A new video from CEI: Policy Peril

Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis explains why we have more to fear from global warming policies than from global warming itself.

policy_peril_title

I thought this video might be a complement to Richard Courtney’s post below. It is almost 40  minutes long, but the slider bar does allow you to skip ahead if you wish.

The video starts below. I’ve put it below the “read more” line since it is quite a bandwidth draw and not everyone who visits may want to watch it. BTW yours truly is in this video. – Anthony

[viddler id=a824e340&w=437&h=288]

Thanks to WUWT reader Trevor for the reminder.

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “A new video from CEI: Policy Peril

  1. A lot more people will die when they cannot afford to keep themselves warm in the winter.
    It happens every time there is rising heating prices. and they find the elderly frozen.
    Make energy twice as expensive and you can potentially have hundreds of thousands freeze to death, many more succumb to pnemonia and flu. And yet, the politicians who are clamoring for this Energy Tax don’t seem to get it. 10’s of millions are poor, homeless, out of work, stretched to the limit. They will be forced to choose: Heat or eat.

  2. The video offers several valid criticisms of climate change policy. However, does the CEI sincerely care about the quality of life in developing countries?
    Or, only as it impacts corporate profit margins?

  3. The cold hard facts. We need more “bare-assed” truth in today’s political heist of the scientific world.
    Kudos to the producers of this video. Needs to be shouted from the housetops.
    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  4. The propaganda of global warming – a chapter out of George Orwell’s 1984? Consider the ongoing “adjustment” and withholding of climate data, and the suppression of dissent on RealClimate…
    From Wiki:
    “The story follows the life of one seemingly insignificant man, Winston Smith, a civil servant assigned the task of perpetuating the regime’s propaganda by falsifying records and political literature.”
    “As in the Nazi and Stalinist regimes, propaganda is pervasive; Smith’s job is rewriting historical documents to match the contemporary party line, the orthodoxy of which changes daily. It therefore includes destroying evidence, amending newspaper articles, deleting any references to the existence of people identified as “unpersons”.”
    You can guess who the unpersons are – skeptics.

  5. Pamela: There is the dispute. What IS the persistence of CO2? The article you cite uses the same argument against that the IPCC uses for: isotope ratios.

  6. When the kids get real quiet in the other room, you know they are up to something.
    The kids in this case are the ones controlling everything, and when you ask them where’s the data, it’s “I dunno”. The dog ate the data.
    You can burn all the books, hide all the data, fix the data, rewrite the news reports, but you cannot hide what’s going on outside.
    You can tell someone in the Midwest the oceans are rising, but you can’t tell that to the people living on the coast.
    You tell people in the lower 48 that the glaciers are melting in Alaska and the North Pole is almost Ice free, but you can’t tell that to the people up there.
    This is the big undoing. No matter where you live, there is something for everyone to understand that they are being lied to.
    People know that things are exaggerated by the Media, but they also know when they are being led around by the nose.
    The hostiliy of the warmist camp is getting clearer by the day. They say things they shouldn’t be saying about their countrymen that are remembered.
    Those voters won’t doon forget that hositiliy when elections roll around.

  7. Great video, content, commentary – love it!
    I don’t think it’s been discussed here in the Heritic’s world and in the Puritinical Climate world it’s taboo for reasons to be discussed later, but has anyone looked at the “BioChar” concept? It’s the only Carbon Sequestration scheme I’ve seen that actually makes sense. The idea is that you use agricultural waste to create charcoal and as a biproduct “Bio-Oil” which can be used as a heating oil replacement, you then use the charcoal as a soil adjunct and it has been shown to increase yields by up to 30%. I read somewhere that if 10% of the world’s farms started doing this it could completely offset our carbon emissions.
    Why this isn’t an option in the hard core “Eco” world seems to be that “they” – whoever “they” is – can’t stand the idea of fixing the Climate Change problem without inflicting massive pain on ourselves (self-flagellation as reparations for our eco-carbon sins I guess)
    Not exactly OT – but it’s been driving me up the wall that there are all of these completely retarded (sorry, can’t think of another way to describe it) “options” being discussed that are, essentially, throwing money down a hole – throwing iron ore into the ocean, sending a trillion tiny sunshades into space, etc. You’d think that with as inventive as these folks are with their doom and gloom scenarios that they could think of something a little more creative unless, as is hinted in the video, there really is a different agenda in play

  8. CaptainPlanet (21:51:58) :
    Cap, I’ve seen this biochar idea kicked around a lot on alt fuel sites. The 30% increase seems exaggerated but it is one plan for cellulosic fuels that appears to make sense.

  9. The key point is that if CO2 has nothing to do with any temperature rise, then why bother restricting it?. The secondary point is wondering why our”leaders’ are obsessing about miniscule temperature rises – the Medieval and Roman Warm periods don’t seem to have done any harm.

  10. “KimW (23:28:59) :
    The key point is that if CO2 has nothing to do with any temperature rise, then why bother restricting it?. The secondary point is wondering why our”leaders’ are obsessing about miniscule temperature rises – the Medieval and Roman Warm periods don’t seem to have done any harm.”
    Because they want to and will, literally, tax the air we breathe and the energy we consume.

  11. JFA in Monteal (21:48:08) :
    I don’t know . Why was California’s response to skeptics – basically a rehash of the IPCC’s report – posted on the Attorney General’s website ?

  12. Is there a graph somewhere that overlays percent change in CO2 with percent change in temps? The scales as they are (ppm on one side and temp anomaly on the other), superimposed on one another, gives the impression that the rise is measurably similar in degree.

  13. Elizabeth:The video offers several valid criticisms of climate change policy. However, does the CEI sincerely care about the quality of life in developing countries?
    Or, only as it impacts corporate profit margins?

    If the criticisms are valid, why does it matter to you what CEI cares about?
    Do you care about the quality of life in developing countries?
    Do you care if the poor in this country can afford to both eat and heat during the winter. Or eat and afford air conditioning during the summer?

  14. Pamela Gray (20:41:17), thanks for the “missing sink” link. The timing was perfect, as I had just read a piece on E. M. Smith’s blog about the uncertainties in fossil fuel carbon isotope ratio measurements. A key observation is the seasonal fluctuation in atmospheric carbon dioxide, which should be less prominent (undetectable?) if the Solomon et al or IPCC estimates of carbon dioxide residence time are accurate.

  15. A lot more people will die when they cannot afford to keep themselves warm in the winter.
    It happens every time there is rising heating prices. and they find the elderly frozen.
    Make energy twice as expensive and you can potentially have hundreds of thousands freeze to death, many more succumb to pnemonia and flu.

    Think of the health care savings.

  16. The video offers several valid criticisms of climate change policy. However, does the CEI sincerely care about the quality of life in developing countries?
    Some day you should look how many people that have been pulled out of crushing poverty in India and China a year over the last 20 years…
    Then you might look at the changes both countries enacted 20 years ago in regards to deregulation and removing trade barriers.
    When i look at the number of people who are no longer doomed to perpetual poverty I no longer care how rich IBM and Coke got because of it…..The question I have for you is with such astonishing results why do you care so much about corporate profits?

Comments are closed.