Climate change [fraud] information overload?

The more reports produced on climate change, the better for creating awareness, argued Michael Rubinstein, head of media relations at the US-based think-tank, International Food Policy Research Institute. "Each report reinforces the message that there is a progressive drumbeat on the issue; that there is now a global consensus on the extent of the impact of climate change."

He said this was particularly important because until recently there had been "false equivalency": reports tended to produce views from both sides of the climate change debate, from people who believed in it and those who did not.

Investment Greats: Charlie Munger - 29/05/2009

He is vehemently against the ethanol initiatives, which he regards as pricing food out of the range of poor families, and also opposes cap-and-trade carbon policies as insane.

WHY ARE SIMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS ALWAYS CONTROVERSIAL?

People were mocking Chu for his prosaic-but-effective idea, which recalls the fracas around Obama's campaign suggestion that Americans check their tire pressure to make sure their cars were running as efficiently as possible. The RNC and Rush Limbaugh had a field day with that suggestion, even though it was true that it would be a helpful move. I have a hard time figuring out why these kinds of ideas are considered laughable -- anything to score a political point, I suppose. You'd think people who oppose big-government plans like cap-and-trade would want to encourage relatively simple measures to solve the problems of global warming and our unsustainable energy regime. Oh, but they don't believe that global warming and sustainability are actually problems. Sigh.

And the "simple" solution here involves mandating that 30 billion or so square feet of commercial roof space be painted white, because our Energy Secretary thinks that might improve the world's weather?