Our US Senators are about to vote on a far ranging climate bill that only narrowly passed the House of Representatives. My question is, "Do they have even the remotest idea of what is involved in global warming?" The answer is mixed. Some do but apparently most haven't a clue. They may have a few talking points supplied by the IPCC, Al Gore and James Hansen but that is about it. I dare say that few, if any, have read a single paper contrary to the UN IPCC position.
Kudos should go to Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Representative from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann, two that are on track and there are others. The Connecticut contingent is clearly not in this category.
I could appreciate that Joe likes Polar Bears. So do I, but I hope I would be smarter than to trash the world's economy on a bogus claim that bears that have tripled their population in recent decades are going extinct. Joe is apparently not that smart. Senator Leiberman made a speech to some 5th graders last year and made several gaffs from robins showing up in Connecticut in the winter (there is a wintering population in Connecticut) to Glaciers melting (They recede, they do not melt in the traditional sense, except on the edges and bottom. Water supplied by glaciers actually comes from winter snow melt. The ice sublimates.) I wrote a letter to the New Haven paper about that event which got published after supplying a full reference list that the editor was insistent on seeing. How many feature articles come with references? None!
Rosa DeLauro wrote me today claiming the Energy bill she just voted for would generate $846 Billion and would increase green jobs. In Spain, for every green job more than two jobs were lost. We never learn. Obama wants to spend this money to attempt to balance the budget to pay for the stimulus money and health care. Funny, she never mentioned global warming.
The carbon tax she wrote, will not be passed onto the cunsumers for 5 years. A little economics lesson...if no rate increases can be used to offset the costs of the tax, where will the power companies get their income? The ones using coal won't be able to operate. This will close the coal mines, the coal fired plants and we will be short of energy which will raise prices. Those who can't afford to pay the additional costs will likely die first, followed by the rest of us who will have no energy because of blackouts from an overloaded electrical grid. This is the scenario in the UK.
Senator Dodd, is no better. He wants to fight global warming by providing public transportation for example. It may relieve congestion on our highways but won't alter the climate. Connecticut got funds for emergency preparedness to help the energy crisis. If you see the association there let me know.
The other members of Congress from our state are sure to fall in line with the notables. If there is a sceptic among them, I haven't heard. If there is one, I would like to applaud their courage to stand up to the established "consensus" opinion.
Recently Senator Kerry, from nearby Massachusetts, made some statements in a Senate hearing. There were 10 points that he made that were absoluteley wrong. There is not even any argument to be made. A new paper from SPPI by Lord Monckton from Scotland pointed out each of the errors. I believe all have been covered here so if you were called upon to comment on each of these and you had read all the links I have provided you would have been a star. Take a bow if you could have answered each point correctly. Write in a comment if you scored 100% according to the Monckton paper.
As the final straw in this fiasco, we have this from a newsletter, The Week That Was TWTW, I received from Fred Singer today:"
"Climate change is very real. Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying. The storms are more volatile. We are paying the price in more hurricanes and tornadoes".
Click source link for more
Source Link: examiner.com