This time we really, really mean it!

Global warming kooks have been warning us that if we didn’t act immediately in 2002, 2003, 2004, etc., it would be too late to save the earth. Well those deadlines have come and gone, so can’t we all just set about figuring out how to cope with a warmer climate? Nah – now they want to mandate strict rationing on the western world so that the Chinese and Indians can all buy cars. Of course this is insane, but the question is, why do nutters like these get press coverage?

I heard a scientist, a global warming believer, by the way, interviewed this morning by BBC. His basic premise: we’ve all been lied to by alternative energy advocates – there is in fact no reasonable alternative energy alternative to fossil fuels (or nukes). Wind power, solar energy, cow farts, none will provide the energy necessary to run our world. His advice was to get busy adjusting to warmer temperatures. Sounds right to me.


Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “This time we really, really mean it!

  1. w b h

    Money quote: “But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

    John Hinderaker of PowerlineBlog writes:

    Environmentalism A Fraud? Don’t Take My Word For It
    November 27, 2010 Posted by John at 6:24 PM

    Ottmar Edenhofer is one of the leaders of the international global warming movement: he is the deputy director and chief economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, the joint chair of the IPCC’s Working Group 3, and will co-chair the Working Group “Mitigation of Climate Change” at the upcoming summit in Cancun. On November 14, he was interviewed by the Neue Zürcher Zeitung. His explanation of the current goals of the climate change movement was illuminating:

    The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

    That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

    That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

    Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet – and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 – there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

    De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

    First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

  2. w b h

    Here’s another item about this huge fraud:

    The UN banned a global warming denier from covering the talks this week in Cancun.

    At the last conference in Copenhagen journaist Phelim McAleer was attacked during an interview with Neil Cavuto.

    Now the UN won’t allow Phelim into their wealth redistribution meetings.

    A veteran journalist and documentary film maker, known for asking difficult questions of climate scientists and politicians, has been denied press accreditation for the Cancun Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico.

    The UN has refused access to the Cancun Climate Change Conference to Phelim McAleer, who is well known for asking scientists and politicians difficult questions about Global Warming orthodoxy.

    McAleer was notified of the UN’s refusal to accredit him just days before the international conference opening today.

    McAleer produced and directed Not Evil Just Wrong, a documentary on Global Warming, and his reports from Copenhagen Climate Change Conference went viral on Youtube.

    During one encounter an armed UN security guard prevented McAleer from asking a scientist difficult questions about the climategate e-mails and warned that if he did not stop filming he would confiscate his equipment and expel him from the conference.
    McAleer was also assaulted by environmentalists during a live TV interview.

    McAleer says the refusal to allow him access to the Cancun Climate Change Conference is censorship.

    The UN officials in Cancun are hoping to finalize a plan to tax the developed world for their greenhouse gas emissions.

  3. NoWorriesMate

    Interesting that the NYTimes published a lead story on Wikileaks, but not the global warming fraud. Why?

    Because the global warming stuff was stolen.


    Anyone that pays for that garbage should have the it hypocritical heads examined. NYT can’t go to zero fast enough.