If climate science politics were a hockey game…oh, wait

I went to a fight the other night, and a hockey game broke out.

-Rodney Dangerfield (1921 – 2004)

…not surprisingly, the United Nations’ 2010 Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico, is failing, with Mother Nature helping to dampen warming fears as an early winter sets in across the Northern Hemisphere.

Some commentators tell us that this is the beginning of the end of the climate scare. More likely, it is just the end of the beginning. If this were a hockey game, the first period would have just ended with a couple of quick goals by climate realists.

But alarmists built up a 5-0 lead while realists were still learning to play. The score is now 5-2, with most of the game yet to go. While it is appropriate for realists to revel in their late-period success, it is vastly premature to celebrate.

Through the tireless work of hundreds of thousands of mostly unpaid activists, aided by unquestioning journalists, grant-seeking scientists, pandering politicians, opportunistic or naive industries and well-meaning but misinformed citizens, climate campaigners made “stopping global warming” a cause celebre. The warmists’ message was pounded out, free of charge, daily for years: “We in the West are causing a planetary emergency and the poor of the world are the primary victims.” Celebrities, leading scientists and charismatic mega-fauna such as the polar bear were recruited as the faces of responsible environmental stewardship.

As a result, massive donations from left-wing foundations poured in to groups focused on promoting alarm. With unprecedented resources at their disposal, climate campaigners hired communications and legal exerts to help craft long-term, often ruthless strategies to sway public opinion and frighten industry away from effectively defending itself. Meanwhile, throughout the 1980s and ’90s, nature cooperated. Global warming, later to become “climate change,” was ready for prime time.

==============================================================

The entire essay from “Harris and Leyland” gives a great historical perspective. Read it in the Washington Times here

Advertisements

67 thoughts on “If climate science politics were a hockey game…oh, wait

  1. Per Richard Black’s blog here http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/
    “However, if the agreement here acknowledges the need for deeper and faster emission curbs, it doesn’t provide a visible way to achieve them – merely “urging” rich countries to do more.
    The Kyoto Protocol text itself is still full of square brackets and options – on many, many issues.
    And some of the important, tough details have been kicked into the long grass – notably, the issue of “legal form” – whether the next climate agreement should seek to be legally-binding or not.
    So in terms of the most vital question for any climate accord – how much will it contribute to restricting man-made climate change? – you would have to answer, not as far as to meet the needs that it identifies.” At least he is more balanced now than in Copenhagen last year.
    There is still a long way to go before anything “legal” is agreed. Maybe if we get a cool 2011 the weather may put a spanner in the works.

  2. Meanwhile, throughout the 1980s and ’90s, nature cooperated.

    This is the only reason why the AGW scare has survived for so long and why they were 5-0 up. IF in 1989 we entered a 20 year cooling period then this elephant would never have got off the ground.

  3. Thank God for the climate realists:
    [SNIP. Since Mr Roddy’s vile blog is now soliciting donations, I’ve deleted the link. A cash donation from Mr Roddy to WUWT will keep me from snipping his future comments. ~dbs.]
    REPLY: Congratulations Mike, it seems you did not do any actual research, but just let your hate flow naturally. – Anthony

  4. In the rest of the article I read:

    There simply is too much money and political capital, and too many reputations are at stake for alarmists to back down. After their late first-period letdown, environmental activists have stepped up their campaign to keep governments and media from falling off the climate-change bandwagon.

    Like the ex-prime minister Tony Blair when pushed about the lack of WMDs said it invastion was still the right thing to do because Sadam was a tyrant. Alas, if a long cooling period sets in, the warmists will switch tack and say that wind turbines and solar were needed anyway due to the danger of peak oil. :o)

  5. Nice analogy. Down 5 to 2, but with confidence, re-enforced by grim resolve.
    Today of all days is a grim day. Not because of the insubstantial agreement reached in Cancun. But because of the utter mendacity in how it is being hailed in the mainstream media (all of the links you need will be in Tips & Notes to WUWT).
    The MSM reporting of this is difficult to stomach. If I may provide my own analogy, it’s like watching a drug addict rob an old lady. If you want to destroy yourself that is one thing, but to harm others in the process….
    The game is far from over.

  6. The poor are the victims? In absolute terms, the poor have never had it so good as this video proves:
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo&fs=1&hl=en_GB]

  7. where it really fell apart was when they got to the point of trying to make real people actually pay for this nonsense.
    That games over now – in the US for sure – and with it, the rest of the edifice will come crashing down.
    When there is no more rent to be had, the rent-seekers will fold up their circus tents and go find some other game to play.

  8. But…there taint nuth’n like a Cancun bathing beauty all bundled up against global warming, or at least desperately searching for cloths. Let’s hope some enterprising realist took some pictures of that.

  9. It is certainly only the end of the beginning. Some politicians still believe that co2 emissions are an urgent problem. David Cameron today: “”The Cancun agreement is a very significant step forward in renewing the determination of the international community to tackle climate change through multilateral action.”

  10. Copenhagen 2009: lessons learnt on how to suppress dissent.
    Cancun 2010: agreement qualitatively.
    Durban 2011: quantitative agreement on action plans.
    Rio 2012: irrestistable pressure on governments to commit by treaty.
    Then, world government by bureaucrats.
    It’s all happened before, orchestrated by Beurocrats.
    Enjoy!

  11. Oh too funny. I made a spelling error that turns out to be a good one. It’s Cancun. Clothes aren’t even made down there, let alone sold (other than some string and tiny pieces of triangular cloth of course). Our bathing beauty will be searching for cloth to MAKE some! I suppose you could make a crazy quilt out of bikini “cloths”.

  12. Cancun Agreement
    …”The agreement includes plans to create a $100 billion fund to help developing nations deal with global warming and increase efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation.
    Mexican President Felipe Calderon hailed the deal — the culmination of an overnight marathon session at the end of two weeks of talks.
    “It begins a new era of cooperation in climate change. They are the first steps in this long and renewed campaign,” he said. …”
    http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/12/11/mexico.climate.summit/index.html?eref=rss_latest&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent%29

  13. From the article: “There simply is too much money and political capital, and too many reputations are at stake for alarmists to back down. After their late first-period letdown, environmental activists have stepped up their campaign to keep governments and media from falling off the climate-change bandwagon. Literally hundreds of millions of dollars are still being funneled into promoting alarm and futile solutions.” (bold mine)
    And that, boys and girls, is the ‘science’ in a nutshell. Let’s do something, anything with other people’s money. Time to double down.
    What? You say that looked more like money, politics, and vested interests than science? You are very observant, Grasshopper.

  14. The DT is reporting that Viscount Monckton has agreed that humans cause global warming.
    I wonder what he actually said??

  15. There is an interesting discussion going on over at the BBCs “Have your say” site.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/12/will_un_deal_to_curb_climate_c.html
    About 95% of contributors so far are highly critical of the Cancun deal, and skeptical of the global warming industry. It’s all a bit embarrassing for the BBC, which is why I assume they removed the link to the “Have your say” debate which was inserted at the end of the report on the Cancun agreement. However you can still read the contributions by clicking on the above link

  16. Score for the last five British winter forecasts: Weather Action 5, Met Office 0. The populist view will eventually come around siding with scientific fact instead of pure faith.
    Sadly, when the ice is 5,000 feet thick heading for Central Park, there will still be some that believe it is due solely to global warming.

  17. Given the financial and economic circumstances of We the People, of the USofA, transferring 1% of our national debt to the UN seems, to me, a fair redistribution.

  18. Let us not forget that the warming issue is only a battle in the war. The war is with the Fabian Socialist/Progressives/Liberals/World Government who wish to control every aspect of your life. They use fear and greed and lies to win converts and our tools are knowledge and self reliance.

  19. I may be wrong, but I suspect this 100 Billion will be a big issue for the 112th Congress. US apparently committed to this last year but the 111th Congress was pretty looney/lopsided. I ran across a story this morning indicating that Hilary is to freeze all climate related pay-outs.

  20. Mike Roddy says:
    December 11, 2010 at 8:34 am

    ROFL
    Thanks for that link. I needed a good belly laugh! What a hoot!
    “as jellyfish begin to rule the sea
    I’m stocking up on tuna & gonna make a trip to see the whales and sharks before the jellyfish drive them all into extinction.
    Could you step it up a bit, though, so even more fans will change jerseys!

  21. The money troves have been reloaded for another decade of unprecedented Global Warming BS.
    They will use their time well and speed up the process to create Global Government.
    In order to reach their objective the West has to fall.
    Just look at what happens to Julian Assange who is put in prison on bogus charges to know that Big Brother no longer is limited to watching you.
    Illegal detainment, suppression and intimidation has been added to the control apparatus and from now on there will be an ever growing pressure on the expression free speech.
    That’s why I expect the next crush down will hit the Internet and the blog sphere.
    And for those of you who were expecting a crack down on Obama’s climate policies, don’t expect much because the GOP is in on the scheme.
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46101.html

  22. Dena says:
    December 11, 2010 at 9:47 am
    Let us not forget that the warming issue is only a battle in the war. The war is with the Fabian Socialist/Progressives/Liberals/World Government who wish to control every aspect of your life. They use fear and greed and lies to win converts and our tools are knowledge and self reliance.
    Gareth responds:
    And there was me thinking that this was a classic right wing capitalist plot via such scams as carbon trading and masquerading as environmentalists. However, maybe it’s just about scientists and vested interests keeping their heads in the pig trough and ideas of plots by world government belong in the same file as George Bush planning 9/11 with jets piloted by Princess Diana.

  23. “With unprecedented resources at their disposal, climate campaigners hired communications and legal exerts to help craft long-term, often ruthless strategies to sway public opinion and frighten industry away from effectively defending itself.”
    Worse, governments have bought off industries by creating new regulatory markets. GE, IBM, CISCO, and the list goes on, are preparing to reap profits from smart grid (only needed to allow unreliable renwable energy to be fed directly into the grid). For example, large companies are preparing to sell us new “smart” appliances we will be required to buy. Utilities are planning to use power lines as a new broadband delivery system. Millions of dollars are going into developing systems to transmit more information over power lines. A hidden goal is to replace the existing internet with one completely controlled by the government. EMC is developing distributed database with unstructured search capabilities that will permit deep mining of information. CISCO is on board. The internet kill switch is being prepared.
    Let’s be honest: How much longer will blogs like this be allowed to scare people and make them not trust the government?
    Millions of dollars are being given in subsidies to promote the construction of green energy systems. These dollars are buying the support of thousands of small agencies and companies that naively believe they will turn a profit from their green energy systems in a few years.
    A Swedish industrial group compared nuclear, hydro, and wind power (http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP-Nuclear_is_competitive_in_Sweden_says_report-0710104.html). “Wind power, the study suggests, is some 65% more expensive than hydro and about 50% more expensive than nuclear.” Apparently, there is some sanity even in the frozen socialist paradise.
    The fight is far from over. The good news is, California will head over the green cliff with AB32 and an out-of-control Energy Commission, while the rest of the country has rejected Obama, Waxman-Markey (Cap-and-Trade) and the socialist agenda. California still thinks it is leading the way, but its leadership is delusional, believing their own lies. The collapse of California in a few years under Governor Brown may finally bring the end of the green movement in the United States.
    Unfortunately, fabian socialists never give up. They will only repackage their seductive trap for a new naive generation. One answer is to provide real information to counter the lies of the Left. We need to promote real science and expose the frauds, and the sellouts.
    I don’t believe it is crazy to say a possible outcome is a complete economic and social collapse. The path we are on is completely unsustainable. Perhaps when California falls into the economic abyss, the rest of the country will learn from it. We need to end regulatory markets and shrink government. We need reliable and inexpensive domestic energy (nuclear for electricity and to produce LH2). Going forward, fighting over petroleum will put us in the same position as Japan in WWII.
    The climate battle is the focus now, but we need to be ready to shift to the next areas where we can press an advantage. Clearly, there is no political leadership taking us in the right direction. Developing a plan is a key step needed to give people a realistic positive view of the future, and to gather support for a good alternative that preserves freedom.

  24. R. de Haan says:
    December 11, 2010 at 10:00 am

    Just look at what happens to Julian Assange who is put in prison on bogus charges to know that Big Brother no longer is limited to watching you.

    How do you know those rape charges are bogus?

  25. Mike Roddy: Thank you for posting with your real name, or at least the name you use to pen your anti-consumerism drivel. I now have a new name to add to the list of people I will completely ignore. Have you been paid to have that much hateness, or has it developed from a lifetime of having your lunch money stolen?
    REPLY: There’s no point in posting rebuttals, and Mr. Roddy has a history of ignoring them. He doesn’t play fair, but rather chooses the “hit and run” approach. – Anthony

  26. Gore invented the web on a whim
    Then next a false paradigm
    On which with serial stealth
    He promoted his wealth
    Now truth and web haunt and mock him.

  27. >>REPLY: Congratulations Mike, it seems you did not do any actual
    >>research, but just let your hate flow naturally. – Anthony
    Anthony, you should have complained that you were not on the list !! … 😉
    REPLY: Actually I am on the list, you have to click through the other pages. And, Mr. Roddy makes some serious factual errors, simply because he goes with what he “feels” rather than what he researches. He didn’t ask me a single question. He’s simply a hatemonger. Feelings, nothing more than feelings… – Anthony
    .

  28. Let us not forget that the warming issue is only a battle in the war. The war is with the Fabian Socialist/Progressives/Liberals/World Government (not to mention the Fascist Corporatists/Reactionaries/Conservatives/New World Order) who wish to control every aspect of your life.
    They use fear and greed and lies to win converts and our tools are knowledge and self reliance.
    If we must be paranoid, at least let us seek balance in our paranoia, Dena.

  29. R de Haan said above “And for those of you who were expecting a crack down on Obama’s climate policies, don’t expect much because the GOP is in on the scheme.
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46101.html
    Here is what Ralph Hall said (amongst other things)
    “Hall told POLITICO in a recent interview he’s not a climate skeptic. “If they quote me correctly, I’ve never said it’s outrageous to even think about global warming. I want some proof,” he said. “If I get the chair and have the gavel, I’m going to subpoena people from both sides and try to put them under oath and try to find out what the real facts are.”
    Frankly I don’t see a thing wrong with that statement. That is what most socalled sceptics want. Get the facts out on the table under oath.

  30. Some news from Scotland …
    “Scotland’s transport minister, Stewart Stevenson, has resigned following criticism of his handling of the travel chaos caused by recent heavy snowfalls.
    Salmond will announce on Sunday who will take over from Stevenson as transport, infrastructure and climate change secretary. Finance secretary John Swinney has taken charge until a replacement is announced.”
    The reason for Stevenson’s fall in weather (not climate)!

  31. R. de Haan ,
    I really don’t think that’s what the article said . Admittedly , the GOP steering committee has made some disappointing choices for chairmanships , but they’re not on the same team . I expect that they will give more credence to skeptical scientists than we have seen in several years and that they will put a lot of heat on the EPA .

  32. Looking out my office today at a Christmas card scene, and just had a conversation
    this week with a warmist who I have some dealings with: ” Hi Bob, how is it going!”
    “I am concerned, the warm is cold. ” “The belief in the old ways are fading!” “Yet they who know better are gathered in Cancan,er Cancun.” I said:”It’s cold in Cancan, too.”
    “Douglas, you know the Profit has mentioned that there would be unstableness
    with the aether! due to the CO2 of sinners!” “Ah, Bob, if you look out the window, we are getting a little of the that instability..”
    “Ah Gaia’s dandruff! such a beautiful sight!” “Too bad by 2100 it will all be gone.
    Thus speaks the Profit.”
    I think we are looking at a dying cult here. Trouble was, this conversation actually
    happened with only slight modification….

  33. Through the tireless work of hundreds of thousands of mostly unpaid activists, aided by unquestioning journalists, grant-seeking scientists, pandering politicians, opportunistic or naive industries and well-meaning but misinformed citizens, climate campaigners made “stopping global warming” a cause celebre. The warmists’ message was pounded out, free of charge, daily for years: “We in the West are causing a planetary emergency and the poor of the world are the primary victims.” Celebrities, leading scientists and charismatic mega-fauna such as the polar bear were recruited as the faces of responsible environmental stewardship.
    As a result, massive donations from left-wing foundations poured in to groups focused on promoting alarm. With unprecedented resources at their disposal, climate campaigners hired communications and legal exerts to help craft long-term, often ruthless strategies to sway public opinion and frighten industry away from effectively defending itself.

    This is exactly what Fenton Communications does. They coordinate “grass roots” organizations, sometimes even facilitating the creation of the organizations, keeps them on message, organizes media exposure, etc. They were, for example, the public relations machine behind Cindy Sheehan, Larry Johnson, Veterans for Peace, Win Without Wars, Code Pink, etc.
    Fenton coordinates the media and Tides Foundation coordinates the money. What Tides does is this: Say you want to donate $10,000 to some “progressive” or “green” cause but don’t want your name showing on the books of that cause as a donor. You give your donation to Tides and tell them to “earmark” it for your cause. Tides then takes your donation, bundles it with everyone else’s who also earmarked that cause and then makes one lump donation. The cause books a donation from Tides, Tides books a donation from you, but Tides is not required to show how your donation was allocated. They provide a degree of separation so that one can not discover who is actually funding an activist group.
    Fenton started that back during the Alar apple scare when they created “grass roots” organizations that suddenly sprang up all across the nation to protest the use of Alar on apples. They are the masters of “astroturf” or fake grass roots organizations. The Alar scare destroyed many family orchards and turned out to be not the least bit harmful, but the damage was done. Tides directs the money, Fenton directs the message.

  34. And yet a legally binding deal was struck.
    “The deal falls far short of what some scientists and environmentalist claim is needed to stop catastrophic global warming. But it represents a significant step towards the eventual goal of many, which is a legally binding treaty aimed at preventing temperatures rising more than 2C (3.6F) this century.
    For the first time all countries are committed to cutting carbon emissions under an official UN agreement. Rich nations also have to pay a total of £60 billion annually from 2020 into a “green fund” to help poor countries adapt to floods and droughts. The money will also help developing countries, including China and India, switch to renewable energy sources including wind and solar power.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8196634/Cancun-Climate-Change-Conference-agrees-plan-to-cut-carbon-emissions.html
    John M Reynolds

  35. ArndB says:
    December 11, 2010 at 9:25 am
    #___ “The score is now 5-2”
    By far to optimistic. It would be great if it would already be: 5 to 0,5.

    The turning point will come when the powers that be, who have been “kicking the can down the road” in the current financial crisis, run out of road, and the financial roof falls in. Then the many closet skeptics and luke-warmers in Congress will have the cover they need to jettison carbon control measures “for the duration.” That will be a decade, if we’re lucky, by which time the planet’s failure to warm as predicted will be starkly self-evident.

  36. Mike Roddy says:
    December 11, 2010 at 8:34 am
    5 Awards For the World’s Most Heinous Climate Villains
    Congratulations Mike, that’s one of the funniest rants I have ever read, you should send it to John Cleese.

  37. If they can implement the net neutrality, and they are trying to do that, the government will control what is on the internet. In short, sites such as this will be silenced as the government deems it not in the public interest. With that silence goes a lot more.
    The prospect of that happening must be quite encouraging to global warming advocates and liberals at large.

  38. Alar-Classic scare story….
    Know more than a few apple farmers who were put under by that disinformation….

  39. Olen says:
    December 11, 2010 at 12:08 pm
    If they can implement the net neutrality, and they are trying to do that, the government will control what is on the internet. In short, sites such as this will be silenced as the government deems it not in the public interest. With that silence goes a lot more.
    The prospect of that happening must be quite encouraging to global warming advocates and liberals at large.

    You don’t seem to have a clue what net neutrality is about. It is about ISP’s controlling different types of traffic on their networks. Can cable block streaming video or not is the question. If the FCC makes net neutrality the law, then they can’t. If not, they can.

  40. To clarify my first comment on this thread for those who are not deep in politics, there are Republican Progressives and not all Democrats are Progressive. Far more Democrats are progressive than Republicans, but judge each Politician by their actions and not by their party.

  41. I think the biggest emitters should demand payment whenever something is grown or harvested. Everything alive pretty much gets its carbon from primary producers (green plants) and green plants get their carbon from CO2 in the air and water. Why should they get it for free when it is costing the U.S., China, and India so much to put it there? I’m sick of giving them a free carbon ride.

  42. If, only if, them hippies would’ve, like they did in reality, lost ages ago.
    Have anyone ever seen any kind of a hippie play hockey and be successful?

  43. jmrSudbury says:
    December 11, 2010 at 11:48 am
    “And yet a legally binding deal was struck.”
    UN proclamations aren’t legally binding. If they were Iran and North Korea wouldn’t be enriching uranium for bombs, there wouldn’t be any violence in the Middle East, in fact there wouldn’t be any wars at all, and so forth. The United Nations has no power to compel members to do a damn thing. It makes resolutions which it can neither impose nor enforce.

  44. Mike Roddy says:
    December 11, 2010 at 8:34 am
    Thank God for the climate realists:
    I assume it’s small, Mike. Very small, maybe lost, definitely never used, can you find it with your own hand?…. For you to promote such a blatant wackjob.
    How much are you being slipped Mike? To be an intellectual whore?
    Not enough, would be my bet.

  45. jmrSudbury says:
    December 11, 2010 at 11:48 am
    And yet a legally binding deal was struck.

    Any deal the US representative signs onto must first pass two things BEFORE it becomes legally binding on the US Government.
    1. The US President has to sign it.
    2. The Senate has to Ok it.
    Since so far neither of those things have happened that deal is not binding on the US and since I highly doubt the incoming next Senate will commit political suicide confirming it, it has the value slightly greater then used toilet paper.

  46. Just to be clear, the person representing the U.S. at Cancun is Todd Stern.
    Stern is pretty much a nobody in government. A USFS Special Envoy appointed by Hillary Clinton. All high ranking members of the United States Foreign Service are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the senate. Lower down in the USFS rank structure are presidential appointments which do not require senate consent and at the bottom of the barrel are USFS specialists appointed by the Secretary of State. Stern is a specialist.
    Ambassadors, even the big Kahuna the president of the United States, has no power to enter into binding agreements with foreign governments. That is the exclusive domain of the United States Senate.
    By the way, Stern was the USFS special envoy sent to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol. His batting record so far is a perfect zero in one time at bat insomuch as making any agreements which the Senate chose to ratify. I’ll bet dollars against donuts the Senate won’t back him this time either. Think of him as the designated payer of US lip service.

  47. For further clarity for those not familiar with the makeup of the U.S. Senate power is NOT apportioned by population but rather is granted exactly equally among all 57 50 states such that those pesky red “fly-over” states with their small and very conservative populations, states like Oklahoma and Kansas, North and South Dakota, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, and even Alaska (which technically isn’t even flown-over by left and right coast liberals) has exactly equal power in the US Senate as does California and New York.
    Adding insult to injury, absent a 60% Senate majority vote to stop what’s called a “filibuster” any individual Senator can stop the Senate from performing any business at all for as long as he can keep talking because, you see, there are no time limits imposed on how long a US Senator can speak once recognized to speak.
    In November 2010 a modestly more clear-thinking US electorate took away the Democratic 60-vote majority who might have been able to ratify some of less vexing promises made by the Foreign Service in Cancun. Now there’s not a prayer of it. It won’t even make it out of special committee for a vote before the full senate. The Cancun resolution to make a resolution is DOA in the United States.

  48. ‘Sam Hall says:
    December 11, 2010 at 12:57 pm
    You don’t seem to have a clue what net neutrality is about. It is about ISP’s controlling different types of traffic on their networks. Can cable block streaming video or not is the question. If the FCC makes net neutrality the law, then they can’t. If not, they can.’
    That not the right question. Is the FCC allowed to make guidelines, rules and regulations about the Internet thought the cable outlets is the right question? Both Congress and the Courts have said NO. The FCC does not have the power to regulate cable.

  49. I don’t hate you, Anthony. In fact, next time I’m in San Francisco (my home town) I’ll email here and offer to buy you a drink, so we can talk off the record. I doubt if we’ll end up agreeing on much, but certainly we can learn from each other.
    I stand by my jellyfish comment, btw, since their numbers are increasing and the ocean is acidifying.
    REPLY: Your commentary is indeed hateful, but more importantly, libelously false. You didn’t ask any questions, or inquire about the surfacesations project, as a journalist would, so you don’t know what the status is. It’s really a mega fail on your part, and you did this because your hatred of me, this website and what I do. This won’t let you ask honest questions, but rather, causes you to rely on your feelings to write commentary.
    If you are interested in demonstrating that your intent is to be factually based rather than emotional, will you print a correction if I offer it? -Anthony

  50. Further to Dave’s comments about the Senate, treaty ratification requires a 2/3 (67/100) hyper-majority.
    Not a prayer. Unless this is considered “not a treaty”. I think O’s “other way to skin the cat” is to piecemeal it into place with agency regulations, and other sleight-of-hand, like the whole EPA farce. Don’t know how far he’ll get with it. IAC, all money matters must originate in the House, and that’s stacked hard against him.

  51. Hoser says:
    Let’s be honest: How much longer will blogs like this be allowed to scare people and make them not trust the government?
    ————————————————————————————————-
    Funny that your handle in Canadianspeak is synonymous with “Douche”
    There’s enough Ph. D’s posting on this blog to create a University or 5.
    dwright

  52. I’m curious where people get their ideas regarding the function of the US government. It’s not as if the US Constitution and subsequent amendments aren’t online. It is not a complicated document and ther e are not enough amendments to prevent a complete read in an hour. Yet, even journalists fall for the mis-information in print.
    Mark

  53. David Cameron today: “”The Cancun agreement is a very significant step forward in renewing the determination of the international community to tackle climate change through multilateral action.”
    Which translates to ” Well done Chris Huhne. You have kept this scam on the road long enough for my father-in-law to complete his investment in a substantial wind farm, thus ensuring a guaranteed transfer of monies from the UK taxpayer to the Cameron trust funds for 25 years”.
    “We’re all in this together” is his catch phrase, but it seems that some, including the fuel poor pensioners, terrified of the bills that this winter wil bring, are more in it than others.

  54. Mike:
    No ocean is ‘acidifying’ and to repeat the lie is silly. By Grade 8 even the ordinary under-educated American knows that if is it above 7.0 it is alkaline. ‘Acidifying oceans’ is the bluntest meme in the CAGW quiver of pot-shot arrows.
    I see no reason for Anthony (or anyone else) to deal with you respectfully while you have an unsqeezed pimple on your sophomoric website crafted to insult a widely respected member of the climate research community. Leave highschool behind. To show up here to advertise science porn takes the sort of gall one only sees from the likes of Hockey Stick creators. Surely you do not want to be considered to be of that ilk, even briefly.
    Clean up your site then come back and talk nicely.

  55. Mike, I just cannot understand how you can say those things about Anthony when his ENTIRE purpose of the surfacestation project was to ensure that the surface stations were generating the highest quality data possible. If NOAA fixes just ONE station as a result of Anthony’s project (which BTW, they HAVE!), the mission is accomplished. The data is better. How in the hell is that deserving of one of your “awards.”
    And it’s pretty clear you know nothing about the project, and that NOAA answered a question no one asked in their little “report”…I mean, hit piece…

  56. Dear dwrong,
    I like ‘Hoser’ because it is slightly vulgar. The nickname was given to me by an old friend who is now a very highly respected cancer researcher in Canada. Nobody should take themselves too seriously, my friend.
    Clearly, you took a comment out of context and fumbled trying to make a point. Just what was your point? You never mentioned anything about the substance of what I posted.
    I must assume you A) didn’t agree with what I said, or B) you didn’t understand it. Then do you like freedom, or do you oppose it? Do you like government control over your life, or do you oppose that? Would you enjoy having government monitor everything you do in your home, read your emails sent via a government network, have your computer hard disk hacked by anyone able to access the Home Area Network created by smart grid (see http://www.howstuffworks.com/power-network.htm/printable, and http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=R3-rAAAAEBAJ&dq=intellon+computer+power+supply).
    Anyone who thinks their encryption will stop a skilled hacker is naive. Hacker tools are available online (for example, see http://md5crack.com/). Governments can quietly access anything they like on your computer whenever they choose via smart grid. Don’t imagine that a warrant is needed.
    And, isn’t it more than likely the Assange case is a setup to justify cracking down on the wild internet? A bit like burning the Reichstag. Future restrictions are necessary for national security requirements, of course. The regime in power seems to like the Chinese model. Who actually believes a single private first class actually could access such sensitive materials alone?

  57. Just to be clear: The new networking computer power supply, as described in the patent (see link in previous post), accesses the Home Area Network via the power cord. These units are already being sold in Europe, and are coming here no doubt. Utilities want to sell broadband services. Big companies like CISCO, Motorola, and IBM are very interested. Governments and others will be able to access the disk via the power cord through this type of power supply. No ethernet cable required.
    Your current computer power supply almost certainly does not have this capability. Not yet. We can expect these power supplies will be the standard type sold in new computers in the coming years.

  58. Well, I think this is not a good example for young children. And violence should not be tolerated in this kind of sport… Many kids really love this sport… This is very frustrating. 🙂

Comments are closed.