by Phil Brennan at Newsmax.com
Lawmakers who described the alleged effects of global warming are spreading a lot of “eye wash,” a top climate scientist says.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax, S. Fred Singer, a renowned climatologist and professor of environmental sciences emeritus at the University of Virginia, discussed the background behind the recent open letter to Congress he and six other scientists sent to members of the House and Senate.
In the letter, the scientists cited a letter sent by the Woods Hole Research Center, which exhorted Congress to act quickly to avoid a global disaster due to alleged global warming.
Singer said the Woods Hole group “put on a sort of scary exaggerated kind of letter to Congress ahead of the vote in the House in an obvious attempt to stampede them into voting for the Waxman-Markey [cap and trade environmental] bill.
by Irwin M. Stelzer in The Weekly Standard
Death by a thousand cuts. Or in the case of the efficiency of the U.S. economy, by at least four: energy policy, health care policy, trade union resurgence, and fiscal madness.
Start with energy. The world is awash in it. The wind blows and the sun shines, at least some times and somewhere. Oil and gas wells gush, and substantial oil- and gas-rich areas have never even been explored. Coal abounds. Nuclear power can be had at a cost. So why has Barack Obama made energy policy one of his three top priorities — education and health care are the other two — in a country in which inexpensive energy has produced the world’s most productive agriculture, a population capable of navigating America’s huge spaces in air-conditioned comfort, and permitted the substitution of energy-plus-brain-power for back-breaking labor?
One problem is that oil is largely in the hands of very bad actors. Still another is that almost all sources of energy have significant impacts on the environment: solar panels consume acres of space; wind machines are considered eye sores by those who can spot them; oil, natural gas and coal emit CO2, responsible for claims that the globe is warming; nuclear power generates long-lived and dangerous waste.
Some of these problems are soluble, although not without cost. Domestic producers of natural gas tout their product as a substitute for petrol in trucks, busses and other vehicles. Progress is apparently being made in developing cars and trucks that run on at least partly on batteries. The efficiency of vehicles is being increased, albeit in response to inefficient government edicts rather than to more efficient price signals. Never mind that the infrastructure for these various gasoline substitutes has not been developed, and that the cost of these technologies exceeds that of the gasoline-fuelled internal combustion engine by a good margin. They must be listed in the possible column. That’s the good news.
By a 219-212 vote, eight Republicans and 211 Democrats, passed today what Democrats titled “Cap & Trade.” According to The Heritage Foundation, HR 2454 will cost a family of four $2979 per year by taxing energy consumption, increased production costs that will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, and adverse economic impacts such as lost jobs and lower GDP. Though concerned citizens jammed the switchboards of their representatives yesterday to fight against what is really the Democrats’ new “Energy Tax,” our elitist elected officials ignored their constituents’ pleas and protests to push through this huge tax increase that will surely cripple an already ailing economy.
Though President Obama campaigned on the promise of a middle class tax cut, he’s a principal backer of this economy-killing tax. The Wall Street Journal points out that the 95% of Americans the President promised a tax cut will be the hardest hit by this latest Democratic plan to seize a bigger portion of our paychecks. Forget for a minute that what Obama calls a tax cut doesn’t deserve that moniker. The President claims what he dubs a tax cut will save American households only $500-$1000–nowhere even close to the costs those Americans will incur if HR 2454 passes the Senate and is signed into law.
What the President and his Democratic allies are perpetrating is a huge con job on the American people. They hand you somewhere between $500 and $1000, while picking your pocket for $3000–smiling and laughing all the while. That’s the worst part.
Heritage notes that “Climatologist Chip Knappenberger crunched the numbers and found that even the strictest version of Waxman-Markey would reduce projected global temperatures by just 0.044ºC by 2050.” Less than one degree if the Democrats got everything they want and it all works the way they claim. Both of which are doubtful.
Less than one degree! How much of the polar ice cap will that save? How many heat related illnesses and deaths will that avoid?
The fact is, there will be virtually no change to the effects of global warming and Obama and his Democratic pals in Congress know it. This entire bill is a ruse they’ve created for one purpose and one purpose only–to raise taxes. It’s one big con and we, the American people, are the marks.
Contact your Senators, and keep contacting them to make sure this bill dies in the Senate. We cannot afford the Democrats’ tax increase, regardless what name they give it.
from ARRA News Service
Action Alert: Friday, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (the “Cap and Trade Energy Bill”) that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by giving the federal government the power to limit the amount of oil, gasoline, coal, and other fossil fuels used by American utilities and industry. This is a bill that could fundamentally alter the American economy, dramatically affect the climate, and have huge implications for our national security. But, right now no one knows what’s in the bill or how it came to be.
Let your Representatives know that we can’t afford the Democrat’s Energy Tax! You can find links to contact your representatives on the right side of this page.