1 billon dollars to push their climate agenda

Yes for all those people who think skeptics are lavishly funded, here’s proof. Oh, wait…..

Obama to propose $1 billion climate fund

By Alex Guillén, Politico

President Barack Obama will ask Congress to set up a $1 billion Climate Resilience Fund in his proposed budget next month.

Obama is traveling to Fresno, Calif., on Friday to discuss the drought plaguing most of California and the Western U.S. and to announce new administration actions, including the proposed billion-dollar climate fund.

The fund, according to the White House, would go to research on the projected impacts of climate change, help communities prepare for climate change’s effects and fund “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure.”

It remains to be seen whether the administration can secure such a high figure from Congress for a climate fund not likely to attract widespread Republican backing.

White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told POLITICO that Obama “is going to continue to make the case that climate change is already hurting Americans around the country and that it will only get worse for our children and grandchildren if we leave it for future generations to deal with.”

While no single extreme weather event can be attributed directly to climate change, Obama will stress the scientific understanding of how climate change makes events such as the drought more extreme, said John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The administration’s new push to address the drought comes a week after the Agriculture Department announced it would set up a series of “climate hubs” across the U.S. to study climate change’s impacts on agriculture and rural activities and develop mitigation and adaptation measures.

To view online:
https://www.politicopro.com/go/?id=30857

About these ads

123 thoughts on “1 billon dollars to push their climate agenda

  1. Well, my check from Exxon seems to be lost in the mail, so maybe I can fill out the right application forms for some Climate Resilience/Resistance Fund cash instead. I have to pay the heating bills, after all.
    /snark

  2. 0bama doesn’t give 2 hoots about the climate — this is just another case of plundering the treasury.

    I wonder what he thinks Iran’s nuking Israel will do to the climate.

  3. I can Imagine universities across America rubbing their hands with glee…. As spending $1 Billion is really going to stop a La NiNia caused drought. Lunacy.

  4. ” … Obama will stress the scientific understanding … ”
    —-l
    Naturally, “scientific” and “understanding” will be redefined to CAGW standards :)

  5. Happy to help.
    Just tell me what I have to do, how much I can claim and where to apply.
    Yes I know I live in Scotland but I am sure we can be of help.

  6. I have a pen and I have a phone ( not an obummerphone, I paid for it.) and I’m going to use them to tell my representative and and senators how I feel about another $1,000,000,000 going to his cronies to fund more Solyndras!

  7. Chump change… Check this out.

    http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070514-2.html

    Scroll down to see this:
    “The President Has Devoted $37 Billion To Climate Change-Related Activities Since 2001. The President has requested an additional $7.4 billion for FY 2008 – $205 million more than this year. This amount would support a wide range of climate change-related research, development, and deployment programs, voluntary partnerships, and international aid efforts.”

  8. Rapid changes in circulation are caused by solar activity. If not, we will focus on demonstrating dependence we lose, because the Sun in the stratosphere works really fast.

  9. He’d better hurry up with that $1 billion climate fund, the mid-terms are coming and Dems need campaign contributions bad.

    Oh wait, its not about politics, its about saving the planet. I forgot, sorry.

  10. Let the scientists explain the temperature fluctuations in the stratosphere in winter over the the polar circle. Is the volcano erupted? Or perhaps an asteroid?

  11. “The fund, according to the White House, would go to research on the projected impacts of climate change, help communities prepare for climate change’s effects and fund “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure.””

    The fund, according to the White House, would go to spread propaganda on the non-existent impacts of climate change, help cronies plunder “Earned Income” of taxpayers and future generations, and fund “Eco-mental self-flagellation exercises.”

  12. “While no single extreme weather event can be attributed directly to climate change, Obama will stress the scientific understanding of how climate change makes events such as the drought more extreme, said John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.”

    A changing climate will result in changes in climate, so we must do something!

    Well, of course. May I suggest adopting the Boy Scouts of America motto: “Be Prepared”.

    A billion dollar slush fund to support efforts that will do nothing regarding what the climate does seems typically Obama-esque.

    We have a soap opera: “As the Climate Turns”.

  13. Madness … what more is there to say?

    Suggested reading/reference: Charles Mackay’s book –

    “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”

    is a history of popular folly by Scottish journalist Charles Mackay, first published in 1841. The book chronicles its subjects in three parts: “National Delusions”, “Peculiar Follies”, and “Philosophical Delusions”. Despite its journalistic and rather sensational style, the book has gathered a body of academic support as a work of considerable importance in the history of social psychology and psychopathology.

    The subjects of Mackay’s debunking include economic bubbles, alchemy, crusades, witch-hunts, prophecies, fortune-telling, magnetisers (influence of imagination in curing disease), shape of hair and beard (influence of politics and religion on), murder through poisoning, haunted houses, popular follies of great cities, popular admiration of great thieves, duels, and relics. Present day writers on economics, such as Andrew Tobias and Michael Lewis, laud the three chapters on economic bubbles. Scientist and astronomer Carl Sagan mentioned the book in his own discussion about pseudoscience, popular delusions, and hoaxes.

    In later editions Mackay added a footnote referencing the Railway Mania of the 1840s as another “popular delusion”, of importance at least comparable with the South Sea Bubble. Mathematician Andrew Odlyzko has pointed out, in a published lecture, that Mackay himself played a role in this economic bubble, as leader writer in the Glasgow Argus; and wrote on 2 October 1845 that “There is no reason whatever to fear a crash”.

    – – – – –

    Notable quotes:

    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first.

    .

  14. Edit needed: “The administration’s new push to exploit the drought …” Absolutely nothing he mentioned addresses the drought in California, but does much to get money to contemplate how government might inflate it’s do nothing importance.

  15. A conclusion chasing data. I would hope that the house would spike that request as it is pure pork and boondoggle. But it is a very small hope as their latest vote demonstrated.

  16. California is faced with a growing population and a degrading water infrastructure. Instead of planning for the future, Governor Moonbeam and other higher government officials will try to change the weather rather than build infrastructure needed for the future.
    California wants and needs clean power. So they ban hydroelectric in any form preferring instead wind and solar that kills endangered condors and other species (remember the turtles displaced by the Ivanpah solar field?http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/wildlife/two-desert-solar-plants-may-harm-thousands-of-tortoises.html )
    To me, the California efforts at reducing carbon emissions will have negative impacts on all critical areas in the state–Environment, economy, visual beauty, energy security, and ultimately the financial stability of the state treasury. Only with total economic collapse will the state rethink its position on alternative energy.

  17. Surely a bad time to announce this with his ratings so low, according to the polls I thought the US didn’t give two hoots about climate change , he must know this so why?

  18. My brethren, please. The man quieted the rising seas for free. Just imagine what he’ll be able with a billion dollars!

  19. While McKibblesandbits & co. are looking for the missing heat, etc., the US is eventually going to have to start looking for the “missing money” caused by idiotic schemes like this.

    To the “Bush Blamer” above, this Billion from Obama (er, actually us….WE get hit in the wallet) is above and beyond the multiple Billions already being squandered on supposed climate change….so your comparison is invalid…

  20. Kate Forney says:
    February 14, 2014 at 5:59 am
    —————————————————————————————————
    Allow me to correct you, Kate, but it’s exactly the opposite.
    About nukes: Iran 0:200 Israel
    And it’s Israel, which is threatening to bomb Iran to smithereens day-in, day-out – and not vice-versa.
    Just for the files.

  21. “While no single extreme weather event can be attributed directly to climate change, Obama will stress the scientific understanding of how climate change makes events such as the drought more extreme, said John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.”

    Is this the same John Holdren who has been consistently wrong on every prediction he makes. His record is almost as good as Joe Biden of foreign policy and the Hillary Clinton on diplomacy.

  22. The good news is that Obama’s budgets have always been little more than jokes – I don’t think the last three were ever even given a vote in either house of Congress.

    In other words, this story today will be the last you ever hear about this particular piece of nonsense. Of course, that’s as planned, since this isn’t a serious budget item. This is just a dog-whistle to the enviro-fanatics to remind them that they need to keep voting for democrats in the fall. As long as that message is received by the intended audience, this proposal will have done its job.

  23. More research? Wtf.
    This blog, and many others, are flooded on a weekly basis with “new” research.
    The subject has been researched to death, well, unfortunately, not quite, but to the point where I’m convinced that most of the grant apps that get written are just old material that gets dusted off and re-dated.
    The fact that climate has been “researched” for 40yrs and it STILL can’t be figured out ought to tell the common person something about said research.

    And yeah…don’t care that Bush spent money too. Politicians use the unthinking, uneducated, unwilling-to-BE educated masses to support the gravy train. For politicians, at this stage, this is nothing more than a means to move $$$ from Point A to Point B, period…and all done with the “support of the sheeple!!”

    Jim from Maine (soon to be Florida, cuz Global Warming is killing me up here in New England…just can’t take it anymore.

  24. Hmmmmm…..2014 Midterms = XL Decision delay. 2015 XL Decision + $1,000,000,000 talking points = Energy security + jobs + voter compromise for 2016. 2016 = 20 years of flatlining temperatures. It’s not about the real climate folks….it’s all about predicting and trying to control the future political climate.

  25. How much resilience do they want per million dollars because I’m shovel ready with resilience. More’s the point I’m dragline ready.

  26. mogamboguru says:
    February 14, 2014 at 7:07 am (replying to)

    Kate Forney says:
    February 14, 2014 at 5:59 am

    —————————————————————————————————
    Allow me to correct you, Kate, but it’s exactly the opposite.
    About nukes: Iran 0:200 Israel
    And it’s Israel, which is threatening to bomb Iran to smithereens day-in, day-out – and not vice-versa.

    Funny thing, this “truth” concept. (Though, in international relations, it “is” a bit hard to find sometimes….)

    See, it is Israeli’s sworn enemies who have sworn to blow her up with nuclear weapons. It is Israel who has NOT used nuclear weapons and has attempted (sometimes poorly) to avoid unneeded deaths.
    It is Israeli’s enemies who have launched 12,000 unaimed, randomly shot rockets into Israeli homes and stores in just the past year from spots oh-so-cleverly located between houses, shops an stores and offices.
    It is Israeli’s enemies who have constantly attacked innocents in their hatred and propaganda

    But, this is not a innately political website, and this site is NOT intended to address all issues in a conflict going back to the year 4000 …. Leave it be.

  27. Use of the word resilience is interesting, following, as it does here, Taleb’s analysis of the fragility spectrum paradigm.

    “”Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Yet, in spite of the ubiquity of the phenomenon, there is no word for the exact opposite of fragile. Let us call it antifragile. Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better.[my emphasis” (N. N. Taleb, Fooled by Randomness (2001), Prologue http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/prologue.pdf)

    So much for Obama’s progressive Forward! willy-nilly damn the unintended consequences.

  28. YES! YOU, TOO, CAN CONTROL THE CLIMATE!

    Just sign over all of your rights and freedoms, and send them to WhiteHouse.gov. The rest of you will be hearing from IRS.gov, soon…

  29. The best way to encourage climate resilience is to encourage CO2 production. This will help plant life and make photosynthesis work more efficiently using less water, resulting in a greener planet.

  30. The fund, according to the White House, would go to research on the projected impacts of climate change, help communities prepare for climate change’s effects and fund “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure.”

    Forgive me commenting on foreign politics but this sounds like a very good idea.
    We in the UK could do with some resilient infrastructure.

    Weather happens.

  31. I believe we need to prepare for climate change due to the current unusual 11 year solar cycle. The weak output of solar cycle 24 appears to be affecting Earth’s climate toward a cold bias causing more snow events, increased ice cover, and longer period of below freezing conditions.

    The federal government needs to help communities adapt to these conditions to preserve life and economic activity. Stocks of road salt and snow removal equipment needs to be in place well ahead of the next 7 years winter seasons, and quantities sufficient enough need to be anticipated as to not run out. Fuel stocks must be anticipated as to not run out to preserve life from freezing conditions. Homeless shelters must be in place as to save the poorest citizens from freezing to death.

    I applaud President Obama for helping the nation adapt to climate change caused by the grand solar minimum of solar cycle 24. We are going to need all the help we can get.

  32. And speaking of resilience, you know how I was telling you Adelaide in South Oz was apparently experiencing its greatest number of summer days over 40C (that’s 104F for you folks) since the last time we looked, and bearing in mind our sacked Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery’s dire predictions of endless droughts and even if it does rain there won’t be enough runoff to fill our dams, guess what heat does to oceans? No prizes for guessing-

    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/rain-falling-in-adelaide-causes-widespread-flooding-and-commuter-chaos-and-is-our-wettest-day-in-45-years/story-fni6uo1m-1226825879645

    How’s that for resilience Barak baby and always remember resilience is a global problem. Stinge locally and act globally! Besides I’m only 6 steps removed from that Nobel Committee and I know how to pull a few strings.

  33. Observa, gently speaking, no, that’s the commode six steps away and that’s what the string is for, flushing. It’s a common problem as we seniors enter our dotage. Best wishes.

  34. This extra climate related funding and political trip to support local candidates in California again illustrates how big the disconnect is between the Administration and the public. A significant part of the public has been freezing its butt the last several months due to the extra cold weather, snow and ice. Hundreds of thousands of people are still without power from the last storm. Local winter budgets have been exhausted in many states and local cities. There is a shortage of funds, salt, road infrastructure, propane and natural gas. The economy is a taking a beating .One would think the Administration would be at least offering some Federal assistance or public support in the media, but not a single word of encouragement or assistance. All this talk about global warming induced climate change is making things even worse as the public is given a false sense of climate anticipation as they find themselves completely unprepared for the colder winters that have been happening now for 15 years in every Contiguous state because alarmists erroneously only predicted the opposite , unprecedented warming. Billions of taxpayers dollars have been wasted or lost on subsidies for unsustainable direct green energy projects that have failed . Who is going to increase their winter ice and heating fuel stocks when the Administration is claiming that the climate debate is settled and climate change (global warming according to their science) is a fact) .? However winters in every state have been getting colder since 1998. This year will be one of the coldest winters in 30 years. These winters may likely continue to be colder like they did 1880-1910 and 1945-1980 when the global oceans cooled for 20-30 years. The Northern Hemisphere oceans SST has been declining for a decade since about 2003.

  35. Politico “missed” the best quote:

    “During a call with reporters on Thursday evening, the assistant to the president on science and technology, John Holdren, said, without any doubt, the severe drought plaguing California and a number of other states across the country is tied to climate change.

    “Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change,” Holdren said.

    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/198394-obama-to-announce-1b-climate-change-resilience-fund#ixzz2tJZR5ZKv
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook”

  36. “More research? Wtf.
    This blog, and many others, are flooded on a weekly basis with “new” research.”

    It’s not really about research on whether, or how much… that’s settled science, remember? This is about shelling $1 billion to Democrat campaign contributors that make green boondongles. You know, the Solyndra effect.

  37. ‘Observa, gently speaking, no,..’

    Hmmm…you reckon the grant application needs work? Perhaps we could declare a small war, surrender quickly and get a Marshall Resilience Plan? The State Gummint is a wee bit short at present and things are a bit tight.

  38. :Kpar says:
    February 14, 2014 at 7:30 am
    YES! YOU, TOO, CAN CONTROL THE CLIMATE!”
    ###################

    actually this initiative is based on the OPPOSITE idea.

  39. Maybe it’s just me but a billion dollars doesn’t sound like a lot of money these days. But a trillion dollars, now you’re talking.

  40. Ever notice how warmists are like bigfoot hunters? Bigfoot hunters see a broken twig and say a bigfoot has been there or hear a sound at night and say a bigfoot is out there. Warmists see a storm and say man made global warming did that or a drought and say man made global warming did that. Maybe it wasn’t global warming maybe it was a bigfoot.

  41. That is just the tip of the iceberg. Go to

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf

    to see the administration’s August 2013 Federal Climate Expenditure Report to Congress. Table 1 on page 5 totals up the 2014 administration requests for climate change expenditures to be $21.4 Billion. When the fraction of that, $2.658 Billion, spent on scientists in the Global Change Research Program is awarded by an administration whose leader says “climate change is a fact” (meaning of course CAGW), and the head of whose EPA announces that “there better not be any deniers in here,” and whose recent high level addition is John Podesta, etc. etc. what do you think the scientists will propose to prove in their research in order to win proposals? What do you think they will say in their papers demonstrating results?

  42. One billion dollars …

    Okay Cali is having a drought so water is tight. Cali also has about 1/10th the population of the USA so let’s put on our thinking hats and solve this. 100 million dollars can buy more than one million dual flush toilets (Waterridge from Costco just as an example). Replace one million old 13 litre toilets with 4/6 litre ones.

    I’m sure there are better ways but as we can see from the gov’s plan there are a lot worse as well.

  43. ‘During a call with reporters on Thursday evening, the assistant to the president on science and technology, John Holdren, said, without any doubt, the severe drought plaguing California and a number of other states across the country is tied to climate change.
    “Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change,” Holdren said.’

    Seriously, it sounds just like Oz in a continent where some will be experiencing flood, some drought and some average weather but the pollies have to be seen to be concerned-

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/rain-could-dampen-pms-drought-tour/story-fni0xqi4-1226826824783

    and naturally we get the usual suspects blaming the weather cycle on climate change every time it suits them. Realistically, propping up marginal farmers that struggle to survive over the long haul with flood and drought, ultimately penalises those who are viable long term, via lower prices for their produce and higher prices for agricultural land.

  44. M Courtney says:
    February 14, 2014 at 8:07 am

    The fund, according to the White House, would go to research on the projected impacts of climate change, help communities prepare for climate change’s effects and fund “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure.”

    Forgive me commenting on foreign politics but this sounds like a very good idea.
    We in the UK could do with some resilient infrastructure.

    Weather happens.

    You have the infrastructure, it’s merely been neglected because y’all thought you weren’t gonna need it.

    Same thing here in the US. We already have the technology to build around every problem (caveat: it’s cheaper to clean up after tornadoes than it is to make stuff strong enough to withstand them) except the Yellowstone Caldera going “foop”. If people want to build substandard housing on floodplains & in hurricane alleys, let ‘em. When their house gets mashed & they don’t have insurance, they can figure it out for themselves.

  45. I would dearly like to say “only in America’ … but somehow i feel it applies all over the world in order to feed the many snouts in the agw trough!

  46. Burch says:
    February 14, 2014 at 6:10 am

    Chump change… Check this out.

    http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070514-2.html

    Scroll down to see this:
    “The President Has Devoted $37 Billion To Climate Change-Related Activities Since 2001. The President has requested an additional $7.4 billion for FY 2008 – $205 million more than this year. This amount would support a wide range of climate change-related research, development, and deployment programs, voluntary partnerships, and international aid efforts.”

    As far as I can tell, Barky’s still spending all that & more. This $1000000000 is just more of the same nonsense to pass around to his buddies.

  47. On Sun. or Mon. if someone will flyover and video the area of Lake Michigan they are showing as open, ice free water, I think we can catch them “with their pants down”. I am almost certain Lake Michigan will be frozen over. Even looks like they might be funding an ice breaker out there in the thinnest ice portions of the lake, as there is an anomalous white ring around the thinnest ice area?? Don’t know for sure about that part, but it is strange looking and IMO should not be there. Link to 6am EST image: http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/micethk-00.gif
    Lake Ontario ice extent would be interesting, too, if someone is over there and can flyover and video … and compare.

  48. The only real cost of climate change/global warming/AGW/climate weirding/ climate marketing name of the day is the increase in insurance premiums due to over-weighted catastrophic reinsurance premiums and the tax money wasted on political stunts like this.

  49. The money should be used for R&D on a towable trailer that can make the trip from Columbus OH to Atlanta GA and then fold for easy and inexpensive mailing to Columbus.

    I wonder if Obama and friends will view increased migration from the northern US to the southern US as caused by climate change?

  50. A billion dollars.

    Just wiggle the silver handle and watch it go round and round and down the drain.

    No doubt this money will be used to buy off more “scientists” to continue the iron triad of funding and deceit.

    Probably some will be spent on reprogramming, I mean, educating the public about the horrors [sic] of 1-degree Farenheit of possible warming during our lifetimes.

  51. I think that Mr. Obama is mistaken and that he cheated on his “fans ” because of climate change on our and other planets does not depend much on the human factor . Are there climate change on other planets where there is no influence people ? Surely there . I am offering President Obama a solution for all time on our planet for all climate change and much more, for half the smaller amount. So for about $ 500 million , that are included and the cost of making a program for the use of existing astronomical data . Tell Obama that he will repent if this offer does not agree , because this will soon come to my consideration.

  52. “President Barack Obama will ask Congress to set up a $1 billion Climate Resilience Fund in his proposed budget next month…The fund, according to the White House, would go to research on the projected impacts of climate change, help communities prepare for climate change’s effects and fund “breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure.”

    If this is anything like the Administration’s previous bribes, it will offer tens of millions of dollars to every state that signs up for the Climate Resilience Fund. The only condition is that the state will adopt the measures which will be determined later. This bribery will make the actions on climate appear to be state led.

    This was done to our educational system recently under the “Race to the Top” program. States signed up to receive the millions of dollars of federal funding for education, with the provision that they would adopt Common Core, sight unseen. Some states have now seen Common Core’s curricula and are attempting to opt out, and are losing the federal funding as a result. Common Core is a massive curricula which is identical for all schools and is also a data hub for all children in public schools. States sign up for these federal dollars, and if it is like the educational funding, it comes with some fine print for future policies which they have not even seen yet.

  53. Mosher is absolutely right. This is about dealing with issues as they happen not trying to slow climate change by cutting CO2 or other long term interventions. I read stuff on here a lot and unless I am wrong I think many here would herald an idea like this if it came from the likes of Monckton. In fact I think he has said more than a few times, our most realistic way of dealing with any change is to do it as it happens.

    I think many of the comments here are more about political bias than addressing the proposed concept.

  54. ren says:
    February 14, 2014 at 6:23 am
    ————————————–
    Mt Kelud in Indonesia went off last night. Three dead and 100K evacuated. The blast went 10 miles up. Big quake in Hotan China the other day, shake map was rated a 9. The Earth seems to be picking up it,s activity of late.

  55. Has anyone else noticed that if you replace the word “climate change” with “witches” most of these statements would be perfectly acceptable if read in a newspaper from 200-300 years ago?

    While no single extreme weather event can be attributed directly to witches, Obama will stress the scientific understanding of how witches make events such as the drought more extreme, said John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

    We are just repeating the hysteria of a by gone era with new names for the cause.

  56. Climate Hubs? Don’t they really mean jobs for friends of the President that will enable them to harass his non-friends (anyone not living off the government already).

  57. Any government body that spends a dime of this money will be committing waste, and thereby breaching its fiduciary duty to its constituents..

    As several here point out, it’s another scheme to hire more bureaucrats to oppress the public and make for more votes for socialist tyranny. How ,much you wanna bet that this money will wind up in the pockets of der Fuehrer’s billionaire cronies?

  58. @Larry Ledwice –
    You didn’t get it quite right – Holdren is the Director of the Office of Shamanism and Witchcraft.

  59. The republicans are just as stupid as the democrats to have even thought Rommney had the slightest chance… The only chance now is Rubio. THE ONLY….

  60. http://pjmedia.com/blog/yearly-climate-spending-10x-more-than-un-estimate-for-ending-world-hunger/?singlepage=true

    “The United Nations estimates it would cost $30 billion a year to end world hunger. That sounds like a lot, but the world spent more than ten times that amount in 2012 on global warming mitigation, according to a recent Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) study.”…

    “…According to the Reuters analysis of the Summary for Policymakers of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, due to be released this April, the UN is calling on the world to invest an extra $147 billion a year in wind, solar, and nuclear power from 2010 to 2029. If we add that figure to CPI’s measure, the UN wants us to spend approximately $506 billion a year to mitigate global warming,”…

    The whole thing is very much worth a read….

  61. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with developing climate resilience all over the globe.

    The question is whether you develop it by promoting carbon technologies or not.

    The paper’s I’ve read recently suggest that you can predict a cold and snowy winter for the NE half of the USA based on monitoring oscillation indices in the Eastern Pacific, the Arctic and the North Atlantic. I’ve read that there are linkages between oceanic oscillations in the Indian Ocean and SSWs although I”m not sure the link is quite as causal as some are making out.

    I don’t think water management has anything to do with carbon dioxide, it has to do with dredging rivers or not, building more reservoirs or not, groundwater management, forestry policy, urban planning policy and farming policy.

    I don’t think coastal erosion needs carbon capture and storage, it needs civil engineering.

    I don’t think that that this actually has anything to do with global warming per se. It has to do with basic ‘climate events can hurt us so how do we prepare best for them?’

    Actually, that is something everyone should be able to agree is sensible.

    It’s only when you get down to what you propose doing that politics may come in.

    • Considering the “pause” and some predictions of cooling due to solar cycles, it might be a good idea to actively stockpile foodstuffs and perhaps expand lower latitude agriculture to compensate for the shorter growing seasons.

      It may be that the Global Warm-mongers greatest disservice to humanity is preparing for the wrong thing- wasting increasingly scarce resources (ie., the government(s) gobbling up the economy) on rising sea levels and the like, while we should be paying attention to the opposite possibility…

  62. Steven Mosher says:
    February 14, 2014 at 9:03 am

    actually this initiative is based on the OPPOSITE idea.

    Haha, yeah. Guys, I need a billion dollars to look at the idea of trying to start thinking about mitigating the effects (or impacts, if you’re illiterate) of something that I can’t really define right now. Might be flooding, or hurricanes, or droughts, or snow, or lack of snow, or a fish with a headache in Burma, but I need that money to study it.

    I mean, if somebody tells you they’ll sell you the Brooklyn Bridge for $100, you’d be a fool not to take it. Look at the risk/reward profile of that scale of investment!

  63. I think that these people (the feds) might have a little more credibility if they could actually even build a functional web site.

  64. Chad Wozniak says:
    February 14, 2014 at 11:37 am

    @Larry Ledwice –
    You didn’t get it quite right – Holdren is the Director of the Office of Shamanism and Witchcraft.

    I like that! ( no problem on the misspell )

    I should have added a disclaimer to the original post “with apologies to those who sincerely belief in and practice Wicca no insult intended.”
    Witch craft was just the scape goat du jour then much as global warming and climate change has become today’s scape goat du jour.

  65. President Obama wants to spend a billion dollars, not to actually do anything to stop climate change but just to make Americans aware of it. Apparently no one will realize the devastating effects of climate change without a billion dollar propaganda campaign to inform them. I have a better idea. I just need to change the White House spokesman’s quote slightly:

    Runaway deficit spending “is already hurting Americans around the country and that it will only get worse for our children and grandchildren if we leave it for future generations to deal with.”

    The President hasn’t made the case against deficit spending in a long time. I wonder why. But there was a time when he did. Here are some past quotes from him on the subject:

    “I’ve personally asked the leadership in Congress to pass into law rules that follow the simple principle: You pay for what you spend — so that government acts the same way any responsible family does. If you want a tax cut, you got to pay for it; if you want a new program, you got to pay for it. Tell the American people the truth — how are you going to pay for it?
    I want to warn you, there will be setbacks. It will take time. But I promise you I will always tell you the truth…”
    — Pres. Obama, “Change that you believed in”, Apr 29, 2009

    “We can’t keep on just borrowing from China. We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt. … It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”
    — Pres. Obama, May 14, 2009

    The “pay as you go” rule is very simple. Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere.”
    — President Obama; June 9, 2009

    So what spending is the President going to cut to pay for his billion dollar propaganda program on climate change?

  66. About the American two-party paradigm (not systematized anywhere); it’s good cop/bad cop (Mutt & Jeff) written on the political slate. There’s not a spit of difference between them.

    Only The Constitution Party represents America’s conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Party.

  67. “There is some sense to the idea expressed by Steven Mosher at 9:03. However, these sorts of studies have been going on for years – I think maybe AL G. stuffed agencies with folks that pushed studies of such. One place to look is on the SPPI web site. Go to Reports, then SPPI State Climate Profiles. (SPPI = http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/) There are many projects that cities, counties, and states have identified for upgrade – no need to search for new ones. Here’s an older article that claims “Since Katrina the Corps and its contractors have built $15 billion worth of levees, pumps, walls and gates. Forbes-Billions

    What the issue seems to be is that the current president needs a “legacy” and the expected one, namely The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), sometimes called the Affordable Care Act (ACA), but mostly called “Obamacare”, is in shambles. Note the recent delay in implementation of another part of this Act, such that it pushes the problems out beyond the current election cycle.
    Perhaps the One who promised to keep the sea from rising will be more positively remembered than the one who promised if you like your policy and your doctor, you can keep your policy and your doctor. He can be remembered for funding all the pork his big donors want and some of the useful projects already identified.

  68. Did not Obama say that the scientific process is about evidence and facts that “are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.” ?

    Evidentially, he didn’t believe himself then, so why should anyone believe him now?

    Just wondering.

  69. There is nothing wrong with being resilient to real natural climate change that is happening all the time , like for recovery from global cooling ,winter storms, tornadoes ,etc. There is nothing wrong with helping dought victims. However when they add the comment that all droughts are due to climate change (really global warming according to their science ), then I am afraid that this is just another cover word to spend money to fight global warming only , rather than being truly resilient against all forms of natural climate change. In the east, we have had the worst winter in 30 years and you do not hear the Administration being resilient to help 80 % of the country which was freezing its butt and running out of winter funds . This California trip and the Billion $ fund is purely political ploy in my opinion and has very little to do with being truly resilient to all parts of the country with all real natural events

  70. Ah, yes he did:

    “”The truth is that promoting science isn’t just about providing resources—it’s about protecting free and open inquiry. It’s about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology. It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient—especially when it’s inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us.”

    Barack Obama – 12/20/.08

  71. Seems you haven’t been paying attention. Obama doesn’t need congressional approval for anything he does anymore, and everyone seems perfectly willing to allow him to do what he wants. Guess the constitution doesn’t mean much these days.

  72. Maybe I can get some mitigation funds for the “endangered” Fairy shrimp, protected tiger salamanders and spade-foot toads that can’t breed in my empty vernal pool this year in central CA???
    Sweet!

  73. Simon says:
    February 14, 2014 at 10:24 am
    —————————————-
    @ Simon…read this comment…
    “”Louis says:
    February 14, 2014 at 12:45 pm

    President Obama wants to spend a billion dollars, not to actually do anything to stop climate change but just to make Americans aware of it. “”
    —————————————————————-
    That is exactly what is wrong with the great leaders proposal. The drought looms large, and the president says let’s model a solution. Meanwhile they are all set to dump 2 billion dollars into a high speed rail line, which is not necessary at this time. The true drought problem is the massive population, without any further planning for water storage solutions. What is going to happen if this drought lingers for several more years or a decade or two? I honestly hope that it does, because the way that these Democrats misuse the people,s money is going to lead this state and the nation into a mire, which could potentially lead to desperate times for many. Why wait till 2100 for catastrophe, when a good one can be initiated within a shorter term by proper planning?

  74. Have voted Republican since my 1st national election in 1980. Still believe it is generally the correct line. That said I have learned through close contact that we have a poor choice to make in most political contests here. Think some in other places may agree with that sentiment.

    So yes Bush and the Republicans lavished money on a fraud. Obama simply takes it to the next level. The corruption is our political hope because everyone understands greed. Unfortunately science which so many here feel strongly about will end up trashed.

    • troe, I agree with you in general.

      “So yes Bush and the Republicans lavished money on a fraud.”

      I believe that he and (some of) his advisers were taken in- I think his intentions were honorable, just misguided. Unfortunately that just set the stage for the enviro-“mentals” to run with it.

  75. The thing that astonishes me is that geologists, archeologist, anthropologists and historians are not jumping up and down and shouting at the top of their lungs, —-

    Wait a minute we have substantial historical evidence that this is not unprecedented, we have had mega droughts that lasted decades in the past, and destroyed civilizations. This is nothing new!

    It is even implied in news stories but no one makes the obvious logical jump, if this is the worst drought in 800 years — what caused the mega drought 800 years ago — certainly not the burning of fossil fuels and high CO2 levels.

    Some times I just want to slap someone and say — look moron if you studied history, geology and anthropology you wouldn’t be running around waving your arms and shrieking it’s CO2’s fault. We’ve been here before, it has been predictable (in the sense it could happen at any time) for over a hundred years.

    http://www.pnas.org/content/107/50/21283.full

    Several notable droughts extended across much of western North America, including severe and sustained droughts in the late 16th century and the medieval period, between 900–1300 AD (23–25). In this period, episodes of extensive severe drought are documented by a variety of proxy data, but most dramatically by evidence of trees rooted in lakes and river courses in the Sierra Nevada and northwestern Great Basin (26, 27). These droughts appear to have exceeded the duration and magnitude of any subsequent droughts in western North America (5, 25).

    The medieval period was characterized by widespread and regionally severe, sustained drought in western North America. Proxy data documenting drought indicate centuries-long periods of increased aridity across the central and western U.S. (Fig 2F) (25, 22 ). In the Colorado and Sacramento River basins, reconstructions show decadal periods of persistently below average flows during several intervals including much of the 9th, 12th, and 13th centuries (40–42) (Fig 2E). The 12th century episode, also reflected in precipitation and drought extent (13, 25, 43, 44), was particularly severe and persistent and was associated with a peak in solar irradiance and nadir in volcanic activity (4) (Fig. 2A).

    The warmest, driest, most widespread interval of drought documented in the streamflow, DAI and temperature records occurred in the mid-12th century (Fig. 2 and Fig. S2). The driest 10-year period in the Colorado River reconstruction and the 6th most extensive drought-area in the Southwest was 1146 to 1155. Decades ending in 1153, 1154, 1156, 1157, and 1158 were similarly dry and warm. The decade 1146–1155 ranked in the 80th percentile of southern Colorado Plateau temperatures. Several decades in the late 9th and 13th centuries were nearly as warm and dry.

  76. White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told POLITICO that Obama “is going to continue to make the case that climate change is already hurting Americans around the country and that it will only get worse for our children and grandchildren if we leave it for future generations to deal with.”

    If only they thought about our future generations in regards to spending up the national debt to crazy levels!

  77. I’m surprised that it is only $1B. I’m expecting Obama to announce a major fiscal stimulus program now that there is no quantitative spending limits for Congress (only a movable date) to establish his “legacy” before his current terms ends.

    A $1T fiscal stimulus would not surprise me – I would expect spending to the tune of $2T to $4T to be announced before 2016.

  78. White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told POLITICO that Obama “is going to continue to make the case that climate change is already hurting Americans around the country and that it will only get worse for our children and grandchildren if we leave it for future generations to deal with.”

    =====================================================================
    “It’s not Obama’s fault! Therefore we must spend more money to make it worse for our children and grandchildren. A 17 Trillion dollar debt isn’t enough for future generations to deal with. Next we’ll make learning Chinese mandatory to help prepare future generations for the Change You’ve Been Deceived In!.”

  79. Kpar says:
    February 14, 2014 at 4:58 pm
    “So yes Bush and the Republicans lavished money on a fraud.”
    ——————————————————————————–
    The climate change story was not as clear back then as it is now.

  80. True Conservative says:
    February 14, 2014 at 9:04 pm
    If only they thought about our future generations in regards to spending up the national debt to crazy levels!
    —————————————-
    They do not seem to have a clue about the future consequences of their overspending.

  81. Doug Huffman says:
    February 14, 2014 at 1:03 pm

    About the American two-party paradigm (not systematized anywhere); it’s good cop/bad cop (Mutt & Jeff) written on the political slate. There’s not a spit of difference between them.

    Only The Constitution Party represents America’s conservative Country Class against the progressive Ruling Party.

    ==================================================================
    I think a step in the right direction for the USA would be that in any Federal election where the top vote getter had less than 50% of the vote, a run off between the top two would be held 1 month later.
    The “two party system” would then have to pay more attention to the other parties and people would be more likely to actually vote for them if they represented what they really wanted. It would also prevent an aberration such as Adolf winning with only 33% of a vote.

  82. goldminor says: @ February 14, 2014 at 10:08 pm

    They do not seem to have a clue about the future consequences of their overspending.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    They know exactly what the consequences are. National bankruptcy and an IMF/World Bank Structural Adjustment Program

    Structural Adjustment Policies are economic policies which countries must follow in order to qualify for new World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) loans and help them make debt repayments on the older debts owed to commercial banks, governments and the World Bank….

    SAPs generally require countries to devalue their currencies… lift import and export restrictions; balance their budgets and not overspend; and remove price controls and state subsidies.

    Devaluation makes their goods cheaper for foreigners to buy and theoretically makes foreign imports more expensive….

    Balancing national budgets can be done by raising taxes, which the IMF frowns upon, or by cutting government spending, which it definitely recommends. As a result, SAPs often result in deep cuts in programmes like education, health and social care, and the removal of subsidies designed to control the price of basics such as food and milk. So SAPs hurt the poor most, because they depend heavily on these services and subsidies….

    The recommendations are already in from the IMF

    The International Monetary Fund (IMF) quietly dropped a bomb in its October Fiscal Monitor Report. Titled “Taxing Times,” the report paints a dire picture for advanced economies with high debts that fail to aggressively “mobilize domestic revenue.” It goes on to build a case for drastic measures and recommends a series of escalating income and consumption tax increases culminating in the direct confiscation of assets.

    Yes, you read that right. But don’t take it from me. The report itself says:

    The sharp deterioration of the public finances in many countries has revived interest in a “capital levy”— a one-off tax on private wealth—as an exceptional measure to restore debt sustainability. The appeal is that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance is possible and there is a belief that it will never be repeated, does not distort behavior (and may be seen by some as fair). … The conditions for success are strong, but also need to be weighed against the risks of the alternatives, which include repudiating public debt or inflating it away. … The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to precrisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of 15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth. (page 49)

    Note three takeaways.

    First, IMF economists know there are not enough rich people to fund today’s governments even if 100 percent of the assets of the 1 percent were expropriated. That means that all households with positive net wealth—everyone with retirement savings or home equity—would have their assets plundered under the IMF’s formulation.

    Second, such a repudiation of private property will not pay off Western governments’ debts or fund budgets going forward. It will merely “restore debt sustainability,” allowing free-spending sovereigns to keep tapping the bond markets until the next crisis comes along—for which stronger measures will be required, of course.

    Third, should politicians fail to muster the courage to engage in this kind of wholesale robbery, the only alternative scenario the IMF posits is public debt repudiation and hyperinflation….
    (wwwdot)forbes.com/sites/billfrezza/2013/10/15/the-international-monetary-fund-lays-the-groundwork-for-global-wealth-confiscation/

    Notice the ‘debt’ is money printed out of thin air for which we, the American citizens are now collateral for thanks to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

    If you have not read it, read Congressman McFadden on the Federal Reserve Corporation Remarks in Congress, 1934
    We could use him in the oval office right now, it is no wonder he was murdered.

  83. Regardless of whether climate change is a human fault, I think we can all agree on the need to stop relying on the earth for resources

    REPLY: OK then I nominate you for resource mining on Mars then. Adios! – Anthony

  84. This is the paradox.
    Climate change is real: its just going in the wrong direction: colder.
    Global Warming advocates only ever propose solutions for the control of Global Warming, (overheating), by reducing CO2 emissions. However at present the climate appears to be changing, (as it continues to do naturally), to a colder phase, probably because of reducing solar activity in the current cycle 24 and onwards and the resulting changes of ocean circulation patterns.
    Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming advocates fail to explain how reduction of man-made atmospheric CO2 can ever help to control Climate Change towards a cooling world.
    Having made so many dire predictions of the impending adverse climate catastrophes from overheating, Global Warming / Climate Change advocates fail to accept that a climate change towards a cooler climate is more likely to lead to more intense adverse extreme weather, simply because the energy differential between the tropics and the poles is increased.
    And the evidence of these weather extremes is with us this winter 2013 – 2014 throughout the Northern Hemisphere with massive cold in North America, with excessive storms in the UK and intense cold in Siberia etc.
    This is not an effect of man-made CO2 emissions but is much more likely to do with the greater amplification of the Northern jet stream that is now coming closer to the situation of another Little Ice Age.

  85. Paul @ Eco Stores says:
    February 15, 2014 at 5:34 am

    Regardless of whether climate change is a human fault, I think we can all agree on the need to stop relying on the earth for resources

    REPLY: OK then I nominate you for resource mining on Mars then. Adios! – Anthony
    ========================================================
    I agree, Paul. That’s why I no longer use resources from the earth. I have everything imported from Erehwon by wagon trains pulled by teams of unicorns. It costs a little more, but it’s worth it.

    Erewhon? Take a left at the corner, two galaxies over at the 1st stoplight past the Whole Foods market. You can’t miss it.
    P.S. Sign up for their Rewards Card. You get discounts on cold fusion fill-ups at their pumps.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Ahem… on topic:
    I think the wheels are gonna come off those climate hubs. Too many loose nuts…

  86. Paul @ Eco Stores says:
    February 15, 2014 at 5:34 am

    Regardless of whether climate change is a human fault, I think we can all agree on the need to stop relying on the earth for resources

    ================================================================
    Ahhh….Huh?
    Rely on resources that aren’t on Earth?
    Have you been listening to KooKoo? He seems to be the expert on “out-there”.

  87. Goldminor, you said, “The climate change story was not as clear back then as it is now.”

    Many on this comment thread will strongly disagree with you.

    You also said, “They do not seem to have a clue about the future consequences of their overspending.”

    I think that they do- the question is, what is their real agenda? Anybody who thinks that we can continue to spend money we don’t have must believe in Santa Claus.

  88. Simon says:
    February 14, 2014 at 10:24 am
    Mosher is absolutely right.
    —————————————————————————————–
    Sorry, but Mosher is in full support of Morodor on the Potomac, which is what this POTUS is.
    As there is NONE, ZERO ZIP NADA US temperature rise, no increase or decrease in snow cover, stream flow, hurricanes, or drought, fires etc, in any of the DATA, what the hell do you think they are going to do,

    What they will do is Spend more money on crony alternative energy corporations for their political supporters, and try to tax more. It is simply criminal.

  89. I vote we send Paul over to North Korea. I am sure he and his buddies would fit right in.

    I am sure if you sold your Eco-Store Paul you could finance one way tickets for you and your buddies and all of your customers.

    BYE-BYE!
    …..

    North Korea lost it’s diesel imports and tractor parts after the fall of the Soviet Union.
    That caused loss of industrialized agriculture. This combined with floods caused between 240,000 and 3,500,000 deaths from starvation in 1994-1998.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_famine

  90. Samuel Gompers in answer to the question of what labor wants “More”

    At least he was fighting for real people with practical needs in life. The climate zombies are equally blunt but far less intelligent.

  91. Daryl:
    >Burch … does that somehow make it right?

    Didn’t mean to imply that I found it “right”. Just that compared to previous wastage, it was smaller. I should know better than to assume the sarcasm was obvious. Apologies for the confusion.

  92. Think 95% of climate scientists should be reassigned to more important tasks as elderly care, water supply/ sanitary technologies and energy conservation . 97%?. OK then!

  93. GregM:

    At February 15, 2014 at 10:49 am you say

    Think 95% of climate scientists should be reassigned to more important tasks as elderly care, water supply/ sanitary technologies and energy conservation . 97%?. OK then!

    I favour your suggestion that they be “reassigned to … sanitary technologies” and I have a spare brush for one of them to use.

    Richard

  94. richardscourtney says: February 15, 2014 at 11:04 am

    “I favour your suggestion that they be “reassigned to … sanitary technologies” and I have a spare brush for one of them to use”

    You´re more cruel than I, that´s for sure!
    I´m just afraid the last 20-25 years fixation in climate science will delay progress in other areas. Needs are so many and so great in many disciplines.

    “for one of them”.
    Whom?

  95. I think a step in the right direction for the USA would be that in any Federal election where the top vote getter had less than 50% of the vote, a run off between the top two would be held 1 month later.

    Or, better, an instant-runoff system, such as exists in Australia and was voted down in a referendum in the UK in 2012 or thereabouts.

  96. theBuckWheat says:
    February 15, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    More correctly, it is a $1 Billion crony slush fund for the climate science theme park.

    Every year there must be over ten thousands college grads who majored in environmental this-or-that–and over 1000 grad-school graduates in the same. Green pressure groups would find it in their interest to create job niches for them. Given that, they would have lobbied Obama for a proposal like this. Given that Obama wants to offset a green light for Keystone with some sop for the greens, this is the result.

  97. GregM:

    At February 15, 2014 at 2:32 pm you ask me

    richardscourtney says: February 15, 2014 at 11:04 am

    “I favour your suggestion that they be “reassigned to … sanitary technologies” and I have a spare brush for one of them to use”

    You´re more cruel than I, that´s for sure!
    I´m just afraid the last 20-25 years fixation in climate science will delay progress in other areas. Needs are so many and so great in many disciplines.

    “for one of them”.
    Whom?

    Well, I would not suggest Michael Mann but he has shown himself to be incompetent at everything except hiding things, and the job requires competence at removing dirt and not hiding it.

    And I would not suggest Phil Jones because he has a habit of losing useful things so the brush may not be available for use if he had it.

    Similarly, Kevin Trenberth has a problem finding what he thinks exists so I would not trust him to find the dirt.

    So, I think Briffa is my first choice.

    Richard

  98. These sci-fi-entists don’t care what us little people think so long as our politicians believe them or are paid to believe them and push their hot air. I mean their lavish pay, reputation and livelihood are at steak here. I really don’t want them messing with the weather. I like spring, summer, winter and fall. I like the hot, the cold, the rainy and sunny days. I like that every winter is different from the last and one summer is hotter and another colder and one winter warmer and the next colder.

  99. Title: change “billon” to “billion”.
    I have skipped to the end, so apologies if this has been mentioned before.

    Ian M

Comments are closed.