Policy Implications of Climate Models on the Verge of Failure

Gary Pearse says:
June 28, 2013 at 9:42 am
I guess without skeptics, there would be no evaluation of the performance of climate models; WUWT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As I stated in my above comment CAGW has ALWAYS been political. Going all the way back to the first UN Earth Summit in 1972 where Maurice Strong talked of Global Warming and not only invited Greenpeace but paid their expenses and then told them to go home and raise he!!.
Maurice Strong is said to have originated the idea of NGOs, getting the idea from his early employment by YMCA international. Strong was a Senior Advisor to the World Bank, part of the UN Commission on Global Governance and a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation. Although a Canadian he was a major contributor to both the Republican and Democratic parties in the USA. So much so that George W. Bush went to bat for him and saw to it that Strong became Chair at Kyoto.

Elaine Dewar again:
Strong blurted out that he’d almost been shut out of the Earth Summit by people at the State Department. They had been overruled by the White House because George Bush knew him. He said that he’d donated some $100,000 to the Democrats and a slightly lesser amount to the Republicans in 1988. (The Republicans didn’t confirm.)
I had been absolutely astonished….
So Strong gave political contributions (of dubious legality) to both parties; George Bush, now a friend, intervened to help him stay in charge of the Rio conference; he was thereby enabled to set a deep green agenda there; and Bush took a political hit in an election year….. link

Strong is also great buddies with Al Gore. During the First Earth Day in the USA, Gore held up Maurice Strong’s company, Molten Metal Tech. as an example of ‘Green Technology’ The stock prices when up, Strong cashed in and the company then bankrupted when the DOT no longer forked over more grants. (sound familiar) There was even a Congressional investigation which as usual went no where. However the scammed stockholders also sued.
Fast forward and you have Al Gore and Maurice Strong setting up the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) with lawyer Obama help

The charity was the Joyce Foundation on whose board of directors Obama served and which gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were “instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide. link

The idea we have two parties in the USA so both sides of a question are represented is utterly laughable. Dwayne Andreas former CEO of Archer Daniels Midland Co. is perhaps the greatest contributor to both the republican and democratic parties in history. You have to look no further than good old Dwayne and his $$$ to understand why subsidies on corn, sugar and biofuel will never go away. (And why we got the Food Modernization Act designed to destroy US family farms )

….For all ADM’s size, the question now is not whether the government can survive without ADM but whether ADM can survive without the government. Three subsidies that the company relies on are now being targeted by watchdogs ranging from Ralph Nader to the libertarian Cato Institute.
The first subsidy is the Agriculture Department’s corn-price support program. Despite ADM’s close association with corn, this is the least important subsidy to the company. In the short run, ADM might actually benefit if this program is cut back since it might reduce the price the company pays for raw corn. But over time, the lack of a government regulation could lead to wild price fluctuations that would make long-term planning difficult for the company.
Of more benefit to ADM is the Agriculture Department’s sugar program. The program runs like a mini-OPEC: setting prices, limiting production, and forcing Americans to spend $1.4 billion per year more for sugar, according to the General Accounting Office. The irony is that, aside from a small subsidiary in Metairie, La., ADM has no interest in sugar. Its concern is to keep sugar prices high to prevent Coke and all the other ADM customers that replaced cane sugar with corn sweeteners from switching back. “The sugar program acts as an umbrella for them,” says Tom Hammer, president of the Sweetener Users Association. “It protects them from economic competition.”
The third subsidy that ADM depends on is the 54-cent-per-gallon tax credit the federal government allows to refiners of the corn-derived ethanol used in auto fuel. For this subsidy, the federal government pays $3.5 billion over five years. Since ADM makes 60 percent of all the ethanol in the country, the government is essentially contributing $2.1 billion to ADM’s bottom line. No other subsidy in the federal government’s box of goodies is so concentrated in the hands of a single company.
Robert Shapiro, author of a corporate welfare report for the Progressive Policy Institute, describes ADM’s federally supported journey this way: “ADM begins by buying the corn at subsidized prices. Then it uses the corn to make corn sweeteners, which are subsidized by the sugar program. Then it uses the remainder for the big subsidy, which is ethanol.”
The grease–or perhaps oleo–that helps keep these kinds of programs going is the money Andreas, his family, his company, and his company’s subsidiaries provide politicians who have influence over agricultural policy. During the 1992 election, Andreas gave more than $1.4 million in “soft money” (which goes to party organizations rather than individual candidates, and is exempt from limits) and $345,650 more in contributions to congressional and senatorial candidates, using multiple donors in his family and his companies. In the nonpresidential 1994 election, the company and its people gave $656,768 in soft money and another $224,170 in contributions to individual candidates. More recently, Speaker Newt Gingrich’s GOPAC received at least $70,000 from Andreas. (Gingrich has released the names of individual donors, but not yet of corporate ones.) “These guys are state-of-the-art,” says Fred Wertheimer, the longtime Common Cause president who recently stepped down. “They play this game to the hilt.”…. link

Anyone who thinks Money and Politics is not behind CAGW has not been paying attention.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H. L. Mencken
With CAGW we are seeing practical politics up close and personal as we are fleeced down to the bone and sold like so much hanging meat by our ‘Representatives’

Gail Combs says:
June 28, 2013 at 5:09 am
“As others have pointed out we are wining the scientific battle but losing the political war. This is why.”
There is no political war. All parties support what gives the state more power.
““The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers.
Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so the the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.””
[Carrol Quigley, mentor of Bill Clinton]
http://www.newsofinterest.tv/video_pages_flash/politics/misc_neocon_globalist/caroll_quigley_trag_hope.php
In Germany, where the use of CO2AGW to further the power grab is a far more accepted tool due to the panicky nature of the German, all parties are Green parties.
The process cannot be reversed by a political fight; but by a collapse.

tckev (June 28, 2013 at 5:29 pm) suggested:
“we do not know what tools are required to find these unknowns”
Tuned aggregates illustrate the way. Someone with the right background, natural symbolic talent, and sufficient time on their hands will easily reorganize those illustrations into a formal algebraic proof …but of course that’s just unnecessary cultural pomp — the pictures convey the story thoroughly to graphically literate communication receivers with a firm handle on aggregation criteria & thermal wind.