Getting the EPA to list the polar bears as endangered was supposed to be the environmental lawyer full employment and enrichment act of 2006. They were honked when they could only get endangered status, and then hit right in the wallet when Bush stopped the CO2 related suits. Of course they are going to sue. This was supposed to be their meal ticket for the next few decades. This would open the door to sue the evil oil cos, the evil industries, the evil utilities, the evil car companies, the government, and evil capitalists all over the planet. (Whistling, “We’re in the money..”)

Someone above mentioned the relentless brainwashing by Nova, Discovery, Nat Geo, et al.. That is something that anti-AGW theory folks and political conservatives are way behind on. The ovine population believes their telescreen and their teachers at school. As a result the next generation thinks that capitalism is bad, socialism is good, and buying a Prius will save the world.

By my bar bet record, only about 1 in 10 have heard of the federalist papers, but almost all of the other 9 have been green washed and strongly believe that green socialism holds a bright future for the USA. Since the left and green own academia and the media outright we are pretty much fighting an uphill battle trying to bring some sanity to these issues.

Is Cap & Trade Dead?

May 10, 2009
Is Cap-and-Tax-and-Redistribute dead?
“Democratic dissention, Republican opposition and growing public skepticism may derail Congress’ potentially economy-crippling carbon cap-and-trade bill, perhaps saving Americans billions [TRILLIONS] of dollars.

The bill’s author, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, is opposed by centrist Democrats, who fear the Draconian regulations would severely harm their constituents. Congress members representing the steel industry and coal and nuclear power generators oppose the 648-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, authored by Rep. Waxman and Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass.

Meanwhile, Republicans cite studies showing the bill would increase a typical family’s energy prices at least $3,100 a year, and over 20 years result in 7 million lost jobs and $7 trillion in reduced economic output. Republicans say the legislation is essentially a “tax bill,” and plan alternative legislation to create incentives for “clean” coal and more nuclear energy. …
Growing skepticism over the approach – and even the need – to fight global warming by curbing greenhouse gas emissions isn’t limited to Capitol Hill. An artificial market in government-mandated carbon credits would be “monstrously stupid to do right now,” Berkshire Hathaway Inc. CEO Charlie Munger told CNBC, adding that the move is “almost demented” considering other nations’ intention to continue industrial development, emitting vast amounts of greenhouse gases.

Public sentiment is at a new low, too, says pollster Zogby International. Only 30 percent of Americans support cap-and-trade, and 57 percent oppose it. A Pew Research poll of voter priorities ranked global warming dead last behind the economy and 18 other areas. …
In addition, a recent study by the National Center for Climate Research shows that if fully implemented, the Waxman-Markey bill would produce global temperature “savings” of only 0.05 degree centigrade over 50 years [calculated assuming AGW theory, which is bogus]. Even James Hansen, the NASA scientist and perhaps most ardent proponent of manmade global warming as a threat, urges the bill’s defeat, saying it would be ineffective in reducing greenhouse gases.

Even the premise for curbing greenhouse gases is flawed. There has been no cause-and-effect relationship convincingly established between rising carbon emissions and higher temperatures. Indeed, temperatures have leveled off or declined since 1998 while CO2 emissions have skyrocketed, the opposite of the global warming theory.

Considering its questionable assumptions, economic costs and hardships, this bill promises a paltry return on investment. One might say it’s “almost demented.”

http://heliogenic.blogspot.com/2009/05/is-cap-and-tax-and-redistribute-dead.html

REPLY: Actually in this case, Adsense is a priviledge, only the VIP hosted blogs on WP.com are allowed to have it. They run about $500 per month to operate. So I’m getting the opportunity to earn something, without the base cost. – Anthony

Reply: Please stop this kind of encouragement, any attempts to game the system could lead to a loss of the privilege. You don’t think this kind of behavior is easily detected? ~ charles the moderator

http://heliogenic.blogspot.com/2009/05/insanity-eco-zealots-put-80000-farm.html

Not enough coffee – thanks

Mike zzzzzzzzzzz

What I don’t see is those people who are so uptight about electricity and oil refusing to have anything to do with electricity and oil. It would demonstrate considerably better sincerity if they were to permanently pull their main breakers and confine their transportation to the riding of bicycles while never forgetting to wear their CO2 absorption gear.

Bravolingus!

I keep making this point over and over and over whenever some troll shows up and tells us we’re all idiots, that AGW is a proven fact. I guess they bought a few CFL bulbs and feel all smug about themselves.

Michael J. Bentley (06:53:45) :

Um,
Third paragraph, last line, beief should by belief (curse that sticky “L”!!)

Since you’re in correction mode, “loose” should be “lose” ;)

Re: today’s Non-Sequitur comic strip:

Did I misread it?

http://www.uclick.com/client/spi/nq/

I don’t usually read comics other than Dilbert, but I have noticed how political the kiddie page is getting. Even when I agree with the message, I wonder what the take-away message is for kids. I was happy to see this one – til I showed it to my (generally-savvy) teenage daughter, who thought it a pitch for global warming.

Still, I’d have to say, the message is getting through, however subtly. If cartoonists are beginning to see the light, maybe in 20 years, the current generation will look back on the early decades of the 21st century with some sense of irony over what “they” believed.

It truely is all about money, isn’t it. One of the provisions in the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming bill on Cap & Trade (Tax) is the right for organizations like WWF and others to sue CO2 emitters for “PROJECTED FUTURE HARMS” due to predicted global warming.

Gary you pegged it in the first post! It’s not about AGW and CO2 as a pollutant. It’s about the ability to sue the government with its endless pool of money. It’s about how laws are written and a complicit judiciary that help to facilitate the thievery. In California, the Department of Fish and Game have a 100 year old fish stocking program that has to now provide an environmental impact study. They were sewed, lost, and now, cannot stock many lakes and man-made reservoirs. Why the Fish and Game stocking program? Because it is funded by license fees. It is a pool of money that is not in the California general fund (state budget), We also have the Delta Smelt; it was used to cut off water to farmers that have been farming for three generations. Remember the Spotted Owl? The EPA is not an elected body, and are therefore not accountable to voters. This is why you’re seeing more and more states asserting “states rights”. I believe Cap and Trade has pushed people to the limit and the backlash is going to expose most of the corruption. The good thing is that we know who they are!

Hitting it a little early aren’t we?

We non-scientists are dumb about these things. We respect scientists because they can do things we can’t do, and because we’ve been taught from childhood that scientists are noble, impartial searchers for truth. Once we find out how those smart, smart ’scientists’ prostituted themselves to politicians and real scientists didn’t blow the whistle I believe many people will be unhappy. I suspect scientists in all fields, not just climate-related ones, will face neo-Luddite backlash. “Why the he!! should I believe you? Where were you during the Great AGW Swindle?”

MattE is right. It will be some time before most Americans regain any respect for science, real science. How can we non-scientists tell the difference?

Funding will be hard to get. I hope the backlash stops there.

Yup, I do like scientific non-sequitors :) I’m holdin’ to 6 or 12. The rest are Canadian bears our Inuk sent over to help get the population going again….

“Once Obama puts in Cap and Tax and it’s gets colder and colder, we can have a Revolution and get rid of Washington forever.”

Besides all the local State wide initiatives, Three serious threats remain:

1. Cap&Trade, as you just stated

2. Regulation via the Clean Air and Clean Water Act by EPA

3. Adaption of the already signed Montreal Treaty (Ozone)

There are people who would like the public to do something now.
Revolutions are too messy.

http://heliogenic.blogspot.com/2009/05/when-will-agw-bubble-burst.html

Come on now Paul, there are a few more than 6-12 polar bears in Alaska.

“Two populations of polar bears occur in Alaska: the Southern Beaufort Sea population which is shared with Canada and the Chukchi/Bering seas population which is shared with Russia. Based on recently conducted mark/recapture studies from 2001-2006, the Southern Beaufort Sea population has approximately 1500 bears and is currently thought to be declining. Although accurate estimates of the Chukchi/Bering seas population are unavailable, the best available information suggests that there may be about 2000 bears and that the population is declining. Sport hunting for polar bears, which was thought to be the primary reason for the decline in the Alaska populations prior to 1972, was stopped with the passage of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA)”

http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/mmm/polarbear/issues.htm