From AP Video:
President Barack Obama is pledging to respond to what he calls “the threat of climate change.” He says that failing to do so would be a betrayal of the nation’s children, and of future generations. (Jan. 21)
Video and comments from Al Gore follows:
WUWT reader Chris Beal sends this in:
Al Gore Wrote Today:
In his second Inaugural address today, President Obama spoke powerfully and eloquently about the critical importance of solving the climate crisis. His forceful commitment to take action will rekindle the hopes of so many that we are at long last approaching the political tipping point, beyond which we will finally start transforming our economy to sharply reduce global warming pollution and safeguard the future.
President Obama Said in his speech today:
Here is the key section of an inspiring speech:
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.”The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries we must claim its promise.”That is how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure our forests and waterways; our croplands and snowcapped peaks.”
Ref:
http://blog.algore.com/2013/01/inaugural_address.html
UPDATE: Delingpole has a go at this ridiculousness here.
michaeljmcfadden says:
January 21, 2013 at 2:38 pm
…
if the German cost would then be 50% higher, 22 cents/kwh
…
right now it’s 26 euro cents/kwh (say $ 0.35 US) and they’re bound and
determined to push it up to 30 euro cents ($0.40 US) as soon as possible
(I’m quoting EnBW rates from south Germany here). We’re sort of a
captive market here, as we can change energy providers, but we’re still stuck
with a plethora of taxes and fees (thanks, Brussels) that don’t change
regardless of provider. Kind of an energy “hotel California” if you will (or won’t 🙂 ).
Adding to the problem/confusion/etc. is the fact that the industrialized south
of Germany could well use the wind/solar/whatever power being generated
in north Germany except for the, erm, tiny problem that the infrastructure
to move the power north–>south doesn’t currently (no pun intended) exist.
There are proposals for three or four “energy highways” (shades of Gore)
in discussion, but they will take years to complete. Meanwhile, Poland is
less than thrilled that this power is routed through their network (in part)
and the resulting peaks/valleys are a huge strain on their system. They’ve
threatened to stop the flow but nothing’s official yet.
Adding insult to electrical/financial injury, the countries surrounding
Germany (in particular, the Netherlands) receive Germany’s excess
power at reduced rates, which further reduces their costs. Unfortunately
this is borne on the backs of German ratepayers, who are paying
extra fees for the windpower (whether or not it is used) and solar, etc.
Someone’s getting filthy rich off of this, but it ain’t us…..
I think the German edition of Business Week had some great info
on this (graphs, charts, etc.). I will check for this links, as it
really showed the massive price increases of the last 10 years.
Would be nice to have a really tiny (and SAFE) reactor in the back yard
and go totally off the grid….oh well…I can dream (at least that’s free….for now….).
Yeah, listened with interest to his speech – your President seemed to make high priorities of many things that he did not mention let alone run on during the election campaign.
Given your soaring debt levels, you got to say he has the right priorities…
James Delingpole puts in context Obama’s climate agenda as a declaration of war on reality.
Obama declares war on reality
By James Delingpole US politics Last updated: January 21st, 2013
259 Comments Comment on this article
“Reality: your ass is grass!”
When George W Bush declared war on an abstract noun – “Terror” – he was widely and inevitably mocked by the left for his foolishness. Not to be outdone, Barack Obama has used his second inaugural address to declare war on an even more nebulous threat to the security of the world: reality, itself.
Here’s how he put it in his inaugural address: (H/T Theo Spleenventer; Bishop Hill)
We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.
The first sentence is a blatant untruth. Concerted global action so far to deal with the threat of climate change has resulted in: higher energy prices; more deaths from fuel poverty; more intrusive regulation; the destruction of rainforests and the squandering of agricultural land on biofuels; higher food prices; famine and food riots – as a result partly of the drive for biofuels; the entrenchment of corporatism and rent-seeking to the detriment of free markets; the ravaging of the countryside with ugly solar farms and even uglier wind turbines; the deaths of millions of birds and bats; the great recession. How any of this has in any way benefited either our children (who are going to find it far harder to find a job) or future generations is a complete mystery.
The second sentence is a devious combination of the junk factoid and the non sequitur.
That “overwhelming judgement of science” is a reference to the comprehensively discredited Doran survey: the one where the “97 per cent of climate scientists” turned out to consist of just 75 out of 77 climate scientists who could be bothered to reply to two silly and dubious questions.
As for the idea that “science” ever has such a thing as an “overwhelming judgement”: this would be news to Galileo, Newton, Einstein and indeed all the great scientists of history, all of whom made their names by advancing theories which completely overturned the “overwhelming judgement” of their contemporaries.
It’s probably true, up to a point, that “none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms”. But only if you accept that everyone lives in a region susceptible to fires, drought and powerful storms, which not everyone does.
What Obama is presumably trying to slip into that weasel sentence is the notion that “science” is overwhelmingly of the view that raging fires, crippling drought and more powerful storms are increasing as a result of “climate change” (note incidentally how he’s careful not to say whether or not it is man-made, thus enabling him to cover all eventualities). But if this is the case, I’d dearly love to see the evidence that this is a) anthropogenic b) controllable or c)historically unprecedented. Certainly, according to this graph at Watts Up With That?, there is nothing particular weird or alarming about recent weather activity. On an index of “Extreme Weather” in the US since 1910, last year – 2012 – ranks a very modest 54th.
Still, for all that, I applaud the President’s chutzpah and ingenuity. If you want to expand the size of government as much as he obviously does, there’s really no better way than to declare war on reality. Reality is a slippery foe; it has many heads – and no sooner have you cut off one than a thousand more grow in its place; it’s everywhere, at all times, and there’s no escaping it, meaning you have to mobilise unimaginably large resources if you are to have a hope of defeating it. Which, of course, you never will. Obama’s glorious war on reality will be a war without end. Bad luck, America. (But you can’t say I didn’t warn you.…)
Tags: climate change, inaugural address, Obama, war on reality
Sorry- didn’t see that this post is already posted. That’s okay though, we should all read it twice.:]
Moe- it seems you need a vacation, try visiting reality. The climate is doing what it always does, change. The specious, redundant phrase *climate change* shows you are living in a deluded muddle.
Thanks Anthony, The media only played bits and pieces of what President Obama said at the Inauguration in his speech on THE THREAT OF CLIMATE CHANGE. He seems to be running like a Global temperature computer model. Every time he changes the words around when he talks about Climate Change. Last time it was global temperatures are rising faster then expected I heard from him or was that the last President. Mr Al Gore comes out of the grass like a snake when the words Climate Change are said by anyone in government.
P.S. You spelled inaguration wrong, Inauguration right spelling and I did not write the headline. I would of put it as, First time a President has used The Threat Of Climate Change in an Inauguration Speech. Al Gore Speaks out in his blog on what the president really meant in his Inauguration speech on THE THREAT OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
Thanks
This over-reaching is going to hit him, and warmists in general, hard in 2014 if the temperatures nosedive, as I believe they will over the next two years.
Has anyone estimated what it might cost to undo the carbon burial and mitigation when the next LIA comes? Maybe then angry mobs will want climate trials for Greenpeace et al?:] At least let’s go after all the non profits spewing this anti American, nay, anti people agenda and take them off the public teat.
inauguration
not
inaguration
Self correction. I meant to say at 3:06 pm:
But when debt/GDP ranges from 90 to 100% (which it will before 2016 at the current rate of spending), the US economy will collapse–it has in every country stupid enough to have spent itself into “properity”.
Someone above wrote:
“So an idiot really can be president.”
The answer has, at least, one life proof: George W. Bush.
Time will tell if we include Obama too in Charles.U.Farley’s sentence above.
This Obama speech about climate change is very naive and mixes several things that should not be “mixable”. Obama, of course, did not write this part of the speech. This must be Holdren’s ideas.
(I am not an USA citizen)
In most western countries, you get to have the choice between two types of populist clowns:
1. Those that believe passionately in the scientists of the Global Warming Industry, and
2. Those that believe passionately in the priests of the Global Warming Cult.
I guess we are supposed to feel lucky we have two choices of ecoloons, aka Cuba’s political system.
Charles.U.Farley says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:14 pm
“So an idiot really can be president.”
You can’t call a man an Idiot for what he believes.
Besides, President W had a hard time with speaking casually in public, and I wouldn’t call him an idiot, it just wasn’t one of his strong points.
I’m sure the president is as committed to today’s rhetoric as he was on his 1st inaugural address.
“We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.”
For those promoting membership in the NRA, please remember that this group sold us down the river on Obamacare, so they will have to work very hard to get my support.
All this would be moot had our republic not died on June 28, 2012, John Roberts betrayed his oath. Although I held out hope, in reality that is also the day that Barack Obama was ensured of re-election.
Hang on kiddies, the next 4 years aren’t going to be pretty. During the last 4, the Constitution was merely trampled, in the next 4 out comes the heavy duty, cross-cut shredder.
BillD says (January 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm)
I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy.
—–
Yep, that’s working well.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2013/01/20/europe-today-stealing-wood-burning-wood/
Not to mention all the lignite and dirty coal they’re now having to burn.
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21569039-europes-energy-policy-delivers-worst-all-possible-worlds-unwelcome-renaissance
David g and rocky road, glad to here we are in agreement with climate change. As a matter of interest, which particular climate would you prefer. The earth has had many climates, many not supportive of 7 billion humans. I guess you would prefer one that will support you and your lifestyle and will support agriculture, like we have had in the last 10,000 years.
I imagine, you can see no harm in having CO2 levels never experienced by humans before (last time they were this night was 800,0000 years ago. Modern humans have only been around for 125k years.
[snip. Stay on topic. — mod.]
Whats with all the pomp and ceremony ?
What past presidents wasted this much money, celebrating their “win”?
For all of those complaining about Obama and debt, it must remembered that there was debt before Obama and therefore Obama can not have anything to do with the debt. The U.S. of A.’s debt has gone up and down in the past so therefore it is just a natural 60 year cycle.
sceptical,
You have no clue as to how badly Obama has indebted the country [and for what, exactly?]. There is simply no comparison between 0 and previous Administrations. Money is printed and shoveled out to cronies and banks, and we still have the same pot holes in our streets.
Furthermore, 0bama is increasing the national debt by $Trillions every year. At this rate, in 4 more years the U.S. will be $20 – $25 Trillion in debt. He appears to be deliberately sabotaging the economy.
The result of 0bama’s first four years is plain to see. It is downhill from here.
Picture of fiddle burning.
michaeljmcfadden says:
January 21, 2013 at 1:03 pm
Right you are!
http://youtu.be/63h_v6uf0Ao
@ur momisugly sceptical
Right, and as soon as I see a Bill, signed by “CO2”, that mandates a 3C-5C global temperature increase, I’ll be happy to attribute warm weather to greenhouse gases. In the meantime, your analogy is just another silly attempt to conflate correlation with causation.
errr, look I don’t know much about US politics – I’m prepared to admit that – so could someone help me with the following question I have: I was watching the inauguration and…who was that angry looking woman standing behind him?
BillD says:
January 21, 2013 at 2:17 pm
I’ve been impressed by the Germans from right to left and left to right being willing to pay more more for electricity to achieve a rapid transition to renewable energy. The fact that Germany doesn’t have much in the way of fossil fuel companies that are paying to confuse is probably the reason why Germans of all political persuasions seem to favor action on reducing green house gases while the USA is mired in confusion and debate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LOL. Is there an extra Germany somewhere on this planet that we’re unaware of? The one I know about has announced the shut down of non CO2 producing nuclear power plants to be replaced by coal fired Co2 belching power plants to be built asap and fueled with domestic coal.
Or are you from a different planet, which would also explain the discrepancy?