“Libertarian paternalism”? | OpenMarket.org

As the concept of “nudging” implies, there’s little regulators can cook up that they won’t regard as net-beneficial, and worthy of imposing on others. That’s the downside of cost-benefit analysis; it’s all too easy to claim benefits outweigh the costs of the program you champion if you’re the architect of it, or are the agency in charge. From that perch, the world is there for you to lord over; the rest of us are all people things are done to.

Colorado Independent » Sen. Brophy: Pshaw on that global warming

As he bike-rides the great terrain of the state this summer, Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, is twittering. Last night he was inspired to share on the topic of climate science. He doesn’t want the state to spend money on studies of global warming. “E-gawd,” he Tweets. But to be clear, he doesn’t want the state to spend money on studies that start from the premise that the unprecedented modern human population has had anything to do with global warming. E-gawd!
...
There is no real argument against global warming among scientists. The scientific community has achieved consensus on the matter. The global-warming controversy is media created and politically sustained.

World Climate Report » Sea Level Rise: An Update Shows a Slowdown

And for global warming alarmists, a declining rate of sea level rise certainly doesn’t do much for “cause.” Couple the slowing rate of sea level rise with the slowing rate of temperature rise and you should have a slowing rate of public concern. An inconvenient situation as Congress considers “global warming” legislation that will certainly raise energy process while uncertainly mitigate climate change—something that natural forces seem to be doing already, and for free.

Steel plant prompts [bogus] global warming worries | Minnesota Public Radio News

The project is Minnesota Steel Industries -- it's hailed as a historic new direction for the struggling Iron Range. The company will mine taconite and turn it into steel -- right at the mine. It's the first time that's ever been done in this country. And the company says it will be the world's most efficient steel-making operation.

The DNR spent a year and a half creating an Environmental Impact Statement on the project. But that study didn't consider the greenhouse gases the plant will emit. The environmental group, the MCEA, asked the DNR to add a section describing the carbon footprint of the operation.
...
The plant would add 13 percent to the state's industrial sector output, according to MCEA attorney Kevin Reuther. He says that's a significant impact that the DNR should have analyzed.

"To have an entire study of environmental impacts done that doesn't even mention global warming at this point is crazy," Reuther says. "We need to be looking at what the environmental impacts are from continuing to increase our global warming emissions, and we need to be looking at ways of mitigating emissions."