March 31, 2012 | 8 comments
February 22, 2012 | 7 comments
January 12, 2012 | 8 comments
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
December 11, 2011 | 0 comments
Why, 15 years ago is… 1997. Hey, that’s also the year the world agreed to the Kyoto Protocol to… halt catastrophic man-made global warming! Wow, that’s some super fast-acting global governance.
Of course, with the exception of chronically recessed Japan, Russia, and Canada, this treaty only covered Europe; and only a combination of the recession and buying “credits” from exempt countries like China, India, Brazil, South Korea, and so on allowed Europe to meet its promise. Not creation of a viable “clean energy economy.”
And global emissions, well, they went up. While temperatures fell well below what we could have achieved had we de-industrialized. According to the models. So, to recap, emissions at the upper regions of projections (even with the not-projected recession); temps well-below any reduction scenario.
So the theory, like the computer model projections on which the entire enterprise was premised (with the spit and tape of Malthusean dogma), is proved wrong. But, still, let’s declare victory and go home.
That is, if it really was about the climate. Which of course it wasn’t, given the same computer models acknowledged there would be no detectable climate impact even from perfect implementation of Kyoto, with emission reductions not “carbon credit trading” which allows BAU so long as covered countries transfer sufficient wealth.
But whatever one’s rationale, now seems like a good time to abandon the climate panic and its apparent real purpose, the thoroughly anti-prosperity agenda, and get on with putting things back together from amid the rubble of the same crowd’s other great ideas.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online