-
Obamacare Implodes
May 15, 2013 | 41 comments
-
Obama’s Rising Inequality
May 8, 2013 | 101 comments
-
Downsize the Liberals
May 1, 2013 | 53 comments
-
Fight Back! Privatize the FAA!
April 24, 2013 | 65 comments
-
Fallacies and Charades
April 17, 2013 | 14 comments
Special Report
Romney’s Pending Sellout on Global Warming
In the wake of Fakegate, conservatives should be very wary of giving him a pass on more than just Romneycare.
The theory that humans are causing catastrophic global warming by burning fossil fuels and releasing “greenhouse” gases lapsed into self-parody in the past couple of weeks with the scandal of Fakegate. Here is the full context to understand that story, which is valuable because it serves as a further revelation and metaphor for the entire fabrication of global warming.
On an irregular schedule of roughly every 6 years, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) produces a voluminous Assessment Report (AR) on the state of so called climate science. The fourth AR was published in 2007, and the fifth is due to be released in four parts over 2013 to 2014.
In 2008, the Chicago based Heartland Institute began organizing international conferences of scientists from across the globe who want to raise and discuss intellectually troubling questions and doubts regarding the theory of ultimately catastrophic man caused global warming. Heartland has sponsored six such conferences by now, attracting more than 3,000 scientists, journalists, and interested citizens from all over the world.
In 2009, Heartland published Climate Change Reconsidered: The Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). That 860-page careful, dispassionate, thoroughly scientific volume, produced in conjunction with the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, presented the full scope of the scientific research and basis for disputing the global warming alarmist views of the UN’s IPCC. Two years later, Heartland published the 418 page Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2011 Interim Report of the NIPCC, which updated the research regarding global warming and “climate change” since the 2009 volume.
Through these publications and international conferences, Heartland has become the international headquarters of the scientific alternative to the UN’s IPCC, now providing full-scale rebuttals to the UN’s own massive reports. Any speaker, any authority, any journalist or bureaucrat asserting the catastrophic danger of supposed man-caused global warming needs to be asked for their response to Climate Change Reconsidered. If they have none, then they are not qualified to address the subject.
The Fakegate Fabrication
Political activist Peter Gleick had successfully engineered a
career posing as an objective “climate scientist.” He served as
President of the left-wing front Pacific Institute, from which he
is now taking a “temporary leave of absence,” and as chairman of
the science integrity task force of the American Geophysical Union,
from which he has now resigned.
Gleick has publicly confessed that he contacted the Heartland Institute fraudulently pretending to be a member of Heartland’s Board of Directors. Emails released by the Heartland Institute show that he created an email address designed to appear to belong to a board member and used it to convince a staff member to send him confidential board documents. Gleick then forwarded the documents to 15 global warming alarmist advocacy organizations and sympathetic journalists.
The expectation of the plotters of the fraud was apparently that the documents would be as embarrassing and damaging to the global warming skeptics as were the emails revealed in the “Climategate” scandal to the alarmist side. The Climategate revelations showed scientific leaders of the UN’s IPCC and global warming alarmist movement plotting to falsify climate data and exclude those raising doubts about their theories from scientific publications, while coordinating their message with supposedly objective mainstream journalists.
But the stolen Heartland documents only exonerated the skeptics and Heartland. They demonstrate Heartland’s concern to get the truth out on the actual objective science. They reveal negligible funding from oil companies or other self interested commercial enterprises, who actually contribute heavily to global warming alarmists for protection money instead. The documents also show how poorly funded the global warming skeptics at Heartland are, managing on a shoestring to raise a shockingly successful global challenge to the heavily overfunded UN and politicized government science.
As the Wall Street Journal observed on Feb. 21, while Heartland’s budget for the NIPCC this year totals $388,000, that compares to $6.5 million for the UN’s IPCC, and $2.5 billion that Obama’s budget commits for research into “the global changes that have resulted primarily from global over-dependence on fossil fuels.” That demonstrates how an ounce of truth can overcome a tidal wave of falsehood.
Maybe that is why Gleick or one of his coconspirators felt compelled to go farther and compose a fake memo titled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy.” Whoever did it revealed an understanding that a document composed on his computer and distributed online would contain markings demonstrating its source and confirming the forgery. That is why the forgerer printed the document out and scanned it, apparently thinking that would hide its digital trail. But the scanned document itself also contained evidence that allowed it to be traced back to the Pacific Institute’s offices, as explained by Megan McCardle, a senior editor for the Atlantic and herself a global warming alarmist, though not sympathetic to fraud.
Only that forged cover memo, and not any stolen Heartland documents, contains language mirroring Climategate. It discusses fabricated projects that are not activities of Heartland, and a $200,000 Koch Foundation contribution for climate change activities that doesn’t even exist. The Koch Foundation confirms that it gave Heartland only $25,000 in 2011, earmarked for health care policy projects and not climate change, an amount equal to only 0.5% of Heartland’s budget. By contrast, as the Journal also observed, the budget last year for the Natural Resources Defense Council was $95.4 million, and for the World Wildlife Fund $238.5 million.
The bigger problem for Gleick was revealed in the statement of Heartland President Joe Bast on the scandal: “Identity theft and computer fraud are criminal offenses subject to imprisonment. We intend to find this person and see him or her put in prison for these crimes.”
Heartland has now hired a legal team to pursue the matter. That includes Gordon B. Nash, Jr., a partner in the Chicago office of Drinker Biddle & Reath, and a former prosecutor in the office of the U.S. Attorney in Chicago, where he became chief of the Special Prosecutions Division. It also includes James C. Dunlop, a 15-year veteran of the white-collar crime practice of Jones Day, an international law firm with more than 2,500 lawyers on five continents. Dunlop represents companies, institutions, and individuals in criminal matters worldwide, concentrating on investigations relating to criminal allegations, fraud, and unethical conduct. Analogous but far less blatant conduct involving allegations of phone hacking and email tampering led to a Scotland Yard investigation and closure last year of News of the World, once the largest circulation English newspaper in the world.
The affair has served to reveal the fraudulent character of the global warming movement more generally, as sympathetic global warming activists have continued to rally around Gleick despite his confession and the documented fraud. DeSmogBlog.com continued to repeat fraudulent claims regarding the faked document, and make false claims regarding the leaked actual documents. The New York Times resisted correcting the record regarding the Koch Foundation grant, even after the Foundation itself documented the errors in its “reporting.”
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.7.12 @ 6:20AM
According to MittRomney.com your statement on his plans for the EPA and government in general are misleading.
Of course with politicians, promises are not always kept. In fact, Reagan promised to do away with the worthless Department of Energy, a twin sister to the EPA, and the Department of Education. He took no action on either one.
Here's what Romney promises:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/regulation
Repeal Obamacare
Repeal Dodd-Frank and replace with streamlined, modern regulatory framework
Amend Sarbanes-Oxley to relieve mid-size companies from onerous requirements
Initiate review and elimination of all Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy
Reform Environmental Regulation
As president, Mitt Romney will eliminate the regulations promulgated in pursuit of the Obama administration’s costly and ineffective anti-carbon agenda. Romney will also press Congress to reform our environmental laws to ensure that they allow for a proper assessment of their costs.
Ensure that environmental laws properly account for cost in regulatory process
Provide multi-year lead times before companies must come into compliance with onerous new environmental regulations
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.7.12 @ 8:37AM
One thing I forgot to add:
PARK BENCH.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 9:48AM
One thing you forgot to add---"My collaborator, Senator Kennedy."
JJ| 3.8.12 @ 10:01PM
And of course Romney can promise ANYTHING, then break those campaign promises once elected. Go by the history not the promises.
Anyone who bought into the AGW scam has no business making executive decisions.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 9:45AM
Unfortunately every single thing he promises is not within the powers of the presidency and so he will simply shrug and say "I did all I could" when no such legislation materializes.
That is precisely what he did in Massachusetts and anyone who believes he will behave differently in the White House is either an apparatchik or a sucker or both.
Richard Ryan| 3.7.12 @ 1:16PM
"provide lead times before companies MUST come into compliance, initiate review, etc. this is pretty weak stuff. And what about the global warming alarmists Mitt
Has/is surrounding himself with? You just cannot say one negative thing about Romney, and Gingrich and Santorum are trash. Beginning to get old.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.7.12 @ 1:49PM
Gingrich is the one who sat on the Park Bench. Santorum was in the U.S. Senate for years and did nothing about it. Would you mind telling me in 25 words or less why I should defend that?
albert constantine jr.| 3.7.12 @ 2:02PM
Was it a park bench, or a sofa on a beach?
Richard Ryan| 3.7.12 @ 2:12PM
Gingrich and Santorum are not perfect. In my opinion we could have done better than these 4 republicans. Much better. I'm not suggesting you defend the others, just saying that any TRUE conservative would not give Romney a full pass on his history regarding this issue.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.7.12 @ 6:26PM
Stating a fact is not giving someone a pass.
Carbonicus| 3.9.12 @ 11:29PM
re: the alarmists Mitt has surrounded himself with, if the info about John Holdren checks out, then he's no better than Obamao on the global warming issue.
Holdren is a textbook eco-socialist. He and Paul Ehrlich came up with the infamous I = PxAxT equation to try and explain how population growth, consumption, and technology would destroy the planet and humanity with it. This is fundamentally flawed and well explained by many.
Holdren and Ehrlich were big "Club of Rome" watermelons, believing in peak oil, coming resource scarcity, and similar eco-doom. All this is documented in Ehrlich's 1968 book "The Population Bomb" and other collaborations. Resource economist Julian Simon called Ehrlich and Holdren on their predictions in 1980. If Ehrlich and Holdren were right, and resources were in fact becoming more scarce, any basket of resource commodities should be more expensive 10 years hence. If Simon were right, the same basket would be cheaper 10 years later (adjusted for inflation). Holdren helped Ehrlich choose the commodoties (they chose chrome, copper, nickel, tin, tungsten). 10 years later, Simon easily won the bet. Without getting into the details of the structure of the bet, the basket price went DOWN more than 50% over the 10 years from 1980-1990.
Holdren and Ehrlich advocated for triage - cutting off food to countries that were "too far gone". They advocated for forced population control, including putting sterility chemicals in the water supply if necessary. They predicted some form of nuclear or environmental disaster would end humanity by 2000.
Ehrlich or Holdren wrote, in the 1970's "giving affordable energy to humanity would the equivalent of giving an idiot child a loaded machine gun". $4 gas? Given a chance Holdren would make it $10/gallon.
Neo-malthusian and eco-socialist. That's what John Holdren is. He's also Obamao's current "Science Advisor". And Romney appointed him to a position in Mass?
THAT person is associated with the conservative choice to Barack Obamao?
If that association is any indication of Mitt's energy and environmental policy. we're in a heap of trouble, folks.
The American Hitman| 3.7.12 @ 2:28PM
Willard Romneycare could get up and start reading the Communist Manifesto at his next "speech." The GOPe and their talking heads would not care.
Electable!!
Christopher C.| 3.7.12 @ 4:41PM
Exactly. Just how much of a Manchurian candidate is this plastic man?
Garfield| 3.9.12 @ 1:23PM
I'd be inspired by what Romney, cept for the fact I'm not gullable and I pay attention to people's records.
Romney's past suggests that he would have no intention of following through on those promises.
John786| 3.7.12 @ 6:45AM
What if global warming is true. The precautionary principle. Did the moon landings actually take place: remember the fluttering flag- who are they kidding.
Jeremiah Smirking| 3.7.12 @ 8:00AM
It amazes me that such a paranoid doofus as you is able to use a computer.
Stammon| 3.7.12 @ 8:03AM
Wow Jere, you said it better with less than half the words, my hat's off to you.
Stammon| 3.7.12 @ 8:02AM
Pull that tin-foil hat down tighter, reality is about to creep in;
We have photographs of the landing site by satellites. It really happened.
And who cares about Global Warming when Chicago is buried under a mile of ice. We are a few thousand years late for the next Ice Age.
Burn that dino blood as fast as you can, and hope that CO makes us warm, the sun is about to go out!
Mike Hawk| 3.7.12 @ 8:18AM
OIl is not biogenic. It is a natural product of the pressure cooker of the earth's mantle and core and percolates to the crust in pools.
Stammon| 3.7.12 @ 8:27AM
From your mouth to God's ears, but oil has organics in it that indicate dino blood, just as coal has tree roots and stumps.
But oh, would that piss off the green left if oil is as common as bauxite, and from the same source.
Mike Hawk| 3.7.12 @ 1:33PM
Don't know where you get your info, but it is way out of kelter.
JJ| 3.8.12 @ 10:04PM
I have been reading more about the Russian theory of oil coming from the mantle rather than dead dinosaurs. Makes more sense frankly. That makes oil a renewable energy source.
John - TMF| 3.7.12 @ 9:02AM
Mike,
Yeah, the Russians figured that one out several decades ago. The concept was proven by the existence of Titan. Saturn's moon is basically a mini-planet of abiotic hydrocarbons... seas of methane, rocks of water ice, and hydrocarbon clouds and snow. Add to that there isn't a sign of dinosaurs on its sub-zero surface. Just don't send a match to Titan. ;-)
The grand irony is that petroleum and natural gas are probably the most viable fundamentally renewable non-nuclear (well not if you don't count the nuclear powered inferno at the core of the Earth)... power source. The trick is getting through all of the rock to get to the goodies, which seem to be just about everywhere we drill...
Of course the eco-wackos want mankind dead, so that they can preserve nature as they see it should be.
The stories of Genesis posit that mankind stole his intellect from God. God's punishment was that we had to live by what we took.
He eventually forgave us that particular sin, of course, but we still abuse the "gift".
The Greeks in their pre-monotheistic pagan religion used the concepts of gods to explain the observations that they saw in re-occurring themes of mankind. The most interesting is that of Hubris and Nemesis.
We are currently being visited by the goddess of "recompense" for our overweening pride.
r/TMF
John786| 3.7.12 @ 9:43AM
Just to clarify. I do believe the moon landings happened. But there are lots of conspiracy nuts out their who don't believe it: they are the same type of people who deny global warming. All Conspiracy nuts. The right of politics seems to attract very unsavoury characters especially conspiracy nuts.
JJ| 3.8.12 @ 10:07PM
Because we have conspiracy nuts does not mean that their are not conspiracies. In fact we are finding out more and more conspiracies all the time. We are finding out that the democrats conspire with unions, media matters, ACORN, planned parenthood, etc.
That is a conspiracy.
JJ| 3.8.12 @ 10:07PM
Because we have conspiracy nuts does not mean that their are not conspiracies. In fact we are finding out more and more conspiracies all the time. We are finding out that the democrats conspire with unions, media matters, ACORN, planned parenthood, etc.
That is a conspiracy.
Rob| 3.12.12 @ 12:57AM
Why is it a conspiracy if unions are more associated with the Democratic Party than the Republican? Some might call it an association. Traditionally, a lot of union members have voted for democrats. I don't necessarily see a conspiracy because Republicans are associated with the Chamber of Commerce and vice-versa. Denying global warming in spite of overwhelming evidence and believing that scientists around the world are conspiring together is a little over the top though.
Garfield| 3.9.12 @ 1:26PM
The moon landings happened, one of the thing you see with lunar mission pictures, is a lack of soft shadows.
This is important because that shows that the picture was.
A. Generated in a computer (they didn't exactly have 3DS studio max back then)
B. Picture was taken in an environment that is consistent with a vacuum.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 9:46AM
Dr Paul, perhaps you need to rest a few days....
Dr. X| 3.7.12 @ 7:36AM
Of COURSE Romney will sell out. On global warming and EVERYTHING else.
Republicans are merely Democrats in drag. We need an American Nationalist Third Party.
Mike G| 3.7.12 @ 9:10AM
If Romney is the Republican nominee, the only thing that will keep a liberal out of the White House is an upset by someone like Ron Paul. Lord help us!
Christopher C.| 3.7.12 @ 4:43PM
Or a Constitutionalist Party?
Jeremiah Smirking| 3.7.12 @ 8:02AM
Romney will manage the decline. Perhaps even accellerate it so that we can all die and be kings of our own little planets... dumb dumb dumb dumb dummmmmmmmmb.
JKS| 3.7.12 @ 8:23AM
My prediction is the gop ticket will be Romney/Paul. Two very good reasons not to vote for them. If zero is re-elected so be it. This will be the death of the gop. Good riddance to bad rubbish. The dims can absorb the NE establishment rebups and the rest of the country can form a new party. One that will be based on freedom.
Dan Phillips| 3.7.12 @ 8:25AM
"In addition, while Gingrich calls for replacing the Environmental Protection Agency entirely with a new Environmental Solutions Agency, with a pro-growth mandate of working with business to protect the environment while maximizing jobs and economic growth,"
Gingrich is always so full of big ideas. But what in the Constitution authorizes either an Environmental Protection Agency or an Environmental Solutions Agency? Gingrich has no understanding whatsoever of the doctrine of enumerated powers.
Gary B| 3.7.12 @ 8:55AM
His terrific oratory skills make him an effective sales agent for the cause, but I'm weary of all his "solutions." That's when his ego pulls him right off the reservation. He needs strong handlers to keep him on message.
And his wife... holy crap.
Al Adab| 3.7.12 @ 3:15PM
Dan:
You are correct and while Newt is a very good idea man, too many of them involve an activist government. It is that which we are trying to eliminate. Otherwise all we do, and Romney is a prime example, is to promise better management of the social welfare state which itself is illigitimate. Where is the candidate who will work dilligently to reduce the size and intrusiveness - thence the cost - of government?
Dan Phillips| 3.7.12 @ 6:08PM
"Where is the candidate who will work dilligently to reduce the size and intrusiveness - thence the cost - of government?"
Al Adab, there is clearly a candidate in the race who would do just that.
TrueBlue | 3.8.12 @ 11:03AM
It's been awhile since I read the exact makeup of Newt's ESA, but what I got from it was that it would be an advisory agency rather than a regulation agency like the current EPA.
Advisory agencies are perfectly allowable, since they don't make or pass things enforceable by law, and would be forwarding that advice to either the president or Congress.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.7.12 @ 8:43AM
AGW is the vehicle to get to the Bush/Clinton/Obama and surely Romney elitist plan of Agenda21. If you want to know what the "Intelligent Few" have in mind for the "Bewildered Herd," invest ten minutes watching this video on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM
"Sustainable Devlopment," "Smart Growth" and other nice sounding names creates 14 story, 700 ft. apartments for the "Noble Savages" with "high-speed rail" to get you from your government apartment to your government factory job. There will be no more property rights.
Where is that troll sheep banger when you need him. He should watch this to find out where his messiah plans to send him.
Mike Hawk| 3.7.12 @ 1:36PM
Your scenario means it is all over. Don't expect an election in 2016. Obozo will do like Hugo.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.7.12 @ 2:08PM
It's not over until the fat lady sings. But the denial among some conservatives and many of the Republicans is not reassuring.
If people can't take ten minutes to understand the forces against them, perhaps they don't deserve to be free. Our Constitution and Founding Fathers did not guarantee "unalienable" rights from G0d. You must defend what they won 230 years ago from Britain. To understand the socialist forces, watch the YouTube video. It is Agenda21 for Dummies.
Al Adab| 3.7.12 @ 3:19PM
Jr:
Santorum finally hit it last night in his remarks. He stated government was to protect the liberty of citizens not provide for them. If the Conservative Movement made a better, more articulate case for such Liberty, we might find ourselves in a better position nationally vis-a-vis our inate rights and not expect privil;eges granted by government.
BTW: Is anyone else fed up with the issues and unavailability of site access here of late?
Von Mises Jr.| 3.7.12 @ 3:42PM
Hi Al,
The TEA Parties, AFP and other grouops have been very vocal and educating others on these issues. The GOP liberal establishment is not with us. You see that every time anyone poses a threat to their guy Mittens.
I have seen allot of problems with the site, but it is all good if it is more people crashing the bandwith. All the NYT, non-cable TV and other people who finally realize MSM is bullcrap need somewhere to go to find the truth. If it is being undermined by the leftist or government, start to realize that if things go bad, it will be harder and harder to get access to accurate information. So we must deal with it one way or the other and start planting the seed that if the liberals get their way, they may as well throw their iPads and iPhones in the trash.
Al Adab| 3.7.12 @ 5:36PM
Jr.
Had an interesting conversation this morning at the coffee shop with the guys about whether, assuming an Obama re-election, Alaska might just decide to "go out" over energy policy. There has long been an independance movement up there and they certainly have the viability given their oil supplies to do so. Everything is imported anyway so it makes little difference to their cost of living. Just one of those fun speculation "what if" things that maybe Turtledove could write about.
Carbonicus| 3.10.12 @ 12:09AM
Bingo. You got it. Gold star for you.
For the rest who don't, here's what you need to know in addition to the Agenda 21 nugget Von Mises, Jr. gave you (kudos, Ludwig, very few know anything about it).
The hard core left has figured out that while they can't (yet) get Statism so easy at the polls in the U.S., the way to achieve it is to control energy. And to control energy, they have to control fossil fuels. And the way to control fossil fuels is to demonstrate a "scientific consensus" (do NOT confuse their "scientific" consensus for the political consensus it really is...) that they cause something catastrophic that cannot be disproved and requires immediate action. While there are no doubt some legitimate climate scientists and environmental activists who believe AGW really will be catastrophic, the concept has become the vehicle for Statism "to save the planet and humanity" from a crisis that doesn't exist to a large segment of the modern environmental movement.
Once you understand this issue through that specific lens, all the actions of the hard core left environmentalist make perfect sense: eco-statism via control of energy.
Meanwhile, the U.S. govt. has spent over $100 BILLION on "climate policy" since 1999. For any of you who know anything about the real environmental problems we face here at home, ask yourselves, this question: what good could have been done for human health and the environment with $100 BILLION?
And a quick followup: exactly what do we have to show for that $100 BILLION? Solyndra? (that only accounts for 1/2 of 1% but you get the picture...)
Wake up, America.
(good on you, Ludwig....)
Dr Robert Davidson| 3.10.12 @ 5:30AM
I think you'll find that the scientific consensus is very real and that conspiracy theories and anti-science paranoia is only going to weaken the "conservative" cause (put in quotes, because opposing science is the opposite of conservatism, being extremely reckless and radical)
Carbonicus| 3.10.12 @ 12:30PM
Dr. - Medicine may operate on "consensus". Politics surely operates on "consensus".
As a doc you should know that science doesn't operate on "consensus". In fact, in real science, all it takes is one verifiable hypothesis from a single, minority scientist and another hypothesis (all other hypotheses) believed by 99% of the scientists on the planet is disproved. See Catholic Church circa 1630 and Copernicus and Galileo for reference.
The irony here is that you position disbelief in the Thermageddon paradigm as "anti-science", when the face is that, based on the way real science works, it is the AGW paradigmers who are anti-science. One example: if Svensmark's cosmic ray theory turns out to be right, and the CO2 paradigm is wrong, those of who support Svensmark's hypothesis will have been right, no matter how far outside the "consensus"(97%? 99%? of what? who? on what questions?) we are today, and the scientific method will have proved who was "anti-science" at the end of the day.
Be careful not to step in that hole.
Gary B| 3.7.12 @ 8:50AM
Romney is not only hopelessly boring, he's establishment through and through. If he gets nominated, he will owe the Big Boys big time.
Conservatives' only hope is if he names proven conservatives to his cabinet at the beginning of the general campaign. If he delays, or names DC careerists, you know he's already sold out.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 9:47AM
There are no "proven conservatives" on his campaign team. Ye shall know him by his endorsements---and lack thereof.
Anommynous| 3.7.12 @ 9:19AM
I will not vote for Romney in the general election unless he renounces RomneyCare. I know I'm not the only one.
Gary B| 3.7.12 @ 9:36AM
The whole thing is a Greek tragedy.
Al Adab| 3.7.12 @ 3:20PM
Not a bad analogy Gary. Romney will cave on every issue involving government action to the "prevailing wisdom". There are no core principles to which he adheres.
Vern Crisler| 3.7.12 @ 9:37AM
True conservatives have been warning Republicans about Romney for some time now. He is going to sell them out as soon as it's politically safe. Watch him run to the left when it looks like he has the nomination locked up. Where then are Republicans going to go? Rush had a book out a few years ago, See I Told You So. Dittos for this election season.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 9:43AM
If the GOP Establishment is hell-bent on electing a liberal in 2012, shouldn't we prefer the liberal who can't run again in 2016 over the one who can and will?
WL| 3.7.12 @ 10:01AM
I'll keep this short and sweet, Romney supporters:
1.You guys have won again, and undoubtedly your guy will be the nominee(most likely)..
2.You guys are full of joy as you rub it in our faces...(understandable....I would to)
3. I implore you folks to do us all one real solid favor. Watch your guy, in earnest, for the next 9 months/or 4 years and 9 months.
4. When he refuses to run anything other than a "McCain Campaign"...take note of it.
5. If he wins (and I will celebrate that with you)...but caves in on EVERYTHING from Global warming to Health Care...take note of it.
6. Don't make the same mistake in 2016.
Bob K.| 3.7.12 @ 10:05AM
You have it pegged, Mr. Ferrara,
The politics behind the global warming movement in the USA is all about getting some form of Europe's Cap and Trade taxation into the United States.
Democrats and Republicans who want Cap and Trade push the Global Warming agenda because they prefer the camouflage that the Carbon Tax gives it.
That and because they can also invest in Carbon Credits like Al Gore did.
Google "Personal Carbon Trading" for more information on this money making scheme which our elected officials are waiting to jump into them.
See a typical investment opportunity below:
www.nativeenergy.com
Bob K.| 3.7.12 @ 10:07AM
You have it pegged, Mr. Ferrara,
The politics behind the global warming movement in the USA is all about getting some form of Europe's Cap and Trade taxation into the United States.
Democrats and Republicans who want Cap and Trade push the Global Warming agenda because they prefer the camouflage that the Carbon Tax gives it.
That and because they can also invest in Carbon Credits like Al Gore did.
Google "Personal Carbon Trading" for more information on this money making scheme which our elected officials are waiting to jump into them.
See a typical investment opportunity below:
www.nativeenergy.com
Bob K.| 3.7.12 @ 10:15AM
Imagine the huge new bureaucracy this will require. All the new IRS agents who will be needed.
J. Wilcox| 3.7.12 @ 10:50AM
This is really the worst sort of propagandizing. To take the actions of an ethically challenged and now completely discredited proponent of the agw hoax and attempt to - by the most dubious association I have witnessed in some time - color the reputation of a candidate with whom you obviously have serious disagreements, is beneath the standards of good journalistic behavior. I can think of no other issue, save Obamacare, on which the Republican voting electorate is so excercised or, I would argue, so well-informed. The backlash to anything perceived as even slightly sympathetic to the current administration's policies on this issue would be immediate and severe and follow him the remainder of his time in office. I would bet that Romney knows this and would not be willing to risk such a venture.
Gary B| 3.7.12 @ 11:09AM
He may have no choice if he is in debt to the DC elite. Betrayal will be the order of the day. Selling out conservatives is the safest thing you can do in DC.
Teflon93| 3.7.12 @ 11:20AM
Except Mitt Romney is a committed warmist, one of the few positions he hasn't flip-flopped on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se4CuuTQDgM
CopyKatnj| 3.7.12 @ 11:53AM
Mr. Ferrara is correct to question Gov. Romney about his "Global Warming" position. Here's why:
__________________________
Newark Star Ledger
May 26, 2011
In a blow to clean energy advocates throughout the Northeast, Gov. Chris Christie said this morning that the state will pull out of the region’s "gimmicky" cap-and-trade program by the end of the year.
During a Statehouse news conference, Christie acknowledged the effects humans are having on climate change but said the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative was doing nothing to solve the problem.
"This program is not effective in reducing greenhouse gases and is unlikely to be in the future," Christie told reporters. "The whole system is not working as it was intended to work. It’s a failure."
Critics of the governor will view the decision as another move in his careful chess game to appease conservative supporters in New Jersey and nationwide, who have increasingly pressured him to ditch the program.
"RGGI drives up energy costs for consumers at a time when nobody can afford any additional taxes," Sen. Diane Allen (R-Burlington), who recently signed on to legislation to repeal the initiative, said in a statement.
__________________________
RGGI, pronounce as Reggie, is Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative sponsored by ... Gov. Mitt Romney.
wjw| 3.7.12 @ 4:26PM
Katnji,
Maybe you missed this,"As of December 20, 2005, seven Northeastern US states were involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Massachusetts and Rhode Island dropped out at the last minute; Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney objected to a lack of opt-out provisions if energy prices exceeded a certain threshold.[12]. He went on to attack Senator John McCain for his positive position on cap-and-trade during the 2008 presidential election.[13] The seven states still involved (Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine) signed a "Memorandum of Understanding" committing themselves to move forward with the program. Special provisions were made in that document for Massachusetts and Rhode Island to join the effort at any time prior to January 1, 2008 [14].
Massachusetts rejoined on January 18, 2007, on the order of newly elected Governor Deval Patrick."
And Peter,
On MittRomney.com/issues/energy/significant regulatory reform
Item 5 is "Amend Clean Air Act to exclude carbon dioxide from its purview"
That's good enough for me.
Testing Testicle| 3.7.12 @ 12:05PM
Working?
Mimi| 3.7.12 @ 12:22PM
Thanks Peter for all your work on getting this message of truth out to us.
One more reason for Newt and Rick to have a talk....They HAVE to get on the same team...for America!
Who Knows?| 3.7.12 @ 1:10PM
Thanks for the clear history of the entire global warming “Ponzi” scheme. Personally, I realized long ago what a fraud the entire faux science gory “Gore” trip was. Why, it seems like only yesterday to this writer that global COOLING was the fear.
Perhaps the money quote is the following—
“The only hope for reviving cap and trade is for a newly elected Republican President to propose it, undercutting Congressional Republican opposition to it. Conservatives will rue allowing Romney a pass to the nomination if he turns out to be that guy.”
And, the key word in this paragraph is the ever relevant----IF.
Look, Romney is not stupid. Do you seriously believe that he won’t take into account the “Gleick-gate” news, as well as what the Heartland Institute has produced? The latter’s real science will surely be considered by a President Romney, so I’d expect him to “grow” in office when it comes to cap and trade. He’s a businessman, and cutting unnecessary costs is in his blood!
Besides, the very forms and processes of reality are simply continual surprises, meant, ultimately, to wake us up to the truth---nobody knows what a single thing is.
Understand!
“Those who do not understand as Reality in the heart only think in the head. They are in exile. They are seeking. Thus, they adapt to all remedial paths, sensual and Spiritual, the paths of exploitation and separation. But radical understanding and real self-Enquiry are Reality Itself. Therefore, radical understanding and real self-Enquiry do not resort to the means and signs of suffering. Radical understanding is the unbroken act of Conscious Being. Thus, one who truly understands remains untouched by what passes, but those who seek, like Narcissus, are always trying to become immune. Their struggle is as endless as the Bliss of one whose understanding is most perfect.” From “The Knee of Listening”, by Adi Da, page 474, 1995 edition
Drek| 3.7.12 @ 1:45PM
If Barbara Bush is for ya', I'm agin' ya.'
shipley130| 3.7.12 @ 3:06PM
The fraudsters need to go to jail.
Dr Robert Davidson| 3.10.12 @ 5:25AM
While on the surface it may seem wise to prosecute fraudulent opposers of science like C. Monckton and others, it would only feed into the propagandists' hands - they would have martyrs. The best strategy is to keep supporting science - denial of science is a temporary condition.
Carbonicus| 3.10.12 @ 12:37PM
"The best strategy is to keep supporting science - denial of science is a temporary condition".
Couldn't have said it better myself, Doc.
Denial of the emerging science and empirical evidence piling up all over this planet by those of you who believe human CO2 emissions are a dangerous threat to the planet and humanity is a temporary condition.
In geologic terms, after only a few more sands are through the hourglass, you AGW Thermageddonists will be viewed by human history as the modern equivalent of the early settlers who burned witches, and the Catholic Church still claiming the earth was the center of the universe after Galileo had proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the sun was.
Denial of science? If you live long enough, and I hope you do, you will eat those words.
howard lohmuller| 3.7.12 @ 3:23PM
I remember in 2008 when John McCain got the nomination that summer and in a couple of weeks began talking about mitigating and confronting global warming. The stock market began moving down 20% even before Obama was elected. My fear is that Romney will do the same thing. Never mind that he will also have to explain Romney care, that it is not Obamacare. But it is.
Many voters will forget or confuse themselves thinking politicians and businessmen think alike. They don't. Politicians maximize power. Businessmen maximize profit. Romney has been a politician for the last 1o to 15 years. His object is to build the largest coalition of voters regardless of whether or not global warming is a fraud or Obamacare is a bad idea.
Santorum is also a politician but continuously has refused to compromise his stated positions because he places high value on honesty even at the expense of maximizing his coalition.
Gingrich, a somewhat arrogant politician, places high value on his ideas, preferring to build his coalition on those ideas without being caught saying things he knows to be false.
Either Santorum or Gingrich will do a better job against Obama in the general election than Romney.
Rich Birkett | 3.7.12 @ 6:26PM
You forgot to mention that Ron Paul does very well against Obama. Pollsters, some who have Romney as a client, omit Paul-Obama match up questions, and MSM, including FOX News, dutifully fails to report the omission. https://www.google.com/search?q=Ron+Paul&sitesearch=freedomactivist.net#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=Obama+match+up+site:ronpaul2012.com&oq=Obama+match+up+site:ronpaul2012.com&aq=f&aqi;=&aql;=&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=35200l39450l2l39986l9l9l0l0l0l5l455l3190l2-2.5.2l9l0&gs_l=serp.3...35200l39450l2l39987l9l9l0l0l0l5l455l3190l2-2j5j2l9l0&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=a0c3d604d0e39e1e&biw=1360&bih=595
Garfield| 3.9.12 @ 1:29PM
If it wasn't for the fact Ron Paul is even worse on foreign policy than Obama is, he would be the nominee.
PattyMor| 3.7.12 @ 3:30PM
Look all these politicans that advocate for cap and trade or other carbon taxes are just about government control and taxation at your expense. And look at all those financial sector donors on Mittens extensive list. They're going to expect payback, because that's the way the "game" is played. So pay them back he will.
Should Have Impeached| 3.7.12 @ 5:34PM
I'm thinkin' this is a good reason why CONSERVATIVES should mediate the Republican debates, instead of progressive "news" people who only want to introduce confusing, irrelevant, alienating subject matter like contraception. Republicans can't even discover what their own "candidates" believe within "their own" public debates because the candidates are never asked to debate topics that matter most to conservatives. Having said that... Mr. Ferrara to the rescue!
Rich Birkett | 3.7.12 @ 5:53PM
Excellent article! It shows how far the global warming profiteers will go to slander skeptics they call "deniers". As for Romney, it would not surprise me, should he win the Republican nomination, he will not be the "severely conservative" he claimed to be at CPAC.
Russell| 3.7.12 @ 5:55PM
" the entire fabrication of global warming " ?
Where would conservatism be without science advice from a payola driven K-Street hack late in the service of Jack Abrahoff ?
Coolheaded| 3.7.12 @ 6:16PM
This is shooting inside the tent. To pretend that any conservative can claim a pure record against global warming hysteria ignores Newt's turn on Pelosi's couch and so much more. Unless Senator Imhoffe runs for President, conservatives have to accept a change of heart from their candidate on global warming.
Rich Birkett | 3.7.12 @ 6:30PM
Ron Paul has consistently opposed cap and trade. That's what I like about Paul: he's consistent and predictable.
Nite| 3.7.12 @ 7:55PM
I am amazed at people actually voting for this guy. There are 3 other candidates. They would all be better than Romney. Look at his positions. He is a liberal and has focused on liberal ideas. Remember the GOP establishment is pushing this guy down our throats just like they did the last campaign. Now they are pushing one just like McCain. Before anyone else votes for him, look at his record. It will give you the creeps.
Dickheadliveral| 3.7.12 @ 8:52PM
I am just happy that so many people are buying gins that.. Maybe we will get lucky
Boaz| 3.7.12 @ 11:03PM
The author's aguement is is bad as the global warming crowd's arguement. The guilt by innuendo is getting old. If this is all you have againt Romney, you ain't got nothing. "Mr. Big Ideas"has actually said there is man made Global Warming and the Man who would be our Judge did nothing about stopping the nonsense in his time in the congress and senate. You don't like Romney, fine. But don't insult me with whiney arguements. People in think tanks just don't get it. This article is as bad something on MSNBC.
POST American| 3.7.12 @ 11:11PM
"--Within ten years franchise slummed
and amalgamated North America will
be brought down to the level of the
Philippines and under banker 'managed'
RED Chinese receivership. ---In fact
that's the plan."
In fact ---IT IS.
------------------HUAC/ Nuremberg--------------------
Nuremberg 1945? ---or Nuremberg 1934?
THAT'S the question.
johnd2| 3.8.12 @ 8:40AM
It does not matter that much what anyone thinks about global warming as long as we do not let the one worlders us it as an excuse to take over or trash the carbon fuel economy. Romney may fund some research and throw a few million to his buddies. But he will not get carried away like Obama has.
Andrew Lane| 3.8.12 @ 12:41PM
Accepting the science on this will get Romney votes in the general election, continuing his path toward crazy-town denialism will not.
What gets me is that usually conservatives agree that fossil carbon must be reduced, but they can't think of any way to get there, so they simultaneously say that fossil carbon is not a danger. Crazy town.
JJ| 3.8.12 @ 10:12PM
Oil is not fossil fuel, that is an old theory. Russia has shown that it seeps up from the mantle. There is no reason to reduce the production of oil. Unless of course you want to take away peoples freedom to travel.
stmichrick| 3.8.12 @ 10:30PM
Here's something crazy, Andrew. Al Gore has been beating his gums on this for, what, 20 some years? Have any of his predictions of catastrophe materialized? Imagine the money that would have been wasted if his intentions for legislation had materialized back then. Can you honestly say that you've noticed a difference in air quality since you were a kid?
"Accepting the science," Andrew? If you are one who uses the phrase, 'the science is settled,' you implicitly tell us that you don't understand what science is, or that you have a political agenda that cherry picks scientific data. Hopefully a Romney administration EPA will have some crazy-townies appointed.
Fortunately for us crazy-town deniers, leftists are not able to successfully declare a crisis in order to panic voters and politicians like they used to. I haven't heard your 'conservatives' call for less carbon, just RINOs pandering for votes.
Oil is Good. Where would we be without it?
wodiej| 3.9.12 @ 6:44AM
Romney is a liberal-end of story.
Carl Pettis | 3.9.12 @ 7:26PM
This just shows and reestablishes the fact, that Mitt is an Eastern Establishment Neo Con who has no respect for the limitations on the Federal Government placed on it by its creators, the Thirteen Independent Sovereign Republic States that drafted and authorized the Creation of The Nation of the United States of America, Mitt is not the one to lead us out of the abyss of collectivism that we find ourselves sliding into, I can say with certainty that Newt does not seem to be a friend of the various Ten Amendments and the Limitations they place upon our Federal Government either.
It is indeed a sad state of affairs that the supposedly "conservative" Republicans cannot find a real 'Modern Conservative' who believes in The Constitution as written and signed by The Founders.
Dr Robert Davidson| 3.10.12 @ 5:19AM
The only ones disgraced by "fakegate" are those working at the Heartland Institute
Carbonicus| 3.10.12 @ 9:54PM
And exactly who would that be, Doc? Joe Bast for taking $25,000 in 2011 from the Koch Foundation? Oh no, wait, that was for healthcare, not for climate policy advocacy.
The sad truth is, Doc, all this episode proves is how anti-science your side really is. A small Midwestern outfit with a $6.5 million budget and no less sound science than the UN IPCC (history will show, far more sound) can derail the billions spent by the UN IPCC and the huge budgets of eco-statist non-profits like Greenpeace, NRDC, Sierra, and WWF, all of which are orders of magnitude higher than Heartland's. NRDC: $100 million annually. Greenpeace: $300 million. Sierra: $100 million. WWF: $200 million. All of these spend more in one year on climate policy advocacy than Heartland's entire budget.
Fakegate doesn't disgrace Heartland. All it does is add to the disgrace of your "consensus" scientists. And not just their erroneous scientific hypothesis, more importantly their integrity. Like Climategate, this shows that there is no limit to what your "consensus" scientists will do to quiet those who question the prevailing paradigm.
Like the 17th century Catholic Church, your side is. Newflash: the earth isn't the center of the universe just because your "consensus" says it is. One guy proved the sun is. Now we laugh at the Catholic Church's silly gaia-centric teachings. The "heretics" (= modern day "deniers") were right after all.
Jake Peachey| 3.10.12 @ 5:36PM
Conservatives shouldn't waste this opportunity of the "global warming crisis," with a push for nuclear energy ---- but absolutely not with uranium fuel technology.
Thorium with molten salt technology does indeed present a game changing possibility with proof of concept already accomplished at Oak Ridge, but unfortunately, Congress defunded continued development in the late 60s. If the damaged nuclear reactors in Japan had been molten salt thorium technology, there would have been no explosions, no released radiation, and no meltdowns ----completely safe.
Check it out yourself: http://www.wired.com/magazine/.....ukes/all/1
Thorium-based technology should be more economical than uranium nuclear technology because of its inherent safety (extensive regulations not needed) and you cannot make nuclear weapons from thorium.
It would also be quite important to be able to offer thorium technology for energy all over the world in substitution of building coal plan. I'm quite skeptical that the current rate of carbon emissions is causing global warming, however, but if the rest the world starts loading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide at the same rate as developed countries ----well, I'm not sure what would happen.
Furthermore, when there is a rogue nation insisting they need nuclear technology for energy (even when they're floating on hydrocarbons), it would be would be so nice to offer them thorium technology.
I'm not the type person susceptible to conspiracy theories, but I can't help being suspicious that the vested interest in uranium influenced Congress to drop thorium. Otherwise, there would've been some big write-offs with uranium infrastructure. We made a wrong turn in the road, now are really paying for it. The inherent safety of thorium technology could mean much cheaper energy --- so cheap that we could economically change abundant natural gas into liquid fuels.
Marc Jeric| 3.10.12 @ 7:11PM
The global warming conspiracy needs to be put in perspective to be properly understood. This far-left attack by government-paid drones started in the 1970′s with the global cooling scam: we should disarm our nuclear bombers and fill them with soot to be spread over the poles and so prevent those new glaciers from descending south and crushing the New York skyscrapers to dust. When that did not work the same fakers invented the global warming hoax in the 1990′s; we should nationalize all industries and organize a UN-sponsored world socialist government based on “social justice” with the fakers in charge. What with 12 years of substantial cooling the fakers switched to the climate change flimflam in the 2000′s; so whatever happens we should…see above under the global warming hoax. And now we are faced with the cap & trade power grab – but the aim is the same as above. Our socialists, Marxists, communists, Hollywood stars, university professors in social and political “sciences”, and environmentalists are all clamoring for action while spurring President Obama ("Tomorrow the oceans will stop rising and the planet will start healing") and his 35 czars/commissars to undertake immediate measures to save the planet – with the same aims as described above.
It is evident from the above quote that our President believes himself to be either Jesus come back to Earth, or at least the 12th Imam so ardently desired by that jihadist terrorist and Obama’s friend Ahmadinejad. Like to the Pinocchio in the fable, Obama’s nose grows longer with every lie he pronounces, while jumping up the steps to his teleprompter like a marionette.
In the meantime our Main Stream Media are unanimous in spreading this criminal propaganda daily; the ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, NY Times, Washington Post, Associated Press, Reuters, not forgetting our own Las Vegas Sun, etc. drive this drivel constantly. What is totally ignored are the detailed descriptions of faked data, skewed computer programs, politically revised conclusions by the UN-sponsored far-left clique of biased non-scientists – all government-paid drones that no private enterprise would hire. Another thing ignored is the “Global Warming Petition” (see Internet) where 31,487 independent US scientists (including 9,029 of them with PhD degrees) dispute decisively the findings of the UN-sponsored panel; also ignored is the “Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change” (see also Internet) where a smaller number of competent world scientists, about 712, including 142 pure climatologists, state the same – i.e., that the man-caused catastrophic global warming is a farce. The books by Christopher Horner, Robert Carter, Patrick Michaels, Lawrence Solomon, John Berlau, Steven Milloy, Ian Murray, Christopher Booker, R. C. Balling, D. Avery, S. F. Singer, Brian Sussman, and AW Montford describing the lies, fakes, phony data, opposite conclusions, redacting by UN political hacks, reverse graphs, etc., have exposed this far-left propaganda in painful detail. In the case of the above mentioned Petition, several "environmentalists" had submitted phony names with phony credentials in order to sabotage that effort. It took several years of painstaking and expensive effort (that effort cost us more private money) to clean up the list from those saboteurs and verify all academic and professional data of the signatories.
To put this whole conspiracy in terms of numbers, let me say that the projected world-threatening increase of carbon dioxide of 100 ppm (parts per million) by the end of this century would increase thermal absorptivity of the atmosphere by one-eighth of one percent; that is the definition of something totally negligible. On the other hand the sun cycles of cooling and heating are many thousands of times more powerful with regard to the carbon dioxide in the air; when the sun is in its cold cycle the oceans absorb billions of tons of it; and when the sun heats up the oceans release the carbon dioxide in quantities many thousands of times bigger than anything the mankind could produce. To illustrate this point in more accessible terms to somebody who is not a climatologist or a scientist or an engineer; the argument of catastrophic anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming issued by our panic driven socialist/marxist government-paid hacks is like saying that a burp of a lonely wolf in Alaska will transform Florida into a Sahara-like desert - tomorrow! Perhaps a better example would be to argue that the Pissing Boy in Bruxelles will inundate the continents by the end of the week. As for that bloviating gasbag and “climatologist” Al Gore, Dr. James Hansen with his tirades designed to get him more taxpayers’ money, as well as for Dr. Mann who inverted cause and effect in his "studies" and for Phil Jones who tried to eliminate faked data - they should be brought to the International Court in The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity.
Marc Jeric (MS, PhD, Engineering, UCLA)”
GAI| 3.25.12 @ 11:15PM
Oh great just what I needed to hear. Romney is also pro Globull Warming Hysteria (other wise known as Global Governance/Sustainability/UN Agenda 21)
It is bad enough that he is a Corporate Raider masquerading as a Venture Capitalist and now this.
It is enough to make me vote third party since I see zero difference between Obummer and Romney, except Romney is much more dangerous because we would not be expecting the knife in the back.
Hegelian Dialectric anyone?