Saturday, February 16, 2013

Global Warming Consensus Of Scientists Looking More Like A Myth -
Environment: The global warming alarmists repeat the line endlessly. They claim that there is a consensus among scientists that man is causing climate change. Fact is, they're not even close.
The failed effort to enact cap and trade legislation to fight global warming | Harvard Magazine
...Democrats from states with fossil-fuel reserves reliably vote against measures to control carbon emissions.
...“The public” is seen as a kind of background chorus that, hopefully, will sing on key.
Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation said that he knew in 2010 that the time wasn’t ripe for passing cap-and-trade legislation, but he also knew that the climate system was in urgent need of rescue.

The League of Conservation Voters’ Gene Karpinski noted that public support for addressing climate change is “there, but it is not at the top of the list.” He said that efforts should now be focused on the 2017 legislative session, after a new president takes office.
Lee Wasserman of the Rockefeller Family Fund said that the environmental movement “doesn’t communicate enough with the general public” and that the communications that do exist are mostly intellectual and have “too little heart and gut.” He expressed astonishment that people were protesting in the streets over changes to life insurance, but not over the threatened climate system.
... What might move Americans in general, [warmist Skocpol] argued, is something that will actually benefit them: a cap with a dividend returned to citizens.  [I'd say it's an ominous sign that after trying to sway Americans for decades, you're concluding that you have to pay Americans to sort of believe in it.]
...Conservative Nebraska farmers know about climate change, and they don’t “get” cap and trade, [warmist Tidwell] explained. They do get cap and dividend, he said, calling that approach “the inevitable solution.”
Twitter / ret_ward: There is a lot of political ...
There is a lot of political correctness about which is preventing robust challenges to dogmatic right-wing denial of climate change science.

No comments: