Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
I fear that Science magazine has beclowned itself as badly as the Nobel Peace Prize Committee. They’ve published a “scientific” policy paper by the noted climate scientist Barack Hussein Obama. Not a paper with Obama as one of the signatories. No, Science magazine claims that the President wrote the deathless prose all by himself, not a co-author in sight.
Here’s an example:
At the same time, evidence is mounting that any economic strategy that ignores carbon pollution will impose tremendous costs to the global economy and will result in fewer jobs and less economic growth over the long term. Estimates of the economic damages from warming of 4°C over preindustrial levels range from 1% to 5% of global GDP each year by 2100 (4). One of the most frequently cited economic models pins the estimate of annual damages from warming of 4°C at ~4% of global GDP (4–6), which could lead to lost U.S. federal revenue of roughly $340 billion to $690 billion annually (7).
Ignoring “carbon pollution” will lead to loss of US Federal revenue? OMG … can’t have that.
Now I gotta ask … is there anyone on the planet who thinks that:
a) Barack Hussein Obama was the sole author of this piece of drivel? … or that
b) Any of this is anything but politics? … or that
c) We should get our climate science advice from op-ed political pieces by outgoing politicians? … or that
d) Science magazine is doing its reputation any good by publishing this puff piece? … or that
e) Obama made it into Science magazine (or to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review) on his own merits?
January 20th … could you hurry up please?
My Usual Request: If you are commenting please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE REFERRING TO, so we can all understand what you are discussing.
My Blog: As some folks know, I’ve started my own blog called “Skating Under The Ice“. There I discuss, well, interesting stuff. Come over and take a look, follow the blog … enjoy.