic battery to get rid of). Ethanol fuel is a HUGE greenhouse gas generator (if there is such a thing).
The current administration is the most anti-science, anti-rational in history. They are narcissists gone wild. What about nuclear energy - are we not even going to look at it?
Right now, the most proven technologies are gasoline power, with catalytic converters. Market forces keep costs and pollution incredibly low, and market-driven research will continue to improve this. Remember, the earth does not benefit from actions that we take to make ourselves feel better, only from the actions that actually WORK. For that, we need the grownups back in charge.
Robbins Mitchell| 3.19.09 @ 12:49PM
The elephant in the room that Freya studiously ignores is the fact that the earth is cooling at present and that more carbon dioxide emissions during the last decade did not and could not prevent that....not to mention the fact that all the 'warmist' little computer models not only failed to predict that,they failed to even recognize the fact even after the cooling cycle data had been confirmed....and by the way,Freya,you saying something has been 'proven' doesn't make it so...and given the way you play so fast and loose with the facts, nobody is going to take your assertions at face value...which leads me to believe they are false since you cite no URL's where your assertions can be verified....there now...your dishonesty has just been 'proven'
Dustoff| 3.19.09 @ 1:04PM
Does Freya know that Hansen was one of the big cooling fools back in the 1970.
Pingback| 3.19.09 @ 1:22PM
Topics about Climate » Archive » Cap-and-Trade Socialism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.19.09 @ 1:27PM
Topics about Climate » Archive » The American Spectator : Cap-and-Trade Socialism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.19.09 @ 1:27PM
Topics about Climate » Archive » The American Spectator : Cap-and-Trade Socialism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ed| 3.19.09 @ 2:34PM
Another unintended consequence of Kyoto is that many European countries are buying carbon credits from China, who is not bound by the provisions of Kyoto and pollutes like there is no tomorrow. So Kyoto is inadvertently INCREASING pollution.
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 3:05PM
Ed,
In the carbon credit system, you pay someone NOT to pollute. If you're going to criticize something, it might help if you understood it, or at least did a better job of explaining your reasoning.
Ed| 3.19.09 @ 3:46PM
Freya,
No Freya, you don't pay someone not to pollute, CO2 emitters must pay for the right to emit CO2. If they go beyond their CO2 limit, then they must buy additional credits.
If you are going to criticize something, it might help if you understood it.
stu.b.con| 3.19.09 @ 3:57PM
Hello moderator--get that no good filibustering mouth breathing panty waist David Matthews off this blog, I am begging you!
what a COMPLETE TOOL
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 4:36PM
Ed,
Right, the additional credits come from someone who's NOT polluting. Therefore, if China is polluting like crazy, the credits couldn't be bought from China.
Never mind educating yourself on carbon credits. Try basic logic first.
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 4:37PM
Kevin,
Apologies in advance for cattiness, but:
Wrong on all counts!
First of all, what was that site supposed to be? It's a biography page of the researcher you mentioned, but there was no mention of the paper you cite, unless you're thinking of the one in Physics Letters, which doesn't say what you claim in any case.
"CO2 is a trace atmospheric gas, and exhibits very little "greenhouse" characteristics."
The numbers I cited come from a scientific paper and a textbook, both of which cite direct measurements. If you don't believe me, you can check them out for yourself.
http://www.atmo.arizona.edu/students/courselinks/spring04/atmo451b/pdf/RadiationBudget.pdf (PDF file)
http://www.radix.net/~bobg/climate/halpern.trap.html
"Any effect that CO2 has on warming has already saturated. The teeny tiny effect is already behind us."
I'll admit I don't know where the upper limit is, but I know we're nowhere near it. How? One word: Venus. The greenhouse effect of the planet Venus warms the surface by at least 300 degrees, almost all of that due to CO2. There are differences (in air pressure, for example), and I'm certainly not suggesting that it's going to (or even could) get that bad on Earth, but a limit is a limit.
You can't say that the greenhouse effect is limited to a moderate level here while it's enough to render a planet uninhabitable over there, unless you want to claim that the two planets follow different laws of physics.
"Rising temperature produces more CO2. This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what AlGore tells us. In his imbecility, has confused an effect with a cause. Causality is one of the foundations of science, and can be found in a dictionary."
You claim to be a physicist, but you don't know what a positive feedback is? Under natural conditions, CO2 is an effect and a cause. Warming releases CO2 into the atmosphere, and the additional CO2 increases the greenhouse effect, leading to more warming. The new warming is less than the initial, but by the time a new equilibrium is reached, a lot of the final warming is due to the increased CO2.
"Since the earth is warming (we are exiting an ice age), CO2 levels are increasing. All is well."
The "exiting the Ice Age" argument strikes me as a circular one. "We're warming because we're coming out of the Little Ice Age, and we know we're still coming out of the LIA because we're still warming." What makes you think we haven't come out of it already, and the warming we've had recently is something else?
And your timing's a little off. If I remember correctly, CO2 lags temperature by 800 years in those graphs. So, if the recovery began around 1700, why did the CO2 rise start in 1850? And continue in a steady and accelerating increase even during and after times that we were cooling?
"Warming is overwhelmingly due to solar activity. Everyone knows this."
Yes, including people who believes in AGW. Natural warming is usually due to solar activity.
But look around, do these look like natural conditions to you? Think of it this way. The atmosphere used to have a lot more CO2. That CO2 was absorbed by plants, just as it is today. Most of it was recycled back to the atmosphere, but over time, much of it was trapped in fossilized plants which became fossil fuels, in a natural carbon sequestration. What's happening now, is that by burning oil, coal, and natural gas, we're reversing that process, pumping that sequestered carbon back into the atmosphere. But, while the original process took tens of millions of years, we're reversing at a much higher rate, on the scale of centuries.
And if the warming is due to solar activity, you'd expect to see a rise in solar activity (or maybe a rise in sunspots if you want go the cosmic ray line of argument). The current warming trend started from about 1980 or so, and lasted to at least 1998 (and beyond, but that's a whole other argument that I've already addressed). So, you'd expect to see a increase in solar activity over most of that time, right? Well, you don't. There was a small rise at first, but since at least 1985, solar activity has been flat. I feel to see how the sun could be causing a change when the sun itself has not been changing.
"Climate scientists agree that CO2-driven global warming will produce a tell-tale atmospheric signature. The CO2 will trap heat, and the atmosphere will show temperature striations."
The hot-spot fingerprint, right? It's missing, and assuming the research that claims it's missing is corrent, it is something that needs an explanation. But you're looking at one fingerprint out of of many, most of which fit anthropogenic global warming. For example, the models predict that the stratosphere will cool as the troposphere warms, and that's exactly what we observe happening. And that effect can't be explained by any other cause, certainly not by solar activity. It's like if you find four fingerprints from suspect A on a knife. Then you find another fingerprint from someone else and say, "Oh, suspect A must be innocent." Um, no, not necessarily (to say the least). The absence of a hotspot (if that is in fact the case) is an unexplained factor, but it doesn't overturn all the other evidence by itself.
"I resent you and your ilk trying to hijack science to drive your anti-capitalist agenda."
And I resent you and your ilk ignoring anything that you don't like and lying through your teeth to drive your anti-liberal agenda (or anti-government agenda, anti-science agenda, whatever).
Have a nice day.
Kevin| 3.19.09 @ 4:38PM
An interesting enigma is Mr. Matthews. He can spell, and use punctuation correctly, and form complete sentences. But he seems able to say nothing at all as he does so. Not one fact, not one cogent argument. Just name calling, and incessantly puking back the swill he drank up on this mornings HuffPo. Perhaps he is a robot after all?
In any case, since he believes the world will be more peaceful without homo sapiens, one hopes he will remain true to this conviction and off his carbon-emitting self soon!
Kevin| 3.19.09 @ 4:48PM
Freya:
I included the reference. The bio is a link to all of his papers. In any case, the reference is:
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/papers/Published JOC1651.pdf
anewamerica| 3.19.09 @ 4:52PM
http://reincorporation.blogspot.com
chris| 3.19.09 @ 4:56PM
Dave is right, global warming is going to kill us all. So what if it hasn't happen in 10 years, it's just saving it up for a big thrust in 2099. So the only way to save humanity is to send me some money. I'll draw up some carbon credits for you to passs along to your children to show how you saved the world!
PS- Shame on you if you DO have children, they will just increase the likelyhood of our extinction through their own carbon footprints!
Maynard| 3.19.09 @ 5:04PM
Hello David,
"Undoubtedly the Earth will become a much better place after the Homo sapiens are gone. Certainly the Earth will become a more peaceful place after the Homo sapeins are gone. "
You have just stated the obvious, so start
by killing yourself and the world will be a better
place. Using your logic of course.
daboss| 3.19.09 @ 5:11PM
just to clarify something ... Earth is NOT like Venus - Venus' atmosphere is almost entirely made up of CO2 while the Earths is 1/3 of 1%
"The mass of the atmosphere of Venus is 96.5% carbon dioxide, with most of the remaining 3.5% composed of nitrogen.[9]"
view here
Another reason not to blame CO2 on Earth for warming - since it's such a trace gas.
Anyhow ... cya
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 5:22PM
Hello, David Mathews.
"[Capitalists'] treating the planet like a sewer has served to destroy humankind's future...."
People who own resources and who own land have a vested interest in preserving both. The worst pollution on the planet can be found in Communist countries, where no one has a personal interest in preserving anything.
"Earth will become a much better place after the Homo sapiens are gone."
Sounds like a plan. You first.
+++
deWildcats| 3.19.09 @ 6:25PM
I understand that David Mathews has been studying global warming for over a year. How can anyone dispute such a great authority?
As for humans existing on mother earth, she has shown many times that she can purge us with one great volcanic blast or maybe a dose of the Spanish Flu - but she will control us.
Enjoy your brief moment on earth - we will pass and the earth will turn for a few billion more years.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 6:39PM
Hello David Matthews:
My theory is that global warming is created by bloviating former Vice Presidents who live in big mansion homes in Belle Meade, fly around the world in private jets, sell carbon offsets to gullible fools (that choose their commentary names as those of crappy alt-bands) and get awarded Nobel prizes by Scandanavian boobs too stupid to see that Inconvenient Truths are awefully convenient for a certain political ideology to masquerade as "science" and beyond debate.
Like all Deniers on the right, I too will continue to read my Judeo-Christian myth book, hang out at my local temple of hate and snakehandling and continue to be impervious to reasoning by those like yourself able to channel Scientific Truth and speak it to us Gaia-destroying troglodytes.
Dave, seeing you are such a logician and not swayed by creationist superstition, can you actually present evidence that introduction and functioning of cap and trade in Europe reduced greenhouse gas pollution? Are the peoples of Europe treating the Earth less like a sewer or more?
Skep41 | 3.19.09 @ 6:51PM
These geniuses cant fix the banks, they cant tell the truth and now they're going to 'fix' the weather. How Godlike. They should stop reading their own press releases. Cap and Trade is just another of the insane policies that these dopes learned in their decrepit Ivy League universities. All the fools who have been voting for Democrats all their lives are going to experience 'America's chickens coming home to roost' when these socialists heart-felt crusade to utopia destroys our economy and our currency. These Cap and Trade nostrums have been tried in Europe and after they brought economic activity to its knees they had to be modified or abandoned. C&T is just one of several business-killing 'initiatives' that the megastate has in the hopper. Obama, in only two months, is already the worst president in American History.
Jim O'Brien| 3.19.09 @ 6:57PM
The depth of ignorance about this is astonishing. Ask almost anyone if he thinks "greenhouse gases" are bad, and he will give a knee-jerk "Yes". But in fact, greenhouse gases are essential to maintain earth at its current temperature, warm enough for life as we know it. Most people don't even realize that a major greenhouse gas is water vapor. And most don't realize that CO2 is only present in the atmosphere in trace amounts - currently about 380 parts per million. The earth has gone through periods of warming and cooling for millions of years, before homo sapiens arrived, and long before cars and factories. Changes in cycles of the sun and the earth's orbit are the keys.
Yet Obama and the Democrat Congress is willing to further wreck the economy based on pseudo-science. If Obama's Cap & Trade taxes are enacted, more businesses will leave and take hundreds of thousands of jobs with them. Cap & Trade will be economic suicide.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 7:27PM
Hello Dave Mathews:
*"Europe's had some problems but America can learn from these problems and produce a functioning cap & trade mechanism ... either that or the United States of America can collapse, thereby reducing American pollution to minimal levels because of the absolute lack of economic activity. "
Sort of like Communism in the Soviet Union. It didn't prove Socialism was an abject failure because it wasn't "true" socialism and the "wrong people" were put in charge (i.e. not angels).
You have not answered me. Elision by a radical when asked for proof that the revolution is not folly is as predictable as not possessing a sense of humor or, humility.
There is a difference between a rant and a lampoon, but it usually it isn't discernable to a pompous ass.
codsucker| 3.19.09 @ 7:28PM
David Mathews
I agree that Global Warming is a dire threat to our planet, but what should I do, you seem to be the go to guy on this topic. Please help me I don't want to go EXTINCT!!!!!
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 8:01PM
Hello David Mathews:
Which book should I read? Can you lend me one of yours before you finish coloring it?
Whatever...
codsucker| 3.19.09 @ 8:10PM
If is is too late to stop or extinction, why waste your prodigious talents on these silly-billy consumerist whores. I am going to plant trees, not to save Humankind, but so that animals in the future will have cozy homes. Thank you David Mathews for your unending diligence, you are the voice in the desert.
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 8:20PM
Hello, David Mathews,
"Huh? Translator please ... "
Spoken like someone who has never read a book (other than "Earth in the Balance") and gets all his information from NPR, Markos Moulitsas, and Arianna Huffington. You speak nothing but scientifically and economically illiterate rubbish. Please read something else and educate yourself.
Anyone who uses the moniker "David Mathews" is automatically classified as a cultural retard, a drooling knee-jerk Liberal, and an Obama Kool-Aid drinker.
+++
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 8:22PM
Codsucker: Inspired by your example I will begin to dismantle my soul and Earth destroying Hummer and convert it into a yurt for the family, a geodesic dome for wild animals, and bongs and hacky-sacks for the benefit of all of humankind.
codsucker| 3.19.09 @ 8:28PM
Teleprompter Messiah
Don't worry I'm just trying to lead this tool David Mathews down a rabbit hole. I thought maybe I could get him to post something more substantial than his usual meaningless rants. I do plant trees but I do it for evil capitalist motives. Did you know you can make things from trees?
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 8:32PM
Hello David Mathews:
Do you know how many tons of coal are being needlessly burned to produce electricity to power this computer thingy so that I can trade barbs with a half-wit? Enough to make me want to keep treating the Earth like a sewer.
Get out of your Mom's basement and try to find a girlfriend who shaves her pits.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 8:38PM
Codsucker: Ole Dave is a sad product of our current educational system. He doesn't know that if you don't know who the mark is, then you're the mark.
Keep planting those cellulosic oxygen producers.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 8:42PM
Skep41:
The Left hasn't come up with anything new since Marx and Engels except euphemism.
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 8:53PM
Hello, David Mathews,
"Conservatives get so very bitter when they lose arguments, don't they?"
You have made two erroneous assumptions: (1) that I am bitter, and (2) that we have lost this argument.
Like Hitler from Stalingrad, it is *your* side, natureboy, that is now in retreat. Every time the science is examined and not merely filibustered, every time it snows on Al Gore, you lose adherents. The scales are falling from the eyes of the people, and they see you and your kind for what you are: power-hungry fascists. In a couple of years, you too will end, metaphorically or literally (I don't care which), in the bunker with a pistol and a "black capsule".
Say whatever you want, call me whatever you want, it won't change your status as a universally acknowledged loser. History -- and yes, there will be historians in the future, published in books made of paper (thank you, trees!) -- will see you as the butt of the joke.
+++
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 8:58PM
Hello, David Mathews,
"Wrong." "Wrong." "Wrong."
You invoke "science" as though all questions have been answered and the dogma is fixed. And you think that it's Skep who argues like a Creationist?
Funny, funny stuff. You should be on TV with that.
+++
Starry Starry Night| 3.19.09 @ 9:00PM
For the first time in three years, republicans have tied democrats in generic polling. Didn't take long for the liberal Obumbler freaks to piss off the country. The democrats are gonna get a beatin' in 2010. Can't wait.
Be A Patriot-Reject Liberalism| 3.19.09 @ 9:03PM
The real POTUS is TOTUS--Teleprompter Of The United States--per Rush. LOL!!
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 9:13PM
Hello, David Mathews,
No, not all Texans are as clear-thinking and reality-based as I am -- just most of us. Many, however, remain as foolish and dogmatic as you, judging from the returns of the last election, in which the fantasists were defeated by only 900,000 or so votes.
Yes, the Republican Party is in the minority for a reason -- just not the reason to which you are alluding. Sure, in a drunken "yes we can" binge, Liberals managed to get a lot of Republicans around the country fired last November, but here in Texas, we increased the size of our Republican delegation to Congress, as did a few other right-thinking and sober states. It has been ten years since a Democrat won a statewide election here, and he wasn't anything even remotely like you.
Enough of this country is still like Texas that you should enjoy your moment in the sun while you can. It will be short-lived. How short? Look on Jimmy Carter, and contemplate your future.
I can't wait: Michelle in retirement will make Roslynn look like Little Miss Sunshine.
+++
Jeremiah| 3.19.09 @ 9:17PM
Rush backed Obumbler down--TOTUS was too afraid to debate the great man. You chain smoking cokehead ass kissers make me laugh. We gonna beat you losers good in 2010.
Heather| 3.19.09 @ 9:20PM
Michelle looks like she gets her clothing out of a dumpster. Gives new meaning to 'dumpster diving'. Snark
Obama Rules| 3.19.09 @ 9:23PM
Mathews, is that you swimming next to the dolphin in that photo on your web-site, or is that a whale?
Heather| 3.19.09 @ 9:24PM
We'll see in 2010--not lookin' too good for you clowns. Liberal losers.
Michelle| 3.19.09 @ 9:40PM
No, you're probably just a big fat liberal white boy. Freak.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 9:41PM
Hello Dave Mathews:
Is there any point to your life as an Axelrod Astroturfer?
Curits Rasmussen| 3.19.09 @ 10:19PM
Jeez, Dave
Give it up. Why be bitter? The Marxist proletariat is in control, just as you prefer!
If anything, you should celebrate the impending and unprecedented control of your individual life and the boot across the throat of our capitalist economy.
I'll see you in the soup line, dou***bag.
stmich(DenierBoy)rick| 3.19.09 @ 10:25PM
MrGlobalMathews;
I have been observing your style here.
You have been responding RELIGIOUSLY to all of us unscientific heathen deniers for over 24 hours.
Each point that has been made against man-made GW DOGMA, some stronger than others ,have been answered by you with a wisecrack.
You like to refer to 'scientists' as if there are none who are skeptics (like James Hansen's former boss at NASA).
Please let us know what achievements inform your scientific perspective on the topic.
You are a poor spokesman for your side. Daryl Hannah is more sincere and nice to look at.
You
Charles Martel| 3.19.09 @ 10:27PM
The "global warming" argument is indeed finished. It was only the panic-mongers who got it started in the first place.
Is climate change important? Of course, it is. Read the historical record, and by that I don't mean the cooked statistics of frauds like Gore and Hansen. I mean that we should envision the impact on our world of climate changes like the warming that occurred around the Ninth Century AD (recall the fall of the Maya and the rise of the Vikings) and the cooling that occurred around 1330, which led not just to famine but also directly to the Black Plague.
US agriculture feeds much of the world, and we all need to support efforts to plan ahead. This does not entail an unreasoning stampede toward the carbon offset fantasies of the prophets of AGW doom. Contrary to whatever they may think of us, we are not a panicky mob: we are a civil polity with deliberative processes that serve the purpose of arriving at wise law.
We are also the most important nation on Earth, and we should resist any and all efforts made by "citizens of the world" within our own borders to "change" that.
I thank all of you who have had the patience to wait out this nihilistic moron Mathews. I remain confident that we are a nation of citizens, not subjects.
God bless and keep America.
+++
Obama Rules| 3.19.09 @ 10:29PM
Hell, mind-numbed Mathews won't be in no stinkin' soup line, Curits. He'll be up there with the other marxist liberals eating $200 a pound prime beef with the Obamas. Stupid evil republicans might get to eat garbage--if he decides to be nice to you! Suckers.
Freya| 3.19.09 @ 10:43PM
Not quite, one more point to Daboss from post 5:11.
Dude, a limit is a limit, a point beyond which any further addition will make no difference. So if the absolute limit to the greenhouse effect is thirty-something degrees, it won't matter if the entire atmosphere is composed of nitrous oxide and methane (two of the most powerful greenhouse gases known to exist) packed at 100 atm, the greenhouse effect will still be only thirty-something degrees. Obviously, the real limit is much higher.
Paul from SA| 3.19.09 @ 11:06PM
David Mathews,
Our air at sea level:
Nitrogen = 78.084%
Oxygen = 20.947%
Argon = 00.934%
CO2 = 00.034% (not a trace?)
Two questions:
1) I'll ask again. Can you provide any data that shows a positive correlation between man-made CO2 emissions and global temps, beside just the brief time period 1977-1998?
You cannot!
2) Do you believe in Area 51, alien abductions and crop circles?
It's time for you to go to your room.
woodstock| 3.19.09 @ 11:19PM
If there was such a thing as heat trapping gases then
why don't they trap the heat from reaching earth
in the first place?
Freya must not be old enough to remember the
global cooling scare in the 70's .Every time Al
Gore exhales he adds CO2 so why doesn't he take the lead to decrease CO2.
Teleprompter Messiah| 3.19.09 @ 11:30PM
Carbonicus: Trying to reason with Ole Dave is like showing a watch to a hog.
Good points though, but you are throwing pearls before swine.
Obama Drools| 3.19.09 @ 11:37PM
The air quality in Los Angeles has definitely improved since the 70's. But A-Holes like Mathews will never admit it because what he really wants is POWER!! He's just a run-of-the-mill marxist whore, like all of his buddies in Obummer's administration.
Daphne| 3.19.09 @ 11:39PM
TM: Swine is good--I like the swine visual I get when I think of little Dave. He's probably a big fat white guy.
Susan| 3.20.09 @ 1:27AM
335,000 people have signed a petition demanding Obama release documentation to verify that he is eligible to be POTUS. I believe that he is not. Make your own decisions but if you agree that he has "alot of 'splaying to do", sign the petion at WorldNetDaily(wnd.com), spread the word. Barry Sotero/Barrack Hussein, whatever, he needs TO GO. Then, we should not REELECT ANYONE to the Senate; each state, upon new terms, vote ANYBODY who isnt sitting in D.C.
Osamas Pajamas | 3.20.09 @ 1:39AM
Relax, lads. I have it on good authority that OhBummer is going to hijack Air Force One and crash it into his own head. Yee haa.
Larry| 3.20.09 @ 3:24AM
After some thought here I figured out the perfect defense against carbon taxes and cap and trade.
Make them unconstitutional. Here's how.
The problem carbon taxes have is that it's not a inome tax. The 16th amendment does not apply to them. Which then means that they have to pass the test applied by Article 1 sec. 9 para. 4 .
(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.)
So now the questions are these. Q. What kind of tax is a carbon tax? A. It's a property tax. Q. What are the direct taxes mentioned in the Constitution? A. The court system has held that there are 2 types of direct taxes. Poll taxes and Property taxes.
Now for the money shot. Q. How do you make carbon taxes into unconstitutional property taxes? A. Well, according to the 1896 ruling that killed the 1894 income tax act the vile act that is unconstitutional is a tax upon the produce of your land. So what you need to do is have an ownership interest in the land that creates your energy. The oil wells and the coal mines.
And the tax becomes unconstitutional.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.20.09 @ 6:25AM
http://www.eurweb.com/story/eur51750.cfm
*Appearing at the recent “Ecnomics” conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, former vice president and anthropogenic global warming guru Al Gore had a rather telling exchange with Bjorn Lomborg. Lomborg, a former member of Greenpeace and author of the book the The Skeptical Environmentalist invited Gore to debate the science of man made global warming. Gore declined the invitation insisting that it was “silly” to continue to debate the science. This seemed a particularly odd response given the fact that science is by definition the act of questioning -- a constant effort to peel back more and more layers in order to gain an ever deeper understanding. For Gore, however, “The scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse.” And the science is settled. In his words, "the debate is over." Well, as my mother used to say, “talkin’ loud don’t make you right!”
The fact is that the science is far from settled and there is no consensus on anthropogenic global warming. In fact, the debate is alive and well…at least for those willing to debate.
There are, in fact, more than 31,000 scientists – 9,000 of them with PhDs—that have signed a petition stating their unequivocal belief that the Kyoto protocol and similar proposals will “harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology and damage the health and welfare of mankind.” The petition reads in part: “…There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the earth’s climate.” There are also a growing number of former AGW believers that have studied the science and become climate realists.
Last week, many of those signers joined about 800 other realists at the “International Conference on Climate Change” sponsored by the Heartland Institute. In addition to an impressive list of speakers, there were many scientists, teachers and, well, just regular folks all of whom were up to date in the most current science as well as being conversant in the language of science and all of them concerned about the misuse of science for political gain.
But as we have observed, truth is not determined by polls; it is determined through facts – facts ascertained through scientific inquiry and debate.
The problem is that the current debate (or non debate if you are Al Gore) on Anthropogenic Global Warming has little to do with science and everything to do with politics.
During an exchange from the WSJ conference, Gore insisted that America is at a “political tipping point.” In other words, the political wheels are already in motion to enact policy based not on scientific fact, but on an ideological agenda.
No one narrative explains the willingness of global warming alarmists to distort facts and ignore or omit evidence that contradicts their theory of human-caused global warming. There is no one reason why alarmists attempt to bully climate realists with authoritative arguments – The IPCC declared it so it must be gospel – or simply refuse to engage contrary theories. There is, however, one narrative that seems ever more likely especially in light of the increasing threat of nationalization of industry. The narrative of social control through the rationing of energy begins to make plenty of sense.
In the defense of Marxism, Colin Penfield says,"... the need for an equitable division of labor involving a planned economy... is the only real solution to the current problem of global warming.” What better way to extend political power than to take the very gas each of us exhales with every breath we take – the substance on which photosynthesis relies and label it a contaminant? How better to consolidate power than to announce a planetary emergency based on computer models (as opposed to observed data)and then demand control of industry in order to forestall catastrophe? What could be more perfect than to discover a new moral virtue in “saving the planet?” And what could better explain the rush to enact policy that will cost trillions of dollars, and which by the alarmists own admission, will produce very little in the way of results but will bring the entire capitalist system to a screeching halt?
Of course, there could be another reason, one as old as time itself. In the immortal words of Indiana Jones, “fortune and glory, boy, fortune and glory.”
Robert Rosencrans| 3.20.09 @ 7:35AM
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/More-OpEd-Contributors/Obama-budget-will-bring-back-4-per-gallon-gas-41555612.html
As bureaucrats in Washington attempt to chart a course that will take the nation out of this economic wilderness, President Barack Obama’s proposed $3.6 trillion budget is a stunning departure from the fiscal restraint and responsibility he promised during the campaign.
Obama’s tax-and-spend binge is drawing fire from both sides of the aisle, and for good reason. With a $789 billion “stimulus” bill and $700 billion in Wall Street bailout funds already committed, how much more can taxpayers be expected to bear under the guise of “stimulating” the economy?
Though the president has pledged that 95 percent of Americans won’t see their taxes rise by a single dime, his administration fails to tell us that every single one of us will see higher energy prices as a result of his budget.
By hiking taxes on energy companies and imposing a gigantic global warming tax, Obama virtually ensures rising costs for the energy we need.
The Obama budget’s massive tax increases on domestic energy have somehow slipped under the radar, yet it’s these tax hikes and other punitive measures that will surely reduce domestic energy supply and increase energy costs.
Through a mixture of production tax increases and manipulative tax code restructuring, Obama’s budget slaps a whopping $80 billion tax hike on energy companies. In a brazen political move, the budget would single out the oil and gas industry alone for harsher tax treatment.
In other words, the energy industry will be exempt from a credit all other industries enjoy, and will be forced to raise prices in order to meet the burden of a higher corporate income tax.
The budget also renegotiates the terms of existing oil and gas leases on projects that are deemed “inactive,” and imposes an excise tax on Gulf of Mexico energy production.
During the campaign, candidate Obama was pressured into supporting increased development of domestic oil and gas resources due to its overwhelming popular support. Unfortunately, as President, Obama has taken a “delay and deny” approach that promises even more restrictions on domestic supply.
One of his early moves as president was to delay the implementation of a new plan for the Minerals Management Service that would include new leasing rules, an act that kicks the offshore drilling can even further down the road. Obama’s Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has also canceled plans to drill on lands in Wyoming and Utah. And now with his budget proposal, Obama has added enormous tax hikes to the mix.
The road to economic recovery is paved with low, stable energy prices. Singling out oil and gas companies for pain could result in more supply challenges like the country faced last summer when crude oil prices reached more than $100 per barrel.
As the economy picks up and demand for energy increases, Americans will need readily available supplies to avoid price increases that could undermine the nation’s economic revival.
Perhaps most disturbingly, the budget enacts a titanic $656 billion global warming tax in the form of a “cap-and-trade” system. This scheme would cap emissions of carbon dioxide and force energy producers to pay through the nose for permits to release it. Those companies would then pass the costs on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Obama himself admitted last January that “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket” under such a scheme. Regardless of the science of global warming, bringing our economy to a screeching halt is no way to combat it.
As partisan wrangling continues in Washington, D.C., every taxpayer and consumer should encourage their lawmakers to examine this $3.6 trillion budget, line by line, and reject tax hikes on energy.
In the midst of recession as many Americans are suffering, the promise of massive tax increases and higher energy costs will heap more misery on the beleaguered constituents the administration has pledged to relieve.
Carbonicus| 3.20.09 @ 12:48PM
R. Rosencranz - you've captured it well in your posting, but there's one figure in there that needs some updating/further elucidation, in terms of amount and use of proceeds.
PBO publicly stated that the cap & rape plan he is advancing would raise $656 billion over 10 years. However, one of his administration staffers - Jason Furman, Nat'l Economic Council - briefed senate staffers about three weeks ago and told them the administration believes they can raise $2 trillion over the next 10 years through cap & rape taxes.
All credible analyses of the costs of CO2 emissions reductions through cap & trade fall in a range of 2-4% of GDP - EACH YEAR (not one time).
To the $14 trillion annual U.S. economy, 2% is $280 billion PER YEAR, 3% is $420 billion PER YEAR, and 4% is $560 billion PER YEAR. Carry any of these numbers out ten years, and you can see that even Furman's disclosure to senate staffers is a lie.
Such enormous numbers would be a waste of money, given what I posted last night about the peer reviewed estimates of the difference in temperature this would be most likely to make in the year 2100 (.15-.20 degrees C difference, well inside natural variability). It would be a colossal waste of money even if all of it was going to "alternative energy" R&D, "green jobs", or some other direct environmental investment.
But Furman told senate staffers, and PBO has also said in veiled ways, that they intend to use about 80% of this tax, errr, revenue TO FUND THEIR MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS!
This isn't about the environment. Not to PBO, not to Carol Browner, not to Lisa Jackson, not to John Holdren, not to Steven Chu, not to Al Gore, not to James Hansen. Not to any of them.
This is about rewarding laziness, punishing success, more government control of a new source of tax revenue, more government control over the means of production and distribution (class definition of socialism), etc. It's probably other things too, but it damn sure isn't about the environment.
Carbonicus takes his name from Copernicus, who discovered that the earth revolves around the sun, rather than the sun revolving around the earth, which is what religious teachings said during that time (late 1400's - early 1,500's). For fear of reprisal by the church and others, he witheld publication of his works until just before his death. Galileo later picked up on this and proved Copernicus correct via his telescope and other means. He was, summarily, jailed for heresy by the church in 1633, placed under house arrest for the rest of his life.
Of course, we now know that Galileo and Copernicus were correct, the church and other scientists and philosophers were wrong, and just a few years ago, the Catholic church admitted their error and apologized to both. This is not a commentary on the Catholic church. This is a comparison between the ideology of the church then, and the ideology of eco-socialists today.
This isn't about science, it's about ideology. If it was about science, Gore, Hansen, and all their eco-socialist followers would be happy to debate. Real scientists welcome debate, they don't refuse to do it, call it unnecessary, or belittle those who call for it with ad hominem attacks. That's what ideologists do.
Today, Carbonicus exists and is on a mission to call out eco-socialists, to hit them squarely with facts, observed evidence (as opposed to computer model theory), and to point out their hiding behind ideology and politics and calling it "science".
To all those who've posted here who understand the state of the science, who don't want to see precious economic resources wasted on made-up environmental problems but instead allocated to real environmental problems, who stand for free markets, who understand that only with high per capita GDP do nations improve their environment (see environmental kuznets curve), and who love America - STAND UP, MAKE YOUR VOICES HEARD, AND FIGHT. And do it NOW, before it's too late and the eco-socialists destroy America and hurt the very environment they purport to be trying to save. WE NEED YOU. AMERICA NEEDS YOU. Our quality of life, standard of living, and freedoms are at stake. DON'T WAIT. Attack these people, call them out for their gaiarrhea, and start excoriating ALL elected representatives on this issue.
Because, if you don't, you can expect $6/gallon gas, tripled home energy bills, carbon police watching your every move, zero economic growth, and no environmental improvement.
Stand with Carbonicus and fight. We can congratulate ourselves later, after we've defeated this 7 headed monster.
lifelonghuman| 3.20.09 @ 2:05PM
Nice to see that David Mathews can speak his mind. The leftist sites all censor opposing views. Says a lot about conservatives.
David, the socialist angle is this. Add a tax on energy, based on THEORY (see computer simulations; also see GIGO). The tax will be passed along to consumers, but then give all lower income people cash to offset their energy bills. In other words, spread the wealth.
juno elmo| 3.20.09 @ 2:16PM
I really cannot understand this CAP & TRADE at all.
Can any please explain to me who is placing the CAP & TRADE on natural occurring events such as volcano eruptions and the like? Or are we saying that humans are not "natural"?
I just don't understand. There should not be a CAP & TRADE on any human driven carbon emmissions since any sizable natural occurance of upset dwarfs what humans can produce in decades. I just don't get it.
lifelonghuman| 3.20.09 @ 2:24PM
Upset dwarfs? Is that PC?
Sunny| 3.20.09 @ 2:36PM
God love you Carbonicus.
brutus| 3.20.09 @ 3:09PM
OK, show of hands: how many TAS readers think David Matthews and Freya should get up off their a$$es, get real jobs and become PRODUCTIVE members of American society. These two have WAY too much time on their hands. Sheesh.
Dustoff| 3.20.09 @ 3:47PM
My hand is WAY up. lol
Angel| 3.20.09 @ 4:03PM
I think it's HOT that there are so many smart Conservative men!! You guys rock; libtard Mathews--not so much. ;)
Charles Martel| 3.20.09 @ 6:00PM
Juno: My old mentor and geography professor back in college scoffed at AGW by pointing out that a single volcanic eruption will throw more particulate matter and noxious gasses into the atmosphere than has Man since the discovery of fire.
Brutus: I'll vote "aye", although the resolution must be non-binding, given that, with an attitude like his, DM is unemployable. Besides, I'd bet he's waiting for Obama's domestic national security force to start up. Then he'll show us all what for.
Angel: And some of us are single.
+++
Angel| 3.20.09 @ 7:22PM
Yeah, and so damn far away.
frankg| 3.20.09 @ 9:06PM
I think dave's using a cut and paste machine courtesy of huufpo. He's obviously using tactics of swamping this thread to discourage rational discussion. I don't trust centralized/socialized management of my life. It's just one long march of freedoms that must be surrendered for the common good, or mother gaia, or the god of big government, that will get all the energy it needs, by the way, for its experts, and come to be less of a public servant but instead a perpetual master. Ecology is just a means to an ends. Eventually, it will become painfully obvious to the well connected managing our lives hour to hour that we lower people are the problem, there are just too many of us, and the "one child policies" will begin.
Iaidoka| 3.21.09 @ 7:01AM
Dave is just a troll. He lives to pick fights on line because in real life, he just wants his Mommy and has no backbone at all when face to face.
Best advise: Don't feed the troll. If you don't respond to him, he'll go away pretty quickly.
Marc Jeric| 3.21.09 @ 10:46AM
Since January 2007 we have had the Congress in the hands of the far left (Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dobbs, Rangel, Waters, Shumer, etc.), and since January this year the White House is also in their hands (Obama, Biden, Holder, Clinton, Energy, EPA, education, labor, etc.) - all socialists bent to nationalize banks, health care, heavy industry, energy, etc. Education is already in their hands, from kindergarten to high school to universities, while the justice is mostly administered by far-left judges appointed by the ruling party.
In the 20th century we had 3 big examples of totalitarian socialist experiment, namely Russia, Germany, and Italy. The names of the ruling parties there all had "socialist" in their names: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, German National-Socialist Workers Party, and Italian Socialist Party (Fascists). All of these exercised total control of their economies, eliminated religion from public life, controlled education from pre-school to university,and were characterized by mass murder, war, poverty, secret police, political prisons - and all were clearly of the far-left persuasion.
Our far left now in power, calling themselves "liberals" and urgently voting laws uncannily similar to those of the three big ones mentioned above, are hell-bent to call us, normal people of the classic liberal persuasion in favor of small government, low taxes, free markets, reliance on the Constition, and personal freedom - briefly American way of life - by names such as extreme right, or fascists, or nazis. Why did we permit them to call us such names? By what logic is that possible - or is it the incessant propaganda by our Main Stream Media?
stmichrick| 3.21.09 @ 12:37PM
Dictionary publishers take note:
We have great modern examples to demonstrate the meaning of the word 'oxymoron.'
'settled science'
'scientific consensus'
Vlad-the-Impaler| 3.21.09 @ 3:42PM
I might add, there are approximately 80 million gun owners in the US, and most of them are not of the DM ilk. Somebody needs to flush him like the turd that he is.
Rug| 3.25.09 @ 1:57PM
If we go back to the last "Global Warming" of significance, it lasted almost 500 years. Back then there were no cars, no manufacturing plants. There were a lot of cows and humans. I truly believe that we and the cows are farting too much, as before.
If you guys listen to these chicken littles, you are giving them the soap box they desire.
They do not, or can not, accept that "we" and whatever we have produced are a "blip" in the overall cycle of the Earth. How can they take an AlGore comment and believe it. I keep forgetting, he invented the internet. One hundred years, or even one thousand years is NOTHING in the life of this Blue Marble.
Heather| 3.25.09 @ 11:28PM
Regarding the gas attacks; speak for yourself, Rug. And most assuredly, Dave Mathews. He's a real stinker!!
Trackback| 4.16.09 @ 9:05AM
bad credit mortgage, on bad credit mortgage, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.12.09 @ 12:16PM
Market Based Solutions Now Only Sometimes Socialism « Repartay links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.29.09 @ 1:32AM
CONSENSUS WATCH - 6/27/2009; because without consensus, scientific conclusions would links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 7.9.09 @ 1:39AM
Religious Magnet, on Religious Magnet, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.25.09 @ 3:37AM
Darien Brown (IPA: dæ’·ri·ɛn braʊn) » Blog Archive » Cap-and-trade is socialist? Real links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.8.09 @ 8:02AM
Why Now? « links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.23.09 @ 5:21PM
Wonk Room » Obama: ‘It’s Hard To Say’ Why Critics Of Clean Energy Accuse Him Of Soci links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.23.09 @ 7:49PM
Greenhoof » Blog Archive » Obama says ‘It’s hard to say’ why critics of clean energy links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
hgjghj| 11.26.09 @ 10:10PM
Mac TOD Converter,
TOD Converter for Windows
Pingback| 12.10.09 @ 12:20AM
(d)N0t » Blog Archive » Dream Not Of Today – Polluting The Language In Copenhagen by links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.14.09 @ 1:07PM
. o O ( Credit Repair Software – Dispute Credit | How to fix Credit Fast Review: Sca links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 3.25.10 @ 6:11PM
Satellite TV Deals, on Satellite TV Deals, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
poptropica | 4.9.10 @ 10:42PM
I’ll have a Poptropica full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You
Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale
You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need to jump up when the Hydra is about to strike. He will rear one of his heads back to attack and his eyes will bulge out. When this happens, jump up in the air and then try to land on top of his head. That head will get knocked out. When all five heads get knocked out, the Hydra will be asleep and you can click on him to get one of the scales. I’ll have a full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You
Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale
Poptropica You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need
fiance visa| 10.18.11 @ 12:00PM
Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading you posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.
actos lawsuit
Pingback| 4.20.10 @ 2:16PM
Stop Liberal Lies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
wow| 10.17.11 @ 9:03AM
I will admit this is the third time I have visited your blog and I love it! I added your blog to my rss reader. Looking forward to see more blog posts!
diving equipment
balcuizar62| 10.13.11 @ 2:41AM
I am looking forward to another great article from you.
yaz class action
ruth| 10.17.11 @ 3:28PM
Proceed to keep up the very good operate. I simply further up your RSS feed to my MSN Information Reader. Seeking forward to reading extra from you in a while!Â?
mesothelioma lawsuit
fiance visa| 10.18.11 @ 3:39AM
How did you get so many readers to see your article I’m jealous!
I’m going to look around on your blog to get a better understanding how to attract more people.
fiance visa
creamer| 10.20.11 @ 1:46AM
Any way I will be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon
Actos Attorney
abominable putridity| 11.5.11 @ 11:18AM
This was a really wonderful article. Thank you for your provided information.
i visit here and now i read the topic
L Tod Schlosser
wow| 11.13.11 @ 8:50PM
What a wonderful piece of information Admiring the time and effort you put into your magazine and detailed information you offer!
paxil lawsuit
wow| 11.13.11 @ 9:01PM
That fantabulous post this has been. Within no way seen this kind associated with useful post. I’m grateful to you and anticipate much more associated with posts such as. Thank you very much.
paxil lawsuit
bogol| 11.16.11 @ 1:49PM
Your bogs here uncovered most of the coolest online social trends, I think I would continuously visit your page.It’s really worth reading through!
Actos Lawyer
bogol| 11.30.11 @ 2:53PM
Wow! This blog looks just like my old one! It's on a completely different subject but it has pretty much the same page layout and design. Outstanding choice of colors!
Propecia Lawyer
bogol| 12.1.11 @ 11:59AM
Thanks a lot for sharing this with all of us you really realize what you're speaking approximately! Bookmarked. Kindly additionally discuss with my web site =). We may have a hyperlink change agreement among us!
mesothelioma attorney
inah0911| 12.5.11 @ 4:03PM
yes,this kind of blog always useful for blog readers, it helps people during research. your post is one of the same for blog readers.
san diego personal injury lawyer
inah0911| 12.6.11 @ 12:07PM
it looks like pretty good here and has a many comment thank you for tagging this awesome blog..
bankruptcy attorney san diego
IMYI| 12.15.11 @ 10:08PM
I have to say that Im really unimpressed with this. I mean, sure, youve got some very interesting points. But this blog is just really lacking in something. Maybe its content, maybe its just the design. I dont know. But its almost like you wrote this because everybodys doing it. No passion at all.
Medtronic Infuse Lawyer