What the global warming issue is really all about

[Zebra Top]

Originally Posted by RanchHQ

You have a Boat!

Friggin Rich Republicans!

That's it! If Max has a boat I think we all should either have boats, or no one has a boat!

I am calling for Boating Fairness Reform!

Oh good, proof I'm not a liberal, (thanks Birdie ), I have a boat!

[RanchHQ]

Greenpeace Confesses to Ice Cap Melting Exagerration

• Posted August 19th, 2009 at 5.01pm in Energy and Environment.

On July 15th, Greenpeace said in a press release calling for urgent action: “As permanent ice decreases, we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030,” but in an interview with BBC, Greenpeace leader Gerd Leipold said that might not exactly be the case. See the video below:

YouTube - Greenpeace Leader Admits Arctic Ice Exaggeration

YouTube - Greenpeace Leader Admits Arctic Ice Exaggeration

Emotionalizing or scare tactics? The problem with fear-mongering is that it’s a double-edged sword. Chicken Little scenarios allow you to convince someone to do something they may not have otherwise done or they can make you look very foolish.


In any event, no matter how quickly or slowly the ice caps are melting, capping carbon dioxide emissions with a cap and trade system will do nothing to help and could actually hurt any attempt to slow the ice from melting. The Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill that requires carbon dioxide reductions would reduce global temperatures by negligible amounts (0.2 degree Celsius moderation in world temperature increases by 2100 and no more than a 0.05 degree reduction by 2050), but it would reduce economic activity by significant amounts.

The Heritage Foundation’s analysis of the bill estimates that between 2012-235 will lose $9.4 trillion in income (GDP). In other words, we’ll be living in a world with much less wealth. Over the same time frame, the government will collect $5.7 trillion in new taxes. A world with less economic activity and higher taxes will stifle the innovation that could actually help respond in adapting to a climate crisis.

LINK: Greenpeace Confesses to Ice Cap Melting Exagerration The Foundry

[RanchHQ]

[RanchHQ]

[RanchHQ]

There are Folks in this world who actually think that by having Children you are causing this "Global Warming/Climate Change" deal.

God help us.

'Contraception cheapest way to combat climate change'

Contraception is almost five times cheaper as a means of preventing climate change than conventional green technologies, according to research by the London School of Economics.

By Richard Pindar
Published: 12:05PM BST 09 Sep 2009


Every £4 spent on family planning over the next four decades would reduce global CO2 emissions by more than a ton, whereas a minimum of £19 would have to be spent on low-carbon technologies to achieve the same result, the research says.

The report, Fewer Emitter, Lower Emissions, Less Cost, concludes that family planning should be seen as one of the primary methods of emissions reduction. The UN estimates that 40 per cent of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended.

If these basic family planning needs were met, 34 gigatons (billion tonnes) of CO2 would be saved – equivalent to nearly 6 times the annual emissions of the US and almost 60 times the UK’s annual total.

Roger Martin, chairman of the Optimum Population Trust at the LSE, said: “It’s always been obviously that total emissions depend on the number of emitters as well as their individual emissions – the carbon tonnage can’t shoot down as we want, while the population keeps shooting up.”

UN data suggests that meeting unmet need for family planning would reduce unintended births by 72 per cent, reducing projected world population in 2050 by half a billion to 8.64 million.

The research is published on the day that the Government’s climate change advisers, the Climate Change Committee, warned households and industry that a planned 80 per cent reduction in emissions are likely to prove insufficient.

LINK: 'Contraception cheapest way to combat climate change' - Telegraph

[Maximus]

It sure has been cold this year according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In fact its been the 34th coldest year on record.

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - NOAA: Summer Temperature Below Average for U.S.

[Birdieman]

Anyone seen what happened to the polar ice cap?? LMAO What a farse the whole GW cult thingy has come to be.

[RanchHQ]

[RanchHQ]

"Liberals will always come around to taxing the middle-class because there are just not enough of “the rich” to finance their social engineering."

Obamanomics: Hidden Regressive Taxes

posted at 8:33 am on September 22, 2009 by Karl


Pres. Obama looked silly trying to deny that forcing people to buy health insurance is not a tax. Even the Associated Press was not buying it. Pres. Obama was willing to look silly on network TV because taxes are not popular — but the underlying issue is much bigger.

For example, Treasury Department officials think cap-and-trade legislation would cost taxpayers hundreds of billion in taxes, according to internal documents obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute through a Freedom of Information Act request. At the upper end of the administration’s estimates, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year. Indeed, Obama pal Warren Buffett had already criticized it:

Anything you put in that effectively taxes carbon emissions is — somebody’s going to bear the brunt of it. In the case of a regulated utility, the utility customers are going to pay for it. I mean, it’s going to become, in effect, a tax which we have decided is needed because the market system doesn’t really appropriately penalize something that hurts the future but doesn’t really hurt us tomorrow morning. But that tax is probably going to be pretty regressive.

Of course, Pres. Obama knows this, too. In January 2008, he openly admitted that his cap-and-trade proposal would make energy prices “skyrocket.”

Cap-and-trade is just one of several business taxes Obama has floated. However, the affected companies will not pay most of these taxes. Research shows that 70 to 92 cents of a dollar of business taxes comes out of employees’ pay.

The appeal of stealth taxation is why the Obama administration and other Democrats cannot bear to rule out a value-added tax, assessed on producers, wholesalers and retailers, despite the fact that this tax would also be hugely regressive.

Willie Sutton used to explain that he robbed banks “because that’s where the money is.” Liberals will always come around to taxing the middle-class because there are just not enough of “the rich” to finance their social engineering. But they cannot be honest about it, so they want to outsource tax collection for the nanny state to the business community (just as they have with payroll taxes). If that means Pres. Obama has to look foolish on network TV, it is a small price for them… and potentially a much larger one for the rest of us.

LINK: The Greenroom Forum Archive Obamanomics: Hidden Regressive Taxes

[RanchHQ]

Oops:

September 22, 2009 12:57 PM
U.N. Climate Summit Leaves Large Carbon Footprint



To hear world leaders and others addressing the United Nations Summit on Climate Change, the threat could not be more real and the need more urgent to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

But in stark contrast to the earnest statements is the carbon footprint associated with their gathering.

It happens every autumn: midtown Manhattan becomes the motorcade capital of the world. Each foreign leader in town has a convoy of vehicles. Some of them, like President Obama's motorcade, are 20-to-30 vehicles in length. It's so long - it seems that when the front of it reaches the U.N., the back end is still back at his hotel.

Exacerbating the annual exercise in diplomatic gridlock are police actions, blocking intersections and closing streets for security to facilitate motorcade movements. It renders countless other vehicles immobile while waiting for motorcades to pass, their engines idling but still blowing exhaust into the midtown air

Does it undermine the goal of the climate change summit and cause the pledges of environmental concern to ring hollow?

Asked about it, White House climate change negotiator Todd Sterns had a suggestion.

"I think the U.N. should make a pledge to electric vehicle motorcades within five years," he said.

Right. As soon as all U.N. diplomats pay their parking tickets.

LINK: U.N. Climate Summit Leaves Large Carbon Footprint - Political Hotsheet - CBS News