The climate fools rush in at the inaguration

I see no overwhelming science in support of alarmism. Maybe he doesn’t know about all the science that does not agree with him?

Welcome to the asylum America.

“In his second Inaugural address today, President Obama spoke powerfully and eloquently about the critical importance of solving the climate crisis. ”
So says the man with a bigger personal carbon Footprint than some countries, Al Gore!
WHAT CLIMATE CRISIS???? How the hell is being in the situation whereby the world is NOT warming up at all for 2 decades in any way a crisis?
DO these people not look at the data at all? THEIR MODELS ARE WRONG!

““We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”
My apologies because I’m sure this has already occurred to … just about everyone out there who’s been awake for the last four years, but I can’t seem to stop myself from belaboring the obvious. Why is it again that saving our children and future generations from the threat of climate change, which may or may not have an impact a century or more down the road, more of a priority than saving our children in the decades to come from indentured servitude to pay back insane increases in federal deficit spending?

Don’t worry. In 5 years time, when the world is seeing late frosts and early snowfalls accompanied by brutal winters, the next President will promise to end this scourge of Anthropogenic Global Cooling. Additionally, he will demand higher regulations on fossil fuels in order to warm the planet.

.”The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transfer of cash to Americans that supported my campaign.”

Thank God a leader listens to the professionals and not opinion writers on blogs. Finally we can get down and do something meaningful about the changing climate.

A little OT, but here in England, we have taken a distinct disliking to Obama of late. He is ‘suggesting’ to our PM that we “must” stay in the EU. Whether one is in favour of that or not, we don’t take too kindly to someone who has an obvious disdain for Britain (due to his own family’s history) poking their nose in where it isn’t required. Amusingly, it seems to have had the opposite effect to the one he may of wanted. Some think that if he believes we should be in the EU then maybe it’s time we were out!

So an idiot really can be president.

If AGW proponents think us falling into the trap of God-complex thinking as Al Gore has painted us, they have only to look into the mirror. I once thought ol’ wooden head to be the leader of this snake oil wagon. Unfortunately our president is now the leader of this ill-fated desire to strip every man, woman, child, and their pets of individual rights and freedoms once guaranteed by the constitution he swears today to uphold. He is no better or brighter than the man that led his flock to their deaths waiting for some spaceship behind a comet’s tail. Wake up from this nightmare!
For those who think me a Neanderthal flat earther, yes we landed on the moon, the Earth is fairly round, a woman has a right to choose, consenting adults should be free to marry whomever they choose, and some religious folks hold too close to unsupportable myths as if they were real events and not symbolic stories, I also have three degrees and have published research in a major journal. And was at one time a liberal democrat. Obama’s misguided leadership made me change some of my political leanings, AND my vote!
But most important I do not blindly follow a charismatic leader. God forbid humans repeat that little bit of nasty history. In their misguided attempt to bring about their view of human utopia they killed the Anne Franks of this world.

Gerry, England says:
January 21, 2013 at 12:57 pm
“Just remind me again why you re-elected him? Oh, yeah, he bought off 47% of the voters so only had to dupe a further 4% and job done.”
And that is the real depressing fact. There will always be scoundrels to take advantage of the people but when the people choose them outright, we have a real problem. It’s the educational system and the media that are doing the hard work for the left. They have put this in place over the past 50 or so years. People who do not get taught real history are doomed to repeat it.

Keitho and Gerry: The distinction I always draw in my own battles on this stuff is whether the researchers/politicians are (A) lying, or (B) inexcusably incompetent. Either A or B leads to the conclusion that they should be removed from their positions. Heh, I actually tried this approach about 8 years ago in a town in Ohio, and about a week after I sent my analysis to folks there the chief miscreant at the local Dept of Health resigned! I think it’s easier for people to accept that there might be a problem out there if they can accept it without committing themselves to actually calling someone a liar.
– MJM

One more thing. Though you may abore guns and the killing of animals, though you may be a vegetarian, though you may be no fan of the late Charelton Heston, please consider joining the NRA. As a political entity it may have the chops to derail this out of control speeding train bound for hell. I joined yesterday.

Sometimes I wonder if Matthew 24:15-16 and Daniel 9:26-27 are actually referring to
“the desolation of the Obama nation” instead of “the abomination of the desolation”.
Throwing our children’s (and their children’s) money away on a non-problem with
no reasonable or verifiable science to back it up, and saying “the failure to do so
would betray our children and future generations” is indeed an abomination.
I’m not disputing the small, natural warming since the last ice age, but AGW?
Might as well blame the excess heat from pixie dust and moonbeams….
Energy prices have been rapidly climbing here in Germany (and EU in general),
due to supposed global warming. When the coming cooling hits, a lot of folks
are going to be unable to afford heating due to the higher energy costs
(based on false data/pretenses/what have you). In this case I can only
wonder who’s betraying whom….

President Obama
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.”

Whenever people make sweeping statements like this I ask for peer reviewed evidence or cold, hard data from reputable sources. All I get is chirp, chirp.
Let’s take a look at boreal forest fires.

Future wildfire in circumboreal forests in relation to global warming
Abstract.
Despite increasing temperatures since the end of the Little Ice Age (ca. 1850), wildfire frequency has decreased as shown in many field studies from North America and Europe. We believe that global warming since 1850 may have triggered decreases in fire frequency in some regions and future warming may even lead to further decreases in fire frequency.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2307/3237261/abstract

More similar stuff.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.776/full
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2011.01.021
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/

Supposedly (I can’t find what words he said in the media) Obama just said something like: “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Here’s a man who has just sworn to defend the Constitution. How many days will it take for him to resume his attack on the Constitution? Or how many hours? Impeachment is our only hope to remain free.

@The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says: January 21, 2013 at 1:03 pm
Agreed. This Brit says – Butt out, Obama.

RE: President Barack Obama is pledging to respond to what he calls “the threat of climate change.”
Translation: Get ready for more taxes and regulations.

Let’s hope that the Administration will finally start listening to scientists and make climate change the priority that it merits.

I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy. The fact that Germany doesn’t have much in the way of fossil fuel companies that are paying to confuse is probably the reason why Germans of all political persuasions seem to favor action on reducing green house gases while the USA is mired in confusion and debate.

Obama can always claim he was misled by the ‘so called’ experts. Besides, he can always say he tried, but those nasty Republicans stopped him boo hoo, knowing full well he was never going to move away from cheap gas and oil. It alsokeeps the loonies like Hansen, Gore and Mann just enough onside that they won’t cause trouble for him. Politics for the big boys…

Supposedly, man-made climate change is a threat to our children’s future, but a $17 trillion national debt is not. Never mind that the former is unproven hypothesis, and the latter very, very real.

Pamela, thanks for joining. To me the Second Amendment is a somewhat tedious and expensive responsibility. I hope to never use my gun for more than practice, but OTOH the presence of mine and millions more is a valid even if imperfect deterrent to enemies foreign and domestic. Our President thought that modern firearms were good for Libyan people but appears to have a different opinion about his fellow Americans. After that war “ended” his views on embassy security lined up with his views on school security, ask the bad guys to give up their weapons and ammo and hope they don’t kill you in the meantime.
To our British and Australian readers, I apologize for the diversion. I realize you have made a different choice about security in the modern world. Hopefully things will never reach the point where that choice is regretted.

On the other hand, passing trillions of dollars in debt to our children is apparently hunky dory.

As a consequence of the President’s speech, Gore will buy back Current TV… /sarc

BillD wrote, “I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy.”
I don’t actually know the cost/kwh the Germans pay for their electricity compared to the average American. I believe ours is about 10 cents/kwh excluding the add-ons and about 20 cents/kwh including the add-ons. Let’s say 15 cents/kwh is a fair estimate for the moment? If so….
Bill H, if the German cost would then be 50% higher, 22 cents/kwh (if my estimates are indeed correct) do you seriously believe the average American householder would be willing to check off a box on a ballot saying “I’d like my electric bill to be increased by 50% to help “achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy”? (btw…. the word “rapid” seems a bit misleading — I’d say it implies 5 years or so of ‘suffering’ in the process, but my guess is that what YOU mean by “rapid” is more like 25 years of paying those 50% higher electric bills?)
– MJM
P.S. Anyone have better estimates on the US kwh rate vs. the Germans at the moment?

If they would keep their mouth shut – and didn’t burn tons of fuel jet-setting everywhere – there would be a lot less hot-air.
Would someone ask what is the carbon-footprint of the military?

tz2026 said:
January 21, 2013 at 2:54 pm
Would someone ask what is the carbon-footprint of the military?
—————————————-
The military’s carbon-bootprint is ok cuz they haz the Green Berets
🙂

michaeljmcfadden says:
January 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm
…
if the German cost would then be 50% higher, 22 cents/kwh
…
right now it’s 26 euro cents/kwh (say $ 0.35 US) and they’re bound and
determined to push it up to 30 euro cents ($0.40 US) as soon as possible
(I’m quoting EnBW rates from south Germany here). We’re sort of a
captive market here, as we can change energy providers, but we’re still stuck
with a plethora of taxes and fees (thanks, Brussels) that don’t change
regardless of provider. Kind of an energy “hotel California” if you will (or won’t 🙂 ).
Adding to the problem/confusion/etc. is the fact that the industrialized south
of Germany could well use the wind/solar/whatever power being generated
in north Germany except for the, erm, tiny problem that the infrastructure
to move the power north–>south doesn’t currently (no pun intended) exist.
There are proposals for three or four “energy highways” (shades of Gore)
in discussion, but they will take years to complete. Meanwhile, Poland is
less than thrilled that this power is routed through their network (in part)
and the resulting peaks/valleys are a huge strain on their system. They’ve
threatened to stop the flow but nothing’s official yet.
Adding insult to electrical/financial injury, the countries surrounding
Germany (in particular, the Netherlands) receive Germany’s excess
power at reduced rates, which further reduces their costs. Unfortunately
this is borne on the backs of German ratepayers, who are paying
extra fees for the windpower (whether or not it is used) and solar, etc.
Someone’s getting filthy rich off of this, but it ain’t us…..
I think the German edition of Business Week had some great info
on this (graphs, charts, etc.). I will check for this links, as it
really showed the massive price increases of the last 10 years.
Would be nice to have a really tiny (and SAFE) reactor in the back yard
and go totally off the grid….oh well…I can dream (at least that’s free….for now….).

James Delingpole puts in context Obama’s climate agenda as a declaration of war on reality.
Obama declares war on reality
By James Delingpole US politics Last updated: January 21st, 2013
259 Comments Comment on this article
“Reality: your ass is grass!”
When George W Bush declared war on an abstract noun – “Terror” – he was widely and inevitably mocked by the left for his foolishness. Not to be outdone, Barack Obama has used his second inaugural address to declare war on an even more nebulous threat to the security of the world: reality, itself.
Here’s how he put it in his inaugural address: (H/T Theo Spleenventer; Bishop Hill)
We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.
The first sentence is a blatant untruth. Concerted global action so far to deal with the threat of climate change has resulted in: higher energy prices; more deaths from fuel poverty; more intrusive regulation; the destruction of rainforests and the squandering of agricultural land on biofuels; higher food prices; famine and food riots – as a result partly of the drive for biofuels; the entrenchment of corporatism and rent-seeking to the detriment of free markets; the ravaging of the countryside with ugly solar farms and even uglier wind turbines; the deaths of millions of birds and bats; the great recession. How any of this has in any way benefited either our children (who are going to find it far harder to find a job) or future generations is a complete mystery.
The second sentence is a devious combination of the junk factoid and the non sequitur.
That “overwhelming judgement of science” is a reference to the comprehensively discredited Doran survey: the one where the “97 per cent of climate scientists” turned out to consist of just 75 out of 77 climate scientists who could be bothered to reply to two silly and dubious questions.
As for the idea that “science” ever has such a thing as an “overwhelming judgement”: this would be news to Galileo, Newton, Einstein and indeed all the great scientists of history, all of whom made their names by advancing theories which completely overturned the “overwhelming judgement” of their contemporaries.
It’s probably true, up to a point, that “none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms”. But only if you accept that everyone lives in a region susceptible to fires, drought and powerful storms, which not everyone does.
What Obama is presumably trying to slip into that weasel sentence is the notion that “science” is overwhelmingly of the view that raging fires, crippling drought and more powerful storms are increasing as a result of “climate change” (note incidentally how he’s careful not to say whether or not it is man-made, thus enabling him to cover all eventualities). But if this is the case, I’d dearly love to see the evidence that this is a) anthropogenic b) controllable or c)historically unprecedented. Certainly, according to this graph at Watts Up With That?, there is nothing particular weird or alarming about recent weather activity. On an index of “Extreme Weather” in the US since 1910, last year – 2012 – ranks a very modest 54th.
Still, for all that, I applaud the President’s chutzpah and ingenuity. If you want to expand the size of government as much as he obviously does, there’s really no better way than to declare war on reality. Reality is a slippery foe; it has many heads – and no sooner have you cut off one than a thousand more grow in its place; it’s everywhere, at all times, and there’s no escaping it, meaning you have to mobilise unimaginably large resources if you are to have a hope of defeating it. Which, of course, you never will. Obama’s glorious war on reality will be a war without end. Bad luck, America. (But you can’t say I didn’t warn you.…)
Tags: climate change, inaugural address, Obama, war on reality

Moe- it seems you need a vacation, try visiting reality. The climate is doing what it always does, change. The specious, redundant phrase *climate change* shows you are living in a deluded muddle.

inauguration
not
inaguration

Someone above wrote:
“So an idiot really can be president.”
The answer has, at least, one life proof: George W. Bush.
Time will tell if we include Obama too in Charles.U.Farley’s sentence above.
This Obama speech about climate change is very naive and mixes several things that should not be “mixable”. Obama, of course, did not write this part of the speech. This must be Holdren’s ideas.
(I am not an USA citizen)

Charles.U.Farley says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:14 pm
“So an idiot really can be president.”
You can’t call a man an Idiot for what he believes.
Besides, President W had a hard time with speaking casually in public, and I wouldn’t call him an idiot, it just wasn’t one of his strong points.

David g and rocky road, glad to here we are in agreement with climate change. As a matter of interest, which particular climate would you prefer. The earth has had many climates, many not supportive of 7 billion humans. I guess you would prefer one that will support you and your lifestyle and will support agriculture, like we have had in the last 10,000 years.
I imagine, you can see no harm in having CO2 levels never experienced by humans before (last time they were this night was 800,0000 years ago. Modern humans have only been around for 125k years.
[snip. Stay on topic. — mod.]

For all of those complaining about Obama and debt, it must remembered that there was debt before Obama and therefore Obama can not have anything to do with the debt. The U.S. of A.’s debt has gone up and down in the past so therefore it is just a natural 60 year cycle.

Picture of fiddle burning.

@ sceptical
Right, and as soon as I see a Bill, signed by “CO2”, that mandates a 3C-5C global temperature increase, I’ll be happy to attribute warm weather to greenhouse gases. In the meantime, your analogy is just another silly attempt to conflate correlation with causation.

BillD says:
January 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm
I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy. The fact that Germany doesn’t have much in the way of fossil fuel companies that are paying to confuse is probably the reason why Germans of all political persuasions seem to favor action on reducing green house gases while the USA is mired in confusion and debate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LOL. Is there an extra Germany somewhere on this planet that we’re unaware of? The one I know about has announced the shut down of non CO2 producing nuclear power plants to be replaced by coal fired Co2 belching power plants to be built asap and fueled with domestic coal.
Or are you from a different planet, which would also explain the discrepancy?

BillD, as you can see from Jeff’s response to me:
“right now it’s 26 euro cents/kwh (say $ 0.35 US) and they’re bound and
determined to push it up to 30 euro cents ($0.40 US) ”
, we are basically talking about a rough 100% to 200% increase in US electric bills, a doubling or possibly even a tripling. So, would you be happy putting it up for a democratic vote, with a proper estimate of what you meant by “rapid” to the American people? I.E. a vote on the following (following your model above about the Germans):
“Would you be willing to pay double or triple your current electricity electricity bills to achieve a transition to renewable energy over the next 25 years?” (Of course, as part of offering such a vote you’d also have to outline exactly what would be required to FULLY transition and how it would be achieved in just 25 years.
So what say you BillD? Will you stand behind your words? Can you make a start by agreeing or disagreeing as to whether the 25 year period is indeed what you meant by a “rapid transition”? And then, with whatever period you felt was needed, draw a brief outline as to how such a full transition would be implemented within it, and at what additional cost?
After all, that WOULD be the best way to back up your argument, no?
– MJM

Hey, Moe
Look up Holocene Climate Optimum.

With all respect since I’m not American, but can someone please explain to me how joining the National Rifle Association will deter your president one iota from his ideologically driven agenda. Unfortunately we all knew this was coming when Mr. Obama was re-elected but I fail to see the connection between the constitutional amendment to own guns and the economy.

It is simply a case of task over load. The more energy he and his allies have to pour into his anti-gun agenda, the less other stuff he can accomplish. Sort of the best defense is a good offense strategy. Force him to focus on the gun issue and he will have less time and energy to focus on other destructive agendas. In this case he may have bitten off more than he can chew, so it would be useful to make the chewing as difficult as possible.
With that said, I am of the opinion that the recent rush to judgement on guns and the associated political maneuvering could also be a distraction and misdirection (as they say with magicians, what is the other hand doing?)
The NRA is one of the few groups which is so singly focused that it can make or break political careers for Representatives and Senators who stray too far from the intent of the constitution.
It is also one of the few organizations that can mobilize a huge public response on single issues.
To use the global warming jargon, the behavior of elected officials with regard to one of our most fundamental constitutional protections, is a good proxy for how “loose” they are with the interpretation of other principles of government like the idea that the Federal government is only granted 16 enumerated powers. Any activity that steps outside those enumerated powers is arguably illegal and unconstitutional.
Yes I realize that some of those ventures outside the enumerated powers were sanctioned by the Supreme Court but the Supreme Court has changed its view on other matters over time as well. What many forget is that the Supreme Court only decides very narrow elements of the law as presented by a specific test case brought to the court.
A good example is the recent court decisions which finally explicitly stated that the right to keep and bear arms as specified in the second amendment is an individual right not a group right belonging to the militia. Of course many in the anti-gun crowd ignore the fact that under current U.S. Federal law all adult males between the age of 17 and 45 are in the militia by law.

TITLE 10 – ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A – General Military Law
PART I – ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 – THE MILITIA
-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section
313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States
and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the
National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are –
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
Naval Militia.

The similarities between the two propaganda campaigns is striking. A case could be made that the two agendas are actually part and parcel of the same effort to change the entire structure of our country.
Larry

This is the strategy of distraction. A mere pea and shell game for this president to distract the teaming masses and low information voters from the real problems:
8% unemployment 4 plus years.
13% under-employment
Record permanent disability claims
Record food stamp recipients
16 Trillion in debt and counting
Gasoline in the $3.50 range
Food at 10% inflation
The Middle East with more armed conflicts to count on two hands and one world super power awol.
So he distracts with Gay issues
Then abortion
Then with guns
Now with Climate
Soon with amnesty
All pet projects to placate his core constituents who actually write the news, and teach our children.
I am not taking the bait this time.
To the good folks that provide content and meaningful responses on this site:
Keep the science in his face and remember the issue of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming ranks dead last on a list of American’s priorities.
Soon enough the middle class is not going to accept the table scraps that fall from the plates of our well fed politicians. Not to be sarcastic but the current policies of this administration are just not sustainable.

Another 4 years of dramatic pauses as President Zero try’s to catch up with the teleprompter. In 4 more years the fundamental job of wreaking the American economy will be accomplished. Binders full of bankrupt and broken people all waving free Obama phones. He warned us and we let it happen. What a world!!!

Has anyone worked out how much it costs,to make these wind mills and solar panels?

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:03 pm
A little OT, but here in England, we have taken a distinct disliking to Obama of late. He is ‘suggesting’ to our PM that we “must” stay in the EU. Whether one is in favour of that or not, we don’t take too kindly to someone who has an obvious disdain for Britain (due to his own family’s history) poking their nose in where it isn’t required. Amusingly, it seems to have had the opposite effect to the one he may of wanted. Some think that if he believes we should be in the EU then maybe it’s time we were out!
=====================================================
Along those same lines, I was listening to the news coverage of the innaugural events today (not being a supporter of President Obama) and I heard someone (Mariah Carey maybe) singing a version of an old American patriotic song called “My country tis of thee”, which can only be described as a one fingered salute to the English.
Growing up in the US, I was taught this song in primary school (ages 6 through 12). I only learned that the music it was set to was “God Save the Queen” watching a TV series called “Black Sheep Squadron” at about 13 yrs old. An Aussie island watcher in the pacific, on this particular episode would raise the Union Jack and play it on his record player every morning.
You know that as an official Presidential event there had to be people there representing the UK, how anyone could OK that particular song to be added is just the height of incompetence ….. or something far worse.
TB

BillD says: “I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy.”
Germans are easily fooled.

Sparks says:
January 21, 2013 at 3:49 pm
“Charles.U.Farley says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:14 pm
“So an idiot really can be president.”
You can’t call a man an Idiot for what he believes.”
If he has idiotic believes, one can.
That being said, I don’t think Obama is an idiot. I don’t think he has idiotic believes. I think he believes in nothing but his own enrichment and the enrichment of his cronies. He won’t tell you that candidly, though.
I think he’s simply the biggest and most successful crook around. Just like Hitler who spend his first 4 years in power robbing the country blind and enjoying high times at the Obersalzberg.
He eventually prepared for war because the economy started to fail. And went to rob neighbouring countries blind.

Jason Calley. But the law (government, the people) already tell you what you can and can’t do – and you accept that! You cannot have multiple wives, you cannot abuse your own child, you cannot be cruel to your dog. I don’t know if you have similar laws to us here in England, but you cannot even indulge in ‘depraved’ but consensual sexual acts with other people. So you see, you DO accept laws and rules that impinge your life, so what’s the difference with guns? There is no difference. I’m a vegetarian too – 29 years. I believe in non-aggression, non-violence, and I too believe in self defence. But guns can and do kill, Jason. In your country, very often! When the law banning guns came into effect here in England, I was against it. I now see I was wrong. Gun crime here is very rare (outside of drug gangs), and that has got to be because you can’t get one! I’m 100% certain that if we could all bear arms here in England then we’d have a very sad, and very large, list of depressing multi-kill incidents. I know so many Americans disagree, but it really is time you looked at your right to bear arms and see what it has achieved. It has brought only misery and heartbreak. It hasn’t made you more ‘free’. The US isn’t any more a democracy than the UK. Your political representatives do as they and their party want, not what you want – just like here.
A small device, able to propel a piece of metal at a high velocity, and to instantly kill, is too dangerous to let people own. If guns were invented this week, you can be damn sure that no government anywhere would allow their people to own one. Think about it – it really is as simple as that.

Winning the capital prize in a lottery is certainly an extreme event. In my country this happens every month somewhere. To connect these extreme events with something else than a random number generator, seems to me plain superstition. I thought that the recent turn into weather extremes only marked the bankruptcy of climate science.

Gareth, you wrote, “Climate change is real, however it is caused, and some effects are pretty drastic. This is not a problem we can solve by providing more guns and cutting taxes.”
Nor is it a problem that we may be able to do ANYTHING about … even if we provide less guns and raise taxes.
and you wrote, “If we cannot influence climate change we need to adapt”
That part is clearly true, although I believe it is mainly true in terms of “micro-climate-change” — i.e., periods of several years to a decade or so of droughts and such things that affect food production and energy needs in discrete geographic areas.
The problem Obama et al have is in their assumption that AGW is indisputably a primary and important cause of the problem in either the short or the longer term. I agree with what I see as the general consensus of the WUWT folks that that particular conclusion is by no means an open-and-shut case.
– MJM

Never let a crisis go to waste. If there isn’t a crisis, invent one.

@gareth Phillips
You appear to know two things about American politics — jack and squat.
But in America, you’re allowed to express your opinion regardless of whether you have any clue what you’re talking about.

To: The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
Look, gun crime may be very rare there outside of drug gangs but jolly old England is still now very crime ridden. I have talked to people there. It is also a whole lot smaller country, so purging it of guns was easier.
All the years of attempted gun control measures here have done nothing but pump gun sales and manufacturing here. Where they are easily stolen or otherwise get into the wrong hands. What is your proposal to round up all these guns without criminals having a field day?
The problem we have here is a mental health problem from nearly a half century of losing jobs, neglected infrastructure and stacking on government debt. Throw in 10 times more violence in video games and on television in the last quarter century and it is a brew for violence to increase.
This president and the one who proceeded him instead should have been tarred and feathered yesterday. Along with the other members of government (present and past) who have spent us into the ground with wasted pork. Buying voters… buying campaign contribution in a revolving slush fund.

Gareth Phillips says:
January 22, 2013 at 2:47 am

Moe says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:00 pm
Thank God a leader listens to the professionals and not opinion writers on blogs. Finally we can get down and do something meaningful about the changing climate.
Gareth replies: well said Moe, it’s hearing a President speak and act like Obama which inspires me as a European to fight anti-American prejudice whenever I hear it. The world will always recall how close the US came to electing a man who while being a useful politician, hailed from a party held ransom by a small percentage of far right Conservatives who would have inflicted substantial damage on the US and ultimately the west. Obama may not be perfect, but the alternative result does not bear thinking about. Climate change is real, however it is caused, and some effects are pretty drastic. This is not a problem we can solve by providing more guns and cutting taxes. If we cannot influence climate change we need to adapt, and it will be great to see President Obama take a lead on that.

Sorry to break it to ya, Gareth, but you’ve been brainwashed. And in so many ways I don’t have the time to correct all your inconsistencies and false assumptions.
But have a good day. That’s all you can hope for.

Reality Check Here crime comparisons;US and GB

Written on the cover of your “Climate skeptics guide to the universe” is the phrase “Don’t panic.” Go to Yahoo News, a site with a definite liberal bias, and follow the link to any climate story. Read the comments. The overwhelming consensus of commenters (97%) is that global warming is a scam designed to bankrupt Western economies. I imagine that on sites with a conservative bias, e.g. The Blaze, the consensus would be close to unanimous.
PS I’m a lukewarmer and not quite ready to laugh the whole thing off yet.

michaeljmcfadden says:
January 22, 2013 at 4:37 am
Gareth, you wrote, “Climate change is real, however it is caused, and some effects are pretty drastic. This is not a problem we can solve by providing more guns and cutting taxes.”
Nor is it a problem that we may be able to do ANYTHING about … even if we provide less guns and raise taxes.
and you wrote, “If we cannot influence climate change we need to adapt”
That part is clearly true, although I believe it is mainly true in terms of “micro-climate-change” — i.e., periods of several years to a decade or so of droughts and such things that affect food production and energy needs in discrete geographic areas.
The problem Obama et al have is in their assumption that AGW is indisputably a primary and important cause of the problem in either the short or the longer term. I agree with what I see as the general consensus of the WUWT folks that that particular conclusion is by no means an open-and-shut case.
– MJM
Thanks Michael, a rare and sensible to response to one of a skeptical nature but who swims against the right wing tide prevalent on this fine site. best wishes, Gareth

Michael Mann is pleased that Obama’s speech used the D-word:
http://www.facebook.com/MichaelMannScientist/posts/478397618883112
Mann tries to lump every possible criticism of any climate data, methods, analysis, paleo history, models, catastrophic claims, energy policy, mitigation policy, etc. etc. into some vast amorphous ‘denial of science’ — that way he avoids answering cogent criticisms and lazily smears all critics as ‘science deniers’….

DirkH says:
January 22, 2013 at 12:46 pm
Gareth Phillips says:
January 22, 2013 at 2:47 am
“Climate change is real, however it is caused, and some effects are pretty drastic. This is not a problem we can solve by providing more guns and cutting taxes. If we cannot influence climate change we need to adapt, and it will be great to see President Obama take a lead on that.
”
Gareth, please send mechanized infantry, billions of Dollars or a few gigatons of shredded Olivine, whatever helps, to Germany.
We’re having effin cold winters. Do something man!
Hi Dirk, pretty chilly in Wales as well. Our best bet is to look at how other countries have adapted to drastic changes in climate or temps. I’ve just added secondary double glazing and solar hot water generation. We have not had a decent summer for 4 years now so I have adapted our crops to cold weather and flood resistant types. It’s worth looking at how people have adapted in Sweden or Finland, and if it gets hot, well we can look over the Alps to our southern neighbours for inspiration. Stay warm, or get your knitting needles out!

People keep thinking that the president has all these liberal ideas that don’t make sense in the light of day. Obamacare isn’t going to reduce costs or provide better care. Guns need to be registered and “assault rifles” banned, although only a very small fraction of the violence is associated with long guns of any type. There is plenty of proof that Global warming is bogus, but let’s move on that as well.
The president isn’t doing these things because he’s a stupid liberal, Each of the actions is carefully selected to achieve the same goal – Tyranny. Control health care (1/6 of the economy), Control Energy (most of the rest of the economy), Disarm citizens of the types of weapons that could be used to stand up to a Government that has gone off the rails.
I hate it when people get all up in arms and accuse people of being Nazis, but the picture is starting to come into focus and it’s disquieting. None of this is about what it seems to be. The president doesn’t think obamacare will accomplish anything it was supposed to, he doesn’t believe gun control will prevent another Sandy Hook, he doesn’t believe climate change is happening. He’s using the fascist playbook right in front of our eyes – and we just tell ourselves he’s a liberal moron. He actually told Bohner we don’t have a spending problem, nobody could be that out of touch. I’ve been worrying about the debt he’s leaving us with – now I’m worried that he’s not planning on leaving period.