Our real manmade climate crisis

John Kerry - Caricature
John Kerry – Caricature (Photo credit: DonkeyHotey)

The crisis is due not to climate change, but to actions taken in the name of preventing change

Guest Post by Paul Driessen

In his first address as Secretary of State, John Kerry said we must safeguard “the most sacred trust” we owe to our children and grandchildren: “an environment not ravaged by rising seas, deadly superstorms, devastating droughts, and the other hallmarks of a dramatically changing climate.”

Even the IPCC and British Meteorological Office now recognize that average global temperatures haven’t budged in almost 17 years. Little evidence suggests that sea level rise, storms, droughts, polar ice and temperatures or other weather and climate events and trends display any statistically significant difference from what Earth and mankind have experienced over the last 100-plus years.

However, we do face imminent manmade climate disasters. Global warming is the greatest moral issue of our time. We must do all we can to prevent looming climate catastrophes.

But those cataclysms have nothing to do with alleged human contributions to planetary climate systems that have always been chaotic, unpredictable and often disastrous: ice ages, little ice ages, dust bowls, droughts and monster storms that ravaged and sometimes even toppled cities and civilizations.

Our real climate crisis is our responses to Mr. Kerry’s illusory crises. It takes four closely related forms.

Influence peddling. Over the past three years, the Tides Foundation and Tides Center alone poured $335 million into environmentalist climate campaigns, and $1 billion into green lobbies at large, notes Undue Influence author Ron Arnold. Major US donors gave $199 million to Canadian environmental groups just for anti-oil sands and Keystone pipeline battles during the last twelve years, analysts Vivian Krause and Brian Seasholes estimate; the Tides Foundation poured $10 million into these battles during 2009-2012.

All told, US foundations alone have “invested” over $797 million in environmentalist climate campaigns since 2000! And over $19.3 billion in “environmental” efforts since 1995, Arnold calculates! Add to that the tens of billions that environmental activist groups, universities and other organizations have received from individual donors, corporations and government agencies to promote “manmade climate disaster” theories – and pretty soon you’re talking real money.

Moreover, that’s just US cash. It doesn’t include EU, UN and other climate cataclysm contributions. Nor does it include US or global spending on wind, solar, biofuel and other “renewable” energy schemes. That this money has caused widespread pernicious and corrupting effects should surprise no one.

Politicized science, markets and ethics. The corrupting cash has feathered careers, supported entire departments, companies and industries, and sullied our political, economic and ethical systems. It has taken countless billions out of productive sectors of our economy, and given it to politically connected, politically correct institutions that promote climate alarmism and renewable energy (and which use some of this crony capitalist taxpayer and consumer cash to help reelect their political sponsors).

Toe the line – pocket the cash, bask in the limelight. Question the dogma – get vilified, harassed and even dismissed from university or state climatologist positions for threatening the grants pipeline.

The system has replaced honest, robust, evidence-based, peer-reviewed science with pseudo-science based on activism, computer models, doctored data, “pal reviews,” press releases and other chicanery that resulted in Climategate, IPCC exposés, and growing outrage. Practitioners of these dark sciences almost never debate climate disaster deniers or skeptics; climate millionaire Al Gore won’t even take questions that he has not preapproved; and colleges have become centers for “socially responsible investing” campaigns based on climate chaos, “sustainable development” and anti-hydrocarbon ideologies.

Increasingly powerful, well-funded, unelected and unaccountable activist groups and bureaucracies use manmade global warming claims to impose regulations that bypass legislatures and ignore job and economic considerations. They employ sweetheart lawsuits that let activists and agencies agree to legally binding agreements that leave out the parties who will actually be impacted by the court decisions.

The green behemoth wields increasing power over nearly every aspect of our lives and liberties, with no accountability for screw-ups or even deliberate harm to large segments of our population. All in the name of controlling Earth’s temperature and preventing climate change

Climate eco-imperialism impoverishes and kills. Climate alarmism and pseudo science have justified all manner of regulations, carbon trading, carbon taxes, renewable energy programs and other initiatives that increase the cost of everything we make, grow, ship, eat, heat, cool, wear and do – and thus impair job creation, economic growth, living standards, health, welfare and ecological values.

Excessive EPA rules have closed numerous coal-fired power plants, and the agency plans to regulate most of the US hydrocarbon-based economy by restricting carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles, generating plants, cement kilns, factories, malls, hospitals and other “significant” sources. Were it not for the hydraulic fracturing revolution that has made natural gas and gas-fired generation abundant and cheap, US electricity prices would be skyrocketing – just as they have in Britain and Germany.

EU papers carry almost daily articles about fuel poverty, potential blackouts, outsourcing, job losses, economic malaise and despair, and deforestation for fire wood in those and other European countries, due to their focus on climate alarmism and “green” energy. California electricity prices are already highest in USA, thanks to its EU-style programs. The alarms are misplaced, the programs do nothing to reduce Chinese, Indian or global emissions, and renewable energy is hardly eco-friendly or sustainable.

Wind energy requires perpetual subsidies and “backup” fossil fuel power plants that actually produce 80% of the electricity attributed to wind, and blankets wildlife habitats with turbines and transmission lines that kill millions of birds and bats every year. In fact, industrial wind facilities remain viable only because they are exempted from many environmental review, wildlife and bird protection laws that are enforced with heavy penalties for all other industries. Solar smothers habitats with glossy panels, and biofuels divert crops and cropland to replace fuels that we have in abundance but refuse to develop.

Now climate activists and EPA want to regulate fracking for gas that was once their preferred option.

By far the worst climate crisis, however, is eco-imperialism perpetrated against African and other poor nations. When their country was building a new power plant that would burn natural gas that previously was wasted through “flaring,” President Obama told Ghanaians they should use their “bountiful” wind, solar, geothermal and biofuels energy, instead of fossil fuels that threaten us with dangerous global warming. Meanwhile, his Administration refused to support loans for South Africa’s critically needed, state-of-the-art Medupi coal-fired power plant, which the Center for American Progress, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club and other radical groups stridently opposed.

The actions ignored both the livelihoods and living standards that electricity has brought the world, and the millions of deaths from lung infections and intestinal diseases that these power plants would prevent.

Ready-made excuse for incompetence. Hurricane / Superstorm Sandy proved how “dangerous manmade climate change” can give politicians a handy excuse for ill-considered development decisions that increase storm and flood risk, failure to prepare their communities for inevitable severe weather events, misleading storm warnings, and slow or incompetent responses in their aftermath. Blaming carbon dioxide emissions and rising seas is always easier than manning up and shouldering the blame for Bloombergian failures. Citing IPCC computer forecasts of nastier storms and flooded coastlines likewise gives insurers a convenient excuse for hiking insurance rates.

When the conversation next turns to climate change, discussing the real climate crisis – and the true meaning of environmental justice – could open a few eyes.

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

81 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James at 48
March 8, 2013 4:36 pm

The US East Coast where the huge concentration of media and political power give the region outsized influence is indeed drowning. It’s been gradually drowning since the Great Melt and this is exacerbated by the tectonic subsidence there. People who live there assume all coasts are experiencing something similar. The Green Mafia take full advantage of it.

Jimbo
March 8, 2013 5:11 pm

I read above about the following:

Over the past three years, the Tides Foundation and Tides Center alone poured $335 million into environmentalist climate campaigns, and $1 billion into green lobbies at large, notes Undue Influence author Ron Arnold.

Does it do similar funding programs as the following:?

The Climate Works Foundation, though, is of special interest as it was in 2008, awarded $460,800,000 from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, a grant-making organisation with assets of $7.2 billion, which disbursed $353,400,000 in grants in 2011. It has made another grant to Climate Works only last week of $100 million – bringing the total grants to this organisation to just short of $600 million
http://mrworthing.blogspot.com/2012/02/funding-imbalance.html

I think we need a financial flow chart to show how the hundreds of millions are flowing into green eco-fascist propaganda. I’m sure Heartland’s large $6.5 million will feature prominently.
In today’s world there are at least 2 groups who know what’s going on in this global financial scam. The global warming sceptics and the establishment of climate scientist whores, bankers, oil companies, governments, hypocritical ‘greens’ and Hollywood ‘stars’. There is a third group, they are known as the ordinary members of the public – worldwide. They are being screwed for all its worth.

March 8, 2013 5:18 pm

Chuck Nolan says March 8, 2013 at 11:05 am
I think Kerry is the same as Romney. …

I *do* wish ppl would even just lightly research a subject before commenting, well, blindly … truly, this exemplifies “low information” posting.
a) Who turned around the 2002 Winter Olympics?
b) Who married “into money”?

Jeff Alberts
March 8, 2013 7:09 pm

Tom J says:
March 8, 2013 at 9:17 am
A friend of mine who works for a bordering village of Chicago told me he had a co-worker tell him he voted 3 times for Obama. Now let’s talk about what’s been emerging from Ohio: double votes, triple, gosh, even sextuple votes.

Some people will believe anything anyone tells them, as long as it suits their preconceived notions.

Laurie Bowen
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
March 9, 2013 9:23 am

Jeff: “”A friend of mine who works for a bordering village of Chicago told me he had a co-worker tell him he voted 3 times for Obama. Now let’s talk about what’s been emerging from Ohio: double votes, triple, gosh, even sextuple votes.””
That could be true, without being illegal or wrong . . . . over a long period of time. Once in the primaries, once in 2008 presidential election and once in the 2012 election . . . .!!! just sayin’ . . . . Had him & you goin’ . . . . there, huh?

tony nordberg
March 9, 2013 11:02 am

re Ian W’s remarks on Ernst Beck’s work, I concur.
However, I was proposing a rigorous scientific investigation of the CO2 measurement and data-reduction process.
I know that these kinds of systems contain many potential sources of error, and so they can be analysed via the scientific method of looking for ‘falsifications’. i.e. looking for errors in subsystems that would be needed in order to produce the same result, and checking to see whether these sources of error are properly compensated for in the system as a whole.
For example, the battery of tests could include the effects of non-linearity in the ADC process; dimming of the lightsource, corrosion in the gas vessels, variation in the constituents of the reference gases, the effect of the accumulation of concrete at the site(s), the effect of increasing transport patterns, the local heating of the ocean, and so on.
So, can anyone point to such studies into this most important subject?