War on CO2

The world according to the Liberal orthodoxy (aka. progressives)

    Plant life needs Co2…
    Leftists declare war on Co2…
    Claim to be saving the planet.
    And they call us “flat-earthers”.

 

I think that traces all the way back to the Garden and eating the forbidden fruit.

The serpent said to the woman: “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”[Gen 3:3]

Today the Left says (paraphrasing) ‘Was there really an Adam and Eve? Didn’t we evolve from a microbe or something…. don’t you know? That mutation called human beings have been multiplying and destroying the earth ever since.’

Notice any similarities?

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.”

Gen 1:26 — Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

The Left: Man is created from the image of animals. We shall put plant life and animals over human beings. Plants survive on Co2, and you shall not create Co2. Let us regulate Co2. And you shall worship Creation.

Today news reports say we are on the verge of hitting 400 pp/mm of Co2 in the atmosphere — an all time record, they say:

CO2 Levels Already Topped 400 PPM This Year, On Track To Cross Threshold For A Month

From Climate Central’s Brian Kahn:

Last year, atmospheric carbon dioxide briefly crossed 400 parts per million for the first time in human history. However, it didn’t cross that threshold until mid-May. This year’s first 400 ppm reading came a full two months earlier this past week and the seeming inexorable upward march is likely to race past another milestone next month.

“We’re already seeing values over 400. Probably we’ll see values dwelling over 400 in April and May. It’s just a matter of time before it stays over 400 forever,” said Ralph Keeling in a blog post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/18/400-ppm-co2-levels-_n_4985580.html?icid=maing-grid7

It says that temperatures will rise 8.6 degrees over the next hundred years. Melting polar ice will drive cold jet streams farther south producing snow, but winters will be unusually warm and earlier springs with longer, later falls. And they have problems with our faith-based beliefs.

All that seems almost a certainty, given their vast knowledge, but balancing a budget? Now there’s a non-computable problem.

Immeasurable amounts of Co2 were emitted in creating this post.

RightRing | Bullright

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