This should be good. From Fox news, video follows.
Bret Baier travels across America, revealing rogue regulators, tracing the truth about the president’s environmental agenda and exposing programs that could devastate our economy!
Check out a sneak peek of the special below, and tune in on Sunday at 9p ET to watch the full ‘Fox News Reporting: Behind Obama’s Green Agenda’ on Fox News.
Dr. Spencer writes in an email today:
Tonight at 8 p.m. CDT (9PM EDT/6PM PDT) I’ll be on a FoxNews special entitled “Behind Obama’s Green Agenda”, hosted by Bret Baier. They have not decided when it will air again…FNC probably will announce that in the next few days.
link to video here
UPDATE: – here is an Email from Dr. Spencer tonight:
Well, for those watched…no Roy. They used a couple animations I gave them (early in the show), but the direction of the show was quite different that they envisioned a few months ago, when I spent half a day with them.
Oh, well…it will save me from being harassed over what I said on-camera…for now. 😉 Maybe they will do something more climate-specific later.
To TonyG says:
October 9, 2012 at 6:21 am
I don’t know if this is the study that ben is exactly talking about since in the last 10 years or so, dozens upon dozens of studies have come out stating the same thing. Outside of the studies of course are the people leaving position in newspapers and such like the recent quote from the NYT in which the ombudsman stated “the NYT bleeds liberalism” or roughly along the line.
The BBC both internal and external reviews of say israel/midest coverage in general have found the BBC is a joke. Its sad when even your own reviews have a hard time covering up the fact your bias.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
I watched the show with the hope that a more detailed revelation of this pseudo-agenda’s planned goal for American property owners would finally be televised. While “sustainability” was mentioned, it was never equated with the United Nation’s Agenda 21, which finds its genesis in the 1976 Vancouver Declaration on Habitats, and its growth spurt beginning with the 1992 Rio Accords signed onto by George H. W. Bush. It was later implemented by Clinton through his establishment via executive order of the President’s Council of Sustainable Development, and further enhanced by the Obama E.O. 13565 establishing the White House Rural Council. The idea is to force Americans into “walkable/sustainable/monitorable” urban environments under the guise of false environmental concerns. This article reveals the ultimate goal of the “greenies,” (or, if you prefer, the “watermelons”):
http://www.heartland.org/editorial/2003/11/10/ceaucescu-father-smart-growth?art%3fId=13577
Here are a few more articles from credible sources that further expose the agenda:
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/49198
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/49174
http://www.green-agenda.com/sustainabledevelopment.html
http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com
Along with a few that demonstrate what many State and local governments are doing against it:
http://www.wnd.com.2012/06/u-s-rebellion-ignited-against-u-n-s-globalization
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_21_coming_to_a_neigh.html
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/townhallcomstaff/2012/05/31/alabama_fights_a_un_landgrab
Graeme W says (October 8, 2012 at 10:19 pm): “My comment about failure was when comparing the existing system to a direct elect system.”
In other words, an apple is a “failure” if it’s not an orange? WUWT?
Context is important. The original post that I was responding to tried to claim Australia wasn’t a democracy because it allowed the change of leadership partway through a term. I was trying to point out that in neither the USA or Australia do people directly elect their leader, though I conceded that the USA’s system was close than Australia and that’s the context of the apple/orange situation. But the basic point is still true – in neither case is the leader directly elected by the voters. In the case of Australia, the system allows for those who elected the leader (the representatives that the voters DO directly elect to represent them) to change their minds and elect someone else partway through a term. It’s nonsensical to thus claim that Australia was not a democracy, which is what the original poster was trying to claim.
Graeme W, I have no problem with your main point about indirect election of leaders, only with the claim that an indirect system is a “failure” if it works as intended but the result doesn’t match the popular vote. Whatever the context, your original statement was pretty apple-orangey.
DirkH says: “For a “horrible” person he has written a rather fine book, namely The Skeptical Environmentalist.”
Hi DirkH,
Lomborg is Hagar the Horible; no doubt about it – he is after lots of loot money, from the western countries. On the local TV he said: -”GLOBAL warming is for real, but needs 100 billion a year from the western countries; to help in Africa the suffering from the global warming”
Didn’t say that: the spoils will go to the jetseters, worrying themselves to death, with lobsters and chardonnay, in 5 star hotels, for the starving African children,, . That’s why the active Warmist are risking of going to long-term in jail ; for telling all those lies – they are hoping to share the spoils They don’t intend to build few dams with those money, to save storm-water – so that people can produce food in dry days / years. Because: if they build dams, dams improve the climate / dams are built by working people ==== the parasites hate work and good climate. Lomborg should be in the same jail cell with Bernard Madoff. Using the non-existent GLOBAL warming for extortion,.. I wish I’ll be in the jury, when he gets on the witness stand, under oath. Cheers Dirk. .
Gunga Din, you post good stuff, but this time you bit a big one by citing that song:
Um, those would be Fisker Karmas. Fisker was hired on, as a famous designer, to design the Tesla Motors’ Model S body. But he turned in successively lousier designs, and was canned. He immediately popped up in Europe (I’m so tempted to use “Urp”!) at the head of a new company with a far better shell design. TM alleged he’d planned that all along, and stole drivetrain info, etc. Their lawsuit failed, possibly because Fisker wasn’t enough of an engineer to do a competent swipe — and the Karma showed that unequivocally. Certainly nothing of value of the S tech made it into that car!
The 2000+ Roadsters Tesla made had body shells of carbon fibre built for them by Lotus, in UK, based on their Elise. Their Model S, by contrast, is entirely made in the US in-house, starting with rolls of aluminum (in the huge ex-NUMMI plant in Fremont, CA, which Toyota sold to it for $40 million in stock) except for the Panasonic batteries, small 18650 format, which are assembled on-site into its uniquely effective ESS powertrain. First deliveries have begun, to rave reviews, unlike the Karma, which Consumer Reports panned as heavy, slow, loud, cramped, and with a computer control interface which is an ergonomic disaster.
The Tesla is a pure BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle), and the Karma is a hybrid.
At the very least do a few minutes research at their site at TeslaMotors.com .
Clarification: the “theirs” here: “… their Elise. Their Model S …” refer, respectively, to Lotus and Tesla.