| | | |
|
| |
|
By Gary Starr for the Neville Awards
Dec. 1, 2011
|
You may remember the Climate Change email scandal of 2009 which exposed the scientific fraud behing global warming. Several scientists
including men like Michael Mann of Penn State University and Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia were found to have manipulated climate data
to fit the Leftist agenda on global warming.
The scandal derailed the U.N.'s 2009 Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change which was supposed to set the framework
for a massive transfer of wealth from the West to "developing nations"....our punishment for being successful. Climate Change is also the stealth strategy to establish a one-world government under the aegis of the U.N.'s "Agenda 21."
"Professor" Mann's famous "hockey stick" climate model, which supposedly demonstrated the link between man-made carbon emissions and catastrophic global warming, was discredited and the left was thrown into chaos.
But facts don't matter to the Left. Neither does the shame of that scandal. Ideology trumps all. Since 2009 the Left has bravely soldiered on, but the "climate crisis" has receded in the minds of the public as more and more people grapple with the real problems of chronic unemployment, the United States deals with the $15 trillion debt, and the EuroZone threatens to implode.
And just in time for the 2011 Climate Change Conference in Durban, South Africa a new email scandal has surfaced. From the Wall St. Journal on November 28, 2011:
Last week, 5,000 files of private email correspondence among several of the world's top climate scientists were anonymously leaked onto the Internet. Like the first "climategate" leak of 2009, the latest release shows top scientists in the field fudging data, conspiring to bully and silence opponents, and displaying far less certainty about the reliability of anthropogenic global warming theory in private than they ever admit in public.
In more climate fraud news, GM's electric auto Chevy Volt, the savior of mankind, has now been shown to catch fire after being in an accident. What a bargain at $42,000 per car.
We also have "Son of Copenhagen" or the aforementioned United Nations Climate Change Conference in Durban, South Africa.
More out of touch, but still as determined as ever, the UN Agenda 21 crooks are still trying to rope the United States into blithely giving up our sovereignty in the name of "sustainable development."
The following are links to some excellent articles on the latest developments in the great climate change swindle:
|
|
U.N. Climate Conference's Goal? One-World Gov't
By Phyllis Schlafley for Investor's Business Daily
11/28/2011
The United Nations Climate Change Conference in Durban, South Africa, opening on Nov. 28, called COP-17, is one of a series of U.N. meetings working toward a specific goal. Advertising for this meeting features a long list of celebrities, including Angelina Jolie, U2's Bono, Ted Turner, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Al Gore and Michael Bloomberg.
The U.N. goal is to move the United States into a global government by environmental regulations and a vast network of taxes. These newly imposed taxes will give the U.N. a tremendous stream of money in addition to U.S. dues and congressional appropriations.
The plan for taxes was launched at the 1992 U.N. meeting in Rio de Janeiro, known as the Earth Summit, where Conference Secretary-General Maurice Strong produced a 300-page document with 40 proposals called Agenda 21.
The tax-seeking route then proceeded through U.N. meetings in Cancun in 2010, in Durban this November and will be finalized next year at what is called Rio+20 (i.e., Rio de Janeiro after 20 years).
Agenda 21 is a comprehensive master plan to reshape and control the U.S. while locking us into the clutches of the U.N. under the innocuous phrase "sustainable development." Along with 178 countries, President George H.W. Bush accepted Agenda 21 as "soft law." It was adopted by a new tactic called collaborative consensus building, instead of by treaty.
|
|
The Great Global Warming Fizzle -- The climate religion fades in spasms of anger and twitches of boredom.
Wall St. Journal
11/28/2011
How do religions die? Generally they don't, which probably explains why there's so little literature on the subject. Zoroastrianism, for instance, lost many of its sacred texts when Alexander sacked Persepolis in 330 B.C., and most Zoroastrians converted to Islam over 1,000 years ago. Yet today old Zoroaster still counts as many as 210,000 followers, including 11,000 in the U.S. Christopher Hitchens might say you can't kill what wasn't there to begin with.
Still, Zeus and Apollo are no longer with us, and neither are Odin and Thor. Among the secular gods, Marx is mostly dead and Freud is totally so. Something did away with them, and it's worth asking what.
Consider the case of global warming, another system of doomsaying prophecy and faith in things unseen.
As with religion, it is presided over by a caste of spectacularly unattractive people pretending to an obscure form of knowledge that promises to make the seas retreat and the winds abate. As with religion, it comes with an elaborate list of virtues, vices and indulgences. As with religion, its claims are often non-falsifiable, hence the convenience of the term "climate change" when thermometers don't oblige the expected trend lines. As with religion, it is harsh toward skeptics, heretics and other "deniers." And as with religion, it is susceptible to the earthly temptations of money, power, politics, arrogance and deceit.
This week, the conclave of global warming's cardinals are meeting in Durban, South Africa, for their 17th conference in as many years. The idea is to come up with a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which is set to expire next year, and to require rich countries to pony up $100 billion a year to help poor countries cope with the alleged effects of climate change. This is said to be essential because in 2017 global warming becomes "catastrophic and irreversible," according to a recent report by the International Energy Agency.
|
|
E-Car Fires: Big Bump In The Road
Investor's Business Daily
11/28/2011
Industrial Policy: The investigation into the safety of electric car batteries intensifies after additional fires involving the flagship of a proposed electric vehicle fleet. Central planning doesn't work for cars or insurance.
When the Toyota Prius was being accused of having overlooked design flaws that were causing accelerators to get stuck with fatal results, the owners of Government Motors, a competitor, wasted little time pushing for a recall and congressional hearings while accusing Toyota of cutting corners for the sake of corporate profits.
We wonder if the same sense of urgency will prevail in the wake of new safety tests indicating that an earlier test in which a Chevy Volt experienced a battery fire three weeks after a side-impact test was no fluke and that the car's lithium-ion battery poses a fire hazard.
|
|
GM's Volt Woes Cast Shadow on E-Cars
By Sharon Terlep for the Wall St. Journal
11/28/2011
DETROIT—For the past several years, the federal government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting the development of electric cars. Now regulators are investigating whether the big battery packs used by one of them pose a safety risk in the event of an accident.
Last week, U.S. auto-safety officials opened an investigation into General Motors Co.'s Chevrolet Volt after two crash tests of the electric car caused its battery to spark or catch fire. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conducted the tests because of an incident this spring in which a Volt battery damaged in a crash test caught fire three weeks later, igniting the car that contained it and three other vehicles in a NHTSA facility.
Meanwhile, in a change to its previous stance, the agency is no longer saying it is certain that battery-powered cars are as safe as their conventional counterparts. NHTSA said, however, that it has no specific reason to be concerned about vehicles other than the Volt.
Both NHTSA and GM said Volt owners shouldn't worry, as the fires occurred days after a crash and not on impact, and they pointed out that gasoline-powered cars are at risk of catching fire when damaged. More than 250,000 vehicle fires occur each year in the U.S., causing around 500 deaths, according to the National Fire Protection Association.
|
|
GM Scrambles to Defend Volt -- Auto Maker Offers Loaners to Owners Amid Battery Probe.
By Sharon Terlep for the Wall St. Journal
11/29/2011
For the last five years, General Motors Co. has touted its battery-powered Chevrolet Volt as a technological marvel in hopes the car would recast the company's image as a high-tech auto maker dedicated to the greening of planet earth.
Now, after at least three crash-tests resulted in fires or sparks from the vehicle's lithium-ion battery pack, GM is working to reassure consumers the Volt is safe and avoid a potentially embarrassing gaffe just as its turnaround is taking hold.
On Monday, the Detroit auto maker took the unprecedented step of offering loaner vehicles to any of the about 6,000 Chevrolet Volt owners who might be concerned about the vehicle's safety while it and U.S. regulators try to determine whether the car is a fire risk after a serious crash.
|
|
The United States of EPA -- Ms. Jackson's agency takes over automobile design. .
Wall Street Journal
11/28/2011
Here's one good way to consider the vote in 2012: It's about whether to re-elect President Lisa Jackson, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, which these days runs most the U.S. economy.
The EPA heaved its weight against another industry this month, issuing a regulation to sharply increase fuel economy. Under this new rule, America's fleet of passenger cars and light trucks will have to meet an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, a doubling of today's average of about 27 mpg. By the EPA's estimate the rule will cost $157 billion, meaning the real number is vastly greater.
The fuel-economy rule is classic Obama EPA. Until this Administration, fuel standards were the remit of Congress, via its Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. In 2007, the legislative branch raised those standards with a bill requiring the U.S. fleet to hit 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40% increase. The industry is struggling to keep pace with those steep requirements.
President Jackson is now casting aside 35 years of Congressional prerogative. Because the Obama EPA has declared carbon dioxide a "pollutant," and because cars emit CO2, Ms. Jackson is citing the Clean Air Act in her bid to commandeer Detroit. While the EPA officially worked with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Nhtsa, the agency previously in charge of efficiency standards), it's clear the EPA is calling the shots.
|
|
Climategate 2.0 A new batch of leaked emails again shows some leading scientists trying to smear opponents
JAMES DELINGPOLE for the Wall Street Journal
11/28/2011
Last week, 5,000 files of private email correspondence among several of the world's top climate scientists were anonymously leaked onto the Internet. Like the first "climategate" leak of 2009, the latest release shows top scientists in the field fudging data, conspiring to bully and silence opponents, and displaying far less certainty about the reliability of anthropogenic global warming theory in private than they ever admit in public.
The scientists include men like Michael Mann of Penn State University and Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, both of whose reports inform what President Obama has called "the gold standard" of international climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The new release of emails was timed to coincide with the second anniversary of the original climategate leak and with the upcoming United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa. And it has already stirred strong emotions. To Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), for example, the leaker or leakers responsible are attempting to "sabotage the international climate talks" and should be identified and brought "to justice."
One might sympathize with Mr. Markey's outrage if, say, the emails were maliciously rewritten or invented. But at least one scientist involved—Mr. Mann—has confirmed that the emails are genuine, as were the first batch released two years ago. So any malfeasance revealed therein ought to be blamed on the scientists who wrote them, rather than on the whistleblower who exposed them.
|
|
Reading List
|
|
