[…] trampled in the name of renewable energy: Pat Swords, b) Gleick, c) Ban Fossil Fuels, Ban Beef?, d) Legal academics: Silence the Skeptics, e) Put fossil fuel CEOs on trial, The RICO 20 letter, f) Lovelock: democracy on hold, or […]
Comment on Adjudicating the future: silencing climate dissent via the courts by Climate culture | Climate Etc.
↧
↧
Comment on Carbon mandate: an account of collusion, cutting corners and costing Americans billions by Climate culture | Climate Etc.
[…] fossil fuel CEOs on trial, The RICO 20 letter, f) Lovelock: democracy on hold, or Overridden, g) EPA collusion, Conflicts of interest in Climate Science. Whether any particular cases out of these and many […]
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by Kneel
To paraphrase a well known proponent of IPCC dogma:
we have to offer up disaster scenarios, or no-one will listen.
Sadly enough, those who would like to see sensible policies that steer human activities towards both economic prosperity for all and minimal harm to the environment need to battle those who would place human life below environmental concerns. As such, to get the middle road solution that the vast majority want (IMO), the political path requires a battle between two extremes, both compromising to the middle. Environmental extremists are pushing economically harmful solutions, so getting where we need to be requires a polar opposite extremist side too – without that, we’ll end up where we appear to be going with Paris: significant damage and lost opportunity costs with no significant benefit.
Does anyone really want that?
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by Don Monfort
Tony, keep in mind that ranking Democrat member political partisan Eddie’s role in the drama is that of the scheister defense attorney.
The committee majority has the Constitutional right to investigate what they choose to investigate, without the approval of the minority. Multiple Supreme Court decisions have upheld this broad power. Of course the minority always hollers and tries to obstruct when their ox is being gored. We call that politics over here. Elections have consequences.
↧
Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by catweazle666
Vaughan Pratt: “I find your approach to science very puzzling.”
Yes, I’m sure you do.
That’s probably because I trained and was employed as a chemical engineer, so unlike you I had to be very sure that my grasp of the science involved was as faultless as possible, or else I could have ended up with a big smoking hole in the ground and a substantial body count, leading to a big expensive lawsuit and my ejection from the profession, and probably substantial penalties including imprisonment.
That sort of thing tends to concentrate the mind slightly more than just preparing a prospectus for next year’s grant application, you see.
Tell me, would you let your children fly on an aeroplane that was based on the maths and physics of climate “scientists”?
No, for some reason I didn’t think so!
↧
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by timg56
I don’t get why he isn’t laughed at by the MSM.
Then again, if he’s appearing on “Coast to Coast” maybe it’s a sign he is.
What I find surprising is the Pope listening to advice from people who hold views similar to Ehrlich’s – i.e. that the planet has a limited carrying capacity and therefore global population needs to be dramatically reduced.
Notice how they never actually provide plans or methods for the reduction they swear is necessary? (Though I do believe Ehrlich once advocated for forced sterilzation of women in the Third world.)
Also notice that for someone who has argued for so long that the planet is over populated, Ehrlich hangs around into his 90’s? One would think that were he a man of his convictions, he’d contribute personally to his goal of reducing global population and check out.
Unlike the signers of our Declaration of Indepedence, who pledged their lives, their liberty and their fortunes – under a very real and credible threat to all three – people like Ehrlich give up nothing.
↧
Comment on Climate culture by omanuel
“No one should be ashamed to admit they are wrong, which is but saying, in other words, that they are wiser today than they were yesterday.”
― Alexander Pope
↧
Comment on Climate culture by Climate culture | Enjeux énergies et environnement
↧
Comment on Adjudicating the future: silencing climate dissent via the courts by Climate culture | Enjeux énergies et environnement
[…] trampled in the name of renewable energy: Pat Swords, b) Gleick, c) Ban Fossil Fuels, Ban Beef?, d) Legal academics: Silence the Skeptics, e) Put fossil fuel CEOs on trial, The RICO 20 letter, f) Lovelock: democracy on hold, or […]
↧
↧
Comment on Carbon mandate: an account of collusion, cutting corners and costing Americans billions by Climate culture | Enjeux énergies et environnement
[…] fossil fuel CEOs on trial, The RICO 20 letter, f) Lovelock: democracy on hold, or Overridden, g) EPA collusion, Conflicts of interest in Climate Science. Whether any particular cases out of these and many […]
↧
Comment on Climate culture by richardswarthout
The article “How do we really make decisions” is informative and related to this post. The following excerpt aptly summarizes the article:
“But then there is another system in your mind that is intuitive, fast and automatic. This fast way of thinking is incredibly powerful, but totally hidden. It is so powerful, it is actually responsible for most of the things that you say, do, think and believe.”
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26258662
Richard
↧
Comment on Climate culture by Wagathon
Another aspect of the formal climate change culture: the consensus calls those who do not believe in bandwagon science deniers instead of skeptics.
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by timg56
JCH,
While interesting (and informational – thanks for that) what is your point about guitar picks?
Plastic picks suffer in comparison to turtle shell and rosewood picks – ok.
So now what?
My takeaway is two fold.
First, thanks to modern chemistry and fossil fuels used as feedstock, millions of people can take up guitar playing. The alternative would be either a limited number of people allowed to play or extinction of turtles and rosewood trees. (Probably both eventually.)
Second, there may (or may not) be a market for someone who invents a better guitar pick material. (Which will likely be hydro carbon based.)
↧
↧
Comment on Climate culture by kim
The consensus is culturally impoverished, and getting progressively cachectic.
==============================
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by peter3172
JCH:
The miracle would be that a very very thin layer of water at the very surface of the oceans could stop the heat from gobkazillions of atomic bombs from leaving the oceans.
Except that heat leaves the surface by mechanisms other than radiation as well.
And because surface layer is very thin, it doesn’t hold a great deal of energy – energy which is very quickly removed by the slightest of ocean breezes or turbulence – not to mention evaporation.
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by Don Monfort
“Is the Smith request founded on genuine scientific interest or just mischief making ? Is the response reasonable and measured?”
Don’t forget the NOAA whistleblowers. If we are supposed to hold scientists in high esteem and deem them as particularly trustworthy, we can’t expect the oversight committee to ignore the NOAA scientists that “raised concerns about the timing and integrity of the process but were ignored.”
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by Don Monfort
I think that Michael Halpern is Eli Wabbette’s brother Wee-wee Wabbette.
↧
↧
Comment on Climate culture by kim
Yikes, Judy; clicking a comment on the sidebar no longer takes me to the comment, rather just to the head of the post. Mebbe it’s just me.
================
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by jim2
climatereason | November 20, 2015 at 3:03 pm |
Jim2
It all seems extremely partisan from both sides to me.
*******************************************************
I’m a bit surprised that you would say that. Given the questionable adjustment by Karl of ARGO float data using ship data would supply a scientific motivation for investigation. And if Smith indeed is communicating with a whistle-blower, then that’s a damn solid reason to continue.
Besides that, IMO a Congressman should be welcomed if not obliged to investigate any arm of the US Federal government on behalf of the tax payers.
↧
Comment on Iatrogenic (?) climate policy by timg56
I agree with bob droege on this one – the predictions of China becoming the dominate power globally are way over blown. China has so many intrinsic problems that they will be lucky not to hit a deep depression.
Unfortuantely if/when they do, they will take a good part of the world economy with them.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
