Climategate meets Brandenburg Gate – changing of the guards

Obama promises an end to cheap energy

The Left has shifted from being champions of the poor to being developed-world Progressives, comfortably ensconced in their own modernity

June 24, 2013 -by Marita Noon
A few months ago, in his State of the Union address, President Obama proudly pledged to tackle climate change—despite opposition from Republicans. To date, precious little action to combat climate change has been seen from the White House—which pleases most Republicans and angers the Left.
Environmental activists are some of Obama’s most ardent supporters, but they are frustrated and losing patience with the president. He hasn’t been definitive on killing the Keystone pipeline; as the Washington Post reports, he’s “fallen back from the broad clean energy agenda he envisioned when he first took office”—even to the point of supporting natural gas exploration and recently approving Liquefied Natural Gas export terminals that will increase demand by shipping U.S. natural gas to foreign markets; and he seems to have acquiesced to a fossil fuel future by proposing adaptations to make “coastal communities more resistant to increasingly severe storms and floods.” The environmental community wants to see bold steps toward a fossil-fuel free future ….
[excerpt]
Frank Ackerman, an economist at Tufts University who published a book about the economics of global warming, calls the social cost of carbon “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek, he said: “This is a very strange way to make policy about something this important.” And added, “The Obama Administration ‘hasn’t always leveled with us about what is happening behind closed doors.’”
Why bury “something this important” in an afternoon announcement about something that is virtually insignificant? The answer, I believe, is found in a small piece of the Washington Post story cited previously. Apparently, the White House’s own research found that when Obama, in his State of the Union speech, “vowed to act on climate change if Congress refused to do so,” a focus group’s “favorability” rating “plummeted.” White House transcripts reveal that Obama knows that “the politics of this are tough.”
At an April fundraising event at the San Francisco home of billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer, Obama defended his lack of action on climate change: “If you haven’t seen a raise in a decade, if your house is still $25,000, $30,000 underwater … you may be concerned about the temperature of the planet, but it’s probably not rising to your number one concern.”
As a result, his Organizing for America team—“formed to advance the president’s second term agenda”—has been laying the “groundwork with the American public before unveiling a formal climate strategy.” Teasing out the increase in the social cost of carbon was likely part of the strategy, intended to test the waters ahead of the planned climate announcements from the White House.
Likewise, his comments in Berlin, where he reintroduced the subject, calling climate change “the global threat of our time.” The next day, headlines read: “Obama to renew emissions push.” It is believed that the new “measures to tackle climate change” will “effectively ban new coal-fired power plants”—to which I add, will effectively ban “cheap electricity.”
– See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/06/24/obama-promises-an-end-to-cheap-energy/#sthash.OHGMnFWP.dpuf

Good article on the politics of Obama’s weathered climate policy. And what do microwave ovens have to do with climategate? Who knew? This is the kind of politics and policies — no difference between them to Obama — we’ve grown to expect and detest. Ah yes, reintroducing the subject in Berlin, with the sun in his eyes and teleprompter issues.

In a related article, Paul Driessen fleshes out the big questions:

23) Shouldn’t Congress pass a cap-and-trade bill or carbon tax to help heal the climate? 
The climate bill that died in the Democrat Senate was a scientifically meaningless bill that Obama’s own EPA admitted would not impact global CO2 levels – let alone global temperatures.
The climate bill would only have raised the cost of energy for American families and businesses, and killed jobs, while doing nothing for the climate. A major Bloomberg News report revealed that U.S. oil companies would likely cope with the climate legislation by “closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.” Bloomberg also reported that “one in six U.S. refineries probably would close by 2020,” and this could “add 77 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline.”
EPA’s unilateral “carbon dioxide endangerment” regulations would have much the same effect.
20) Don’t graphs show that current temperatures are the highest in 1,000 years?
Penn State professor and UN IPCC modeler Michael Mann did publish a hockey stick-shaped graph that purportedly showed an unprecedented sudden increase in average global temperatures, following ten centuries of supposedly stable climate. However, Dr. Mann was at the center of the Climategate scandal. His graph and the data and methodology behind it have been scrutinized and debunked in peer-reviewed studies by numerous climate scientists, statisticians and other experts.
The latest research clearly reveals that the Medieval Warm Period (also called the Medieval Climate Optimum) has been verified and was in fact global, not just confined to the Northern Hemisphere. The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change reported in 2009 that “the Medieval Warm Period was: (1) global in extent, (2) at least as warm as, but likely even warmer than, the Current Warm Period, and (3) of a duration significantly longer than that of the Current Warm Period to date.”
The Science and Public Policy Institute reported in May 2009: “More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was real, global, and warmer than the present. And the numbers grow larger daily.”

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent to (green), or cooler than (blue), peak Current Warm Period temperatures.

Read more: http://papundits.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/climate-change-issues-for-2012/
And Read more excellent articles at CFACT http://www.cfact.org/
H/T PA Pundits-International

Climate Climax

I think the word CimateGate fits their drumbeat agenda, and it continues.

Buzz words they use are almost comical. Sometimes one has to remember that they are the left’s words and not ones the right has strapped around their alarmist necks.

Climate financing

Climate Change

Climate aid (love that one)

Shifting climate

Climate aid activists

Green Cimate Fund

“fast start” climate financing

And now, drumroll, for their latest creation:
Climate “fiscal cliff” — We are are heading for a Climate fiscal cliff — look out eagles and cliff dwellers! Now they are adapting the language from the debt crisis to globul warming, and hijacking them to point toward their undebatable issue. More to follow. So they’ll say that you cannot address the fiscal problems without addressing Climate Change.

One quote here is not too much:

“A recent projection by the World Bank showed temperatures are on track to increase by up to 4 degrees C (7.2 F) this century, compared with pre-industrial times, overshooting the 2-degree target on which the U.N. talks are based.”

Its bad enough with education the way it is with its problems, but I’m convinced now more than ever that we have to start teaching kids how to read “green”. I mean how to read through the language the left uses by applying critical thinking skills and logic. In the future they will have to know the techniques of propaganda and spot the fallacies in the language of ‘big-gov green’ (a dialect all its own) or enviro-mentalists, just to protect themselves from it.

The Bible warned of worshipping creation over the Creator. They turned the words nature’s God into Nature is god.

Romans 1:25

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

 

If the rhetoric is not enough, Obama has EPA’s gun loaded and aimed at us with a regulation apocolypse. The Examiner reported before the election Obama had EPA hastily prepariing to roll out the regs at the end of November, and if he won they would continue their agenda. That’s now a given. And this is only the tip of the iceberg:

“More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700

What does it say when the administration put so much effort and resources into it? All that new regulation on business and of course GE will be exempt. (surprise!)

Obama has made sure that the EPA will institute mandates even if he has to overreach the executive branch’s power, since, after all, “we can’t wait” for the dictator to do things legally.

2012 UN Climate Talks In Doha, Qatar Face Multiple Challenges

EPA planning new anti-coal regulations for after election

If the rhetoric doesn’t get you, the regulations will.