Greens don't have a monopoly on virtue: just ask Al 'Moneybags' Gore :: James Delingpole

One of the great articles of faith among believers in imminent man-made eco doom is that they hold the monopoly in moral rectitude. It's only the bad guys - eg Big Oil, crazed journalists and bloggers secretly in the pay of Big Oil - who stand to make money out of climate change by disseminating their evil lies about global warming and keeping the carbon economy alive. The good guys, on the other hand - from scientists like Dr James Hansen to eco-activists like Al Gore and the Prince of Wales - are in it out of pure altruism: because they care and want to save Mother Gaia from harm.

But this isn't strictly true. The fact is that many of those associated with Big Green Al's Great Global Warming Scam stand to make a fat fortune out of climate change hysteria, be it through carbon offsets (the closest Wall Street or the City have ever got to trading thin air) or the fat subsidies available for those involved in otherwise economically unviable activities such as wind farming. The more people they infect with their hysteria, the more money they stand to make.

U.S. EPA is Ill-equipped to Fight Global Warming — MasterResource

The only lasting feather in EPA’s cap would be that it managed to eliminate 0.0033ºC of warming each year if it were successful at completely eliminating all U.S. CO2 emissions, forever. It would be mighty interesting to see a quantification of the endangerment that it avoided by doing so. My bet is that it would be embarrassingly small. And the effort to do so would be embarrassingly large.

It is hard to imagine that the EPA couldn’t serve us in far better ways.

The Clamour Of The Times

This morning, Professor Mike Hulme of the University of East Anglia gave a most significant interview on BBC Radio 4’s flagship news programme, ‘Today’. I should like to suggest that you take a moment to listen to this in full [it is only 4.41 minutes long]. The interview is available here: ‘Finding global warming solutions’.

I must then ask ‘global warming’ sceptics and realists to be patient, and not to prejudge what Mike is arguing from his opening sentences. I believe that what he is saying is of enormous importance, and that it deserves to be considered extremely seriously. Mike, as many of you will know, was the founding Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, and, as such, his opinion carries weight. Moreover, while Mike and I would most certainly disagree over certain aspects of climate-change science, I have always held him in the highest regard as one of the most careful and straight of the commentators on the subject.