While the Paris agreement was toothless the bite may well come from a pincer movement with domestic laws. Paris was voluntary and non-binding but may be used to provide a means for National laws that are binding to take effect. The laws within each country may have been put into effect earlier with specially prepared clauses that could be triggered or enabled by the Paris agreement.
Strangely Democrat members, elected democratically, don’t appear to have any problem with this. It doesn’t matter if the elected representatives get bypassed, I suppose — the ends justifies the means, the climate needs to be saved, and the voters are stupid.
I am reminded of Al Gore visiting Australia the week before the Senate was doing climate deals with Clive Palmer. Was that a similar strategy — mix and mesh local and international laws to achieve what cannot be achieved in a democracy via the old fashioned way of convincing the voters. Similarly Chiefio and American Thinker were discussing the TPP agreement and how it ominously meshed with the Paris deal too. The implications of that need to be hammered out too. These local laws that depend on international agreements can suddenly empower those benign looking voluntary deals.
Obama’s hidden climate leverage Brian H. Potts
A few weeks ago, a group of 13 prominent environmental law professors and attorneys released a 91-page report outlining this new approach, which would allow EPA to use existing laws to quickly and efficiently regulate all pollution sources, in all states
Here’s how it works: A rarely used provision of the Clean Air Act — Section 115 — gives EPA the authority to mandate that every U.S. state cut its emissions by whatever amount the agency determines is necessary to protect public health and welfare if two things happen.
First, EPA must receive a report or studies from an “international agency” showing that U.S. air pollution is anticipated to endanger public health or welfare in a foreign country. The many reports put out by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change over the past few decades meet this requirement.
Second, EPA must determine that the foreign country harmed by U.S. pollution has given the U.S. “essentially the same rights with respect to the prevention … of air pollution occurring in that country.” In other words, there needs to be reciprocity. That’s where the newly signed Paris agreement becomes important. The Paris agreement satisfies this reciprocity requirement because there are now nearly 190 countries planning to reduce their emissions, at least in part, to protect one another’s health and welfare.
The means justifies the ends…
Through the completion of an international climate deal, this plan would effectively allow the president to sidestep Congress and take full control over each states’ energy sector. It would give the White House enormous power. States’ rights activists would rightly scream bloody murder.
But while these arguments are justified, the fact is that Congress has proved unwilling to address the looming threat of climate change. Section 115 may not be the best way to do that, but right now it’s the only one.
No Brian, Section 115 is not the only way to address climate change. There’s the old fashioned method of persuading the voters…
Read more: politico.com
h/t Chris D
Big Bro is truly Big Brother
( & the IPCC, CRU & NASA are in charge of the Memory Hole)
172
Effectively a dictatorship under a different name.
190
O’Bumma = O’Brien
( if you apply homogenization )
21
Pattoh, would you explain your “equation”. My last name is O’Brien, I am an American, I never voted for that neo-communist buffoon obama so what exactly are you going on about.
20
Didn’t Obama claim an Irish link somewhere? I seem to remember some song about Irish O’Bama?
I’ve some Irish ancestry too.
20
Get yourself a copy of Orwell’s 1984 – where Big Brother, Memory Holes, the Ministry of Truth, the Ministry of Love & perpetual war came from-
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
20
Sorry OB
No affront intended. O’Brien was a character in 1984 & a tool of Big Brother/INGSOC
( Some what as I perceive BO to be dancing to George S’s tune [ who in turn appears to be dancing to the same rhythm that was the cadence for Maurice Strong ])
Perhaps I am stuck on the phenomenal prescience of Orwell’s ~post WW2 words.
10
Name the enemy. Obama is simply enabling a collective oligarchy of corporatism, greenism along with the usual totalitarians of the left (socialists, fascists, et al). In the US system, when one must add the Supreme Court to validate the oligarchy.
The only novel aspect of this, is the planning that made implementation of blanket EPA dictates possible. Don’t be fooled for one minute that implementing massive CO2 reductions was not planned and gamed well before the Paris agreement. It takes weeks, if not months, for a group of lawyers to write a 91 page strategy paper.
As soon as they can, the EPA will implement this as a mandate. There seems to me to be no downside since it would become just another line item in the litany of GOP complaints. Even is they lose the 2016 elections, they’ll campaign on CO2 for the rest of our lifetimes. Think of it as a perpetual funding scheme.
10
“First, there can be no real question that GHG emissions in the U.S. are a
form of air pollution and contribute to climate change, which endangers health and
welfare in countries all around the world. ”
Is that it? Everybody knows. No real question? Endangers health and welfare? GHG emissions?
Are they talking about CO2? The stuff from which all life on earth is made? Where more is good for everything? What Climate Change? Who actually said we can control CO2 levels anyway? No one.
The vilification without naming carbon dioxide, which everyone breathes out and which is essential for life is now simply an excuse for lawyers, bankers and politicians to bypass democracy. In Australia our faux PM is all three, thanks to a coup in a backroom with the willing assistance of our ABC for which he was minister. As Lord Monckton warns, democracy is at stake here. We want our real PM back, the one who called climate change socialism masquerading as environmentalism, the PM who said climate change is crap.
603
As humans inhale air containing about 0.04% CO2 and exhale air containing about 4% CO2; roughly 100 times greater CO2 concentration, it is vital that this is reduced to save the planet…
¯
So to ensure worthless strenuous activity is minimized, so preventing an undue increase in exhaled CO2 levels, I propose some humans – especially government officials, state and local officials, together with many judges, etc., – must be restrained from any strenuous activity like typing, reading, or trying to think too much. I propose that they only be allowed to watch reruns of daytime TV soaps from a recumbent position (any TV programs from here, here, and here, or and other national archive of TV soaps.)
¯
Also the least useful in society e.g. lawyers, bankers, secondary market traders, etc., must be put into a state of medicated torpor for the foreseeable future.
Remember this is done only as part of the vital measures required if we are to save the planet, and protect future generations.
¯
Only with such measures in place can the rest of us can get on with living full, healthy, and productive lives free from unreasonable stress.
🙂
151
Since the 1970s, each of China and India have increased their populations by 1 billion people. This is not sustainable but how much more sensible is a world carbon dioxide tax?
At three tons of CO2 exhaled per year, the combined extra CO2 output is twice Australia’s entire output of CO2. So you are right, they need to stop breathing hard and we can heat our homes, drive our cars and work on computers. The extra 5 billion people are the problem.
Or possibly the UN should amend its charter and not prevent war and famine and pestilence, they should be encouraging it, to save the planet. Maybe that is the brief of the IPCC? It is hard to imagine how otherwise taxing CO2 is going to save anybody from anything. Every thief says he is just redistributing wealth.
101
lawyers, bankers, secondary market traders, etc. .. You left out merchant bankers and our self appointed PM
100
If CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and has to be restrained somehow, how do we stop people breathing and enjoying the likes of a glass of ale and piece of bread, not to mention a reduction in population?
It’s going from the sublime to the ridiculous driven by scientific illiterates.
220
Interesting question is it not? But then, CO2 was never the issue in the first place, was it?
130
They don’t notice the elephant sitting right in their lap, the many tons of water vapor which is a a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. But then, you see, they can’t so easily propose to regulate (read reduce) water vapor because it doesn’t come from conspicuous human activity, can they?
170
Nearly every industry involves the creation of H2O, the terrible pollutant and vast amounts are generated or just evaporated to allow energy creation even from Nuclear.
Humans are made almost entirely from H2O and CO2. A bit of calcium for bones and a tiny bit of iron and trace elements. So humans are both polluters and pollutants and there was an Australian Federal tax on burial and cemeteries as well as people are the problem. Trees too are almost pure CO2 and H2O. Awful things. Dangerous pollutants all and yes, H2O is the great controller of our weather. Without CO2 and H2O, we would be far better off surely. We should ban life on earth, apparently. As the eternally depressed robot Marvin said in the Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Life, don’t talk to me be about Life.
140
TdeF
You might recall a few years ago that Tim Flabbergasted was advocating the extraction of teeth from each corpse prior to cremation.
He had determined “scientifically”, as only Tim is wont to do, that the combustion of the amalgam in fillings causes so much mercury poisoning that he issued the warning “We’ll all be killed!”.
110
Tim trying to do arithmetic. Now that’s amusing.
90
It’s true that water vapor is created by all sorts of human activities, even breathing. But it would be there in about the same amount if there was no human activity, indeed even if there were no humans at all. So how do you reduce it in the atmosphere when 3/4 of the planet is covered with water, a huge surface from thich the stuff evaporates constantly?
30
It is only a logical extension to make a point. You can no more eliminate gaseous CO2, even if you wanted to do so. The amount in the atmosphere is only 2% of the free CO2 in the same water. The very idea of eliminating or reducing either water or CO2 is wrong, absurd, misguided, silly but if you are talking Greenhouse Gases, by far the dominant one is H2O in its gaseous form.
10
We agree on that. It’s certainly wrong to think that the amount of either one can be somehow regulated back to some magical value that is gong yo be OK with nature. If the natural world around us could speak, I wonder what level of CO2 it would say is what’s “right”. Probably it would laugh and leave us to our foolishness.
00
That’s right Roy; it has nothing to do with reducing CO2. It’s all just another tax grab. I thought we all agreed on this some weeks ago. They will do anything to get their scam implemented to the full extent. Also, I’m sick and tired of them calling CO2 a poison. It’s a blatant lie. I drink lots of soda water with a little lime or lemon, and it hasn’t killed me. In fact it makes me feel better.
140
I don’t think this is “just another tax grab.” It certainly is a way to separate citizens from their money, but, more than that, it’s a ploy to hand power to unelected bureaucrats to create laws without reference to any elected body. This kind of thing has been going on for a long time, in many previously democratic jurisdictions, but this must be the first time that the activities of bureaucrats in one country have been sanctioned not by the electorate in that country, or even by the stupid politicians, but by the bureaucrats in another country altogether. *
Really, the UN could do worse than to sponsor the creation of a pliant state, always ready to claim to be the victim of other people’s actions. They could call it “Ruritania”, I suppose, but they could always fall back on the Maldives.
* I am all too well aware of the eu, but this takes the power-grab beyond anything that Brussels had previously dreamt of, although it’s easy to see that this genuinely is the stuff of eurocrats’ dreams.
61
Yes and no – if *everything* that emits CO2 is to be regulated, then that applies to humans too.
Now you see the whole plan coming together – this is a crushing total dictatorship being formed world wide.
From a conservative Biblical Christian perspective, I can see how the Biblical AntiChrist may eventually rise out of this – in Scripture, the antiChrist has a throne, solves the worlds intractable problems and governs the whole world for a short time, but also declares himself to be “God”. But he is the ultimate deceiver and liar, but will eventually trick people into taking the Mark ( 666 ) and worship him as “God”.
If the UN manages via CAGW to create a global legislative strait jacket for the whole world, the odds are shortening by the day of the rise of the AntiChrist IMHO…..
120
How can CO2 be a greenhouse gas when it increases and there is no temperature change? What sort of greenhouse has no roof and no floor and no walls? Why is a temperature change always bad? What is climate change and why is it always bad and how does CO2 cause it if the temperature does not change? As all food, trees and plants are made entirely from CO2 and H2O and sunlight, why is extra CO2 bad for anything? Where is this 100 metre sea level rise? Or even one metre? Tuvalu? Sydney? Currently 170mm in a century, maybe. Where are our acid oceans? They do not exist and never will. Facts. Al Gore promised us the end of the world in ten years, ten years ago. You cannot trust politicians with science.
290
The currently touted increase in temperature due to CO2 is 0.14oC per decade.
Every time I see that, I translate it into 1.4oC per century.
One and a half degrees in more than most lifetimes, or one and a half degrees, spread over four generations.
What is so frightening about that?
And will not those future generations have other approaches to solving the problem, it there is really a problem, a hundred years from now.
130
“What is so frightening about that? “
And if that warming ever actually eventuates, it would be in the higher northern latitudes in winter.. like now from the current EL Nino.
This would be TOTALLY BENEFICIAL. Vast areas of land and sea opened up for use.
There is absolutely NOTHING to worry about even if the mythical 1.5C or 2C warming did occur.
41
The original scare was 0.5C in ten years, even if that might have been just technology change from thermometers. Even the very mathematically challenged Gore and Flannery could work out 5C in 100 years, so it was game on. That was the wonderful, exciting scare. Critical warming. Rapid, unstoppable warming. Tipping points. Doom. The greatest moral challenge in a generation. All hopeful leftist fantasy blamed on successful industrial democracies and have all the scaremongers benefited? Yes. World fame. Australian of the year. Billionaire status. Even a Nobel peace prize! Who cares that it was a bug on the windscreen of life?
50
Everyone, including those scientists not on the dole from the AGW/CC gravy train, should be screaming bloody murder about this usurpation of power by the EPA. Combustion of fossil fuels is merely returning carbon dioxide to the atmosphere from whence it came. It is ridiculous that this can be harmful in any way. Carbon dioxide has three very narrow absorption bands in the IR while water vapor has a very broad absorption. It is water in all its forms- water vapor, water ice and liquid water- that keep our planet warm, and cool.
180
At a news conference last week (October 2015) in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.
Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
120
According to this, it’s a done deal – we are to blame for GHG and all the evils that come of it. I am so (not) ashamed.
https://nicholas.duke.edu/about/news/long-term-global-warming-requires-external-drivers
“By examining how Earth cools itself back down after a period of natural warming, a study by scientists at Duke University and NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory confirms that global temperature does not rise or fall chaotically in the long run. Unless pushed by outside forces, temperature should remain stable.
The new evidence may finally help put the chill on skeptics’ belief that long-term global warming occurs in an unpredictable manner, independently of external drivers such as human impacts. “
02
Another stitch-up. What is their definition of chaos?
“there are other important, previously less appreciated, mechanisms at work too,” . No chill on sceptics’ beliefs there.
It took them a long time to wake up to this. Had they been attending to the science instead of the ad hominems they could have saved a lot of time.
10
Some very clever and experienced people are trying to analyse just what Obama is attempting to achieve where enforced ‘Climate Mandates’ are concerned, money, power, greed, debts, promises, pacts are all good ideas for researching answers however it could be even simpler that those.
Every leader in most countries will have a favourite cause and the establishment connected to that becomes a pet project for that leader, whether it be military, financial, transport, tourism, education, medicine or in this case environmental, except where you would figure the leader of the free world support an environmental cause that would benefit his country as Abraham Lincoln foresaw in this case the exact opposite is true.
Obama’s deep political views are emerging with the deconstruction of capitalism via environmentalism via the grossly over powered EPA.
320
He sees himself as a world leader, not an American leader. The world didn’t elect him but some pretended they did with the noble peace prize. He’s the Tony Blair of American, no depth, a surfer on the world stage.
00
Such are the nuts and bolts of eco-global governance by bureaucracy, the devil in the detail of how the UN aims to achieve its larger objective of an “
sustainable” eco-socialist World, abetted by Obama et al.The linked UN document here lays out all the objectives and the means by which they are to be systematically achieved by 2020 and 2030 “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” outlined in the “Means of Implementation”, sections 39 – 46, and “Means of implementation and the Global Partnership” sections 60 – 71. Trade and finance play central roles, as does inter-generational, “activisim.” It is all conducted and implemented at global, national and regional levels.
It becomes chillingly clear.
210
Beware the role that will be possible for the TPP in the climate scam should it come into existence.
120
“Transforming Our World”
This is actually an ad by Emirates Airline and Boeing. This 2 minute video clip features Dubai. However take a look at what Oil can do for you!
http://viewfromabove.emirates.com/#/2d/city/dubai/detail
50
I usually enjoy my visits there although I avoid the main tourist traps! I do prefer to fly there by Airbus A380 rather than Boeing 777.
10
How long before it looks like Babylon?
20
Doesn’t it already?
00
The Politico piece on the warmunist law professor paper is as flawed as the paper. Section 115 of the Clean Air Act is available on line. It is beyond a legal stretch to say the specifically non-binding COP21 meets the specific statutory reciprocity requirement of equivalent legal rights. Nonbinding means there are NO legal enforcement rights. This is warmunist drivel.
The real show is the 26 state lawsuit against EPA on grounds that Obama’s Clean Power Plan is unconstitutional. Last week the federal appelate court in DC (stacked very liberal) refused to issue a preliminary injunctive stay. The states appealed to SCOTUS for a stay until the case is resolved. Chief Justice Roberts got it last Thursday, today gave the EPA until this Thursday to respond, and he is likely to rule early next week. He alone will decide on the preliminary injunction. IMO a stay is justified on two grounds. First, starting to comply now puts a great burden and cost on the states. Second, they are very likely to prevail. Harvard Law School’s Larry Tribe has written a masterful brief for the states. Well worth a read for those with an interest in US constitutional law.
270
Hope you’re right on the stay. Seems like every time something is “obviously unconstitutional”, they change a word or two and suddenly everything is right as rain.
130
Actually, it’s change a judge or two …
I hope I’m wrong, but I suspect this is the Achilles Heel in Ristvan’s optimism above
A single (cherry-picked ?) judge from the Supreme Court was the initial enabler for the EPA
90
Jo, you should be proud that the first responses to your post has produced such insightful analysis into what may prove the turning point of the global warming delusion.
Why should these “13 prominent environmental law professors” have any more connection with the world as we know it than any other random 13 academics. You would have thought that they would have taken the elementary precaution of recruiting a 14th so as not to be an unlucky number.
TeDF exposes the challenge to free democracy that is being perpetrated here,
Yonniestone the drivers of vanity (and the attendant hubris) that underlie the actions of the premier players and Manfred the blind arrogance of the global elite who really believe they can control the world.
Rud, you put your finger on the fatal flaw. This issue of “states rights” precipitated the civil war, the last time the US was ever in danger of obliteration. NO external body can overrule that and the US constitution. “Agenda 2030” is dead in the water if a duly elected congress decides.
How much military, economic or even moral power does the UN deploy. Can they command China, India or even Russia?
Section 115 could cease to exist tomorrow if Congress so decided. The Global Warming narrative is that fragile.
Never mind your five IPPC assessment reports, one vote in congress and it is all gone.
Not to soon I hope, what otherwise will I do in my dotage – watch bloody cricket?
210
Rud,
Great points well made.
“….Harvard Law School’s Larry Tribe has written a masterful brief for the states. Well worth a read for those with an interest in US constitutional law.”
Do you happen to have a link?
Mentat
50
That quote is from Istvan’s comment above at #5
It suggsts caution to leaven the optimism …
40
Rud,
For the avoidance of confusion I’m asking for a link to the paper by Harvard’s Larry Tribe.
Thanks
Mentat
40
I’m not Istvan but anyway:
http://www.masseygail.com/pdf/Tribe-Peabody_111%28d%29_Comments_%28filed%29.pdf
40
Hi Mentat —
here’s a link, it’s not the actual brief but it’s something written by the same professor regarding why it’s unconstitutional:
http://today.law.harvard.edu/why-epa-climate-plan-is-unconstitutional/
10
in the uSA I thought income tax was voluntary, however the 3 letter agencies basically harass people and stop them truly testing this in court by effectively ignoring the law…..so in theory anything is possible….
70
Someone tell Brian that climate change is a permanently looming threat. Just consider the little ups and downs since the wipe-out of the Younger Dryas a mere twelve thousand years ago: Bond Events, migration periods, LIA, Laki-style eruptions, Tambora-scale eruptions…Maybe in Brian’s mind they’re not threats because most involved cooling. Maybe Brian thinks coolings don’t cause drought. Maybe he lives near a coastal landslip and is alarmed by that elusive sea level jump the rest of us have to squint to see. Maybe he’s a crypto-creationist and believes that Bass Strait just appeared ten thousand years ago.
Most likely, Brian couldn’t care less.
70
The main battle ground in our struggle against global warming as never been in the science lab , its always been in the political arena , sceptics won the argument over the science years ago . Democracy in the west is just a sham , Obama has planned to circumvent the Democratic process and go via the TPP for at least two years now , consider that the cost of an election campaign in America has become crazy money and that the democrats have been funded to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars by the green blob industry , that in turn depends on tax payer subsidies and grants for its profits , so Obama and his motely crew are nothing more than lobbyists for their funders , that’s why you Americans absolutely must give your support to Trump !!! Because he is the only candidate that is so wealthy he doesn’t need to bend the knee to any vested interest funder , the worst case scenario is that Trump does not win the Republican hot seat and carries out his threat to stand as an independent ( he has the money to do just that ) the result would be a divided right of center vote at election time and power handed to the Democrats on a plate
20
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I’m with Cruz. Ted Cruz. 🙂 He also just won the Iowa caucus, and decisively so.
http://theresurgent.com/ted-cruz-restitutor-orbis/
I don’t have much faith in a guy who supported Mitch MccConnell AGAINST the Tea Party and who endorses Obamacare. Really, there’s something quite immoral about forcing religious organizations to violate their beliefs by funding abortion.
20
Two hundred odd years later, Americans vote in Caesars. Rule not by Congress or Senate, but elected dictator.
And they are okay with it.
The world changes before our eyes and no longer for the best.
50
I wrote the following soon after the failed 2009 IPCC Conference in Copenhagen. It remains pertinent today.
The AGW-scare was killed at the failed 2009 IPCC Conference in Copenhagen. I said then that the scare would continue to move as though alive in similar manner to a beheaded chicken running around a farmyard. It continues to provide the movements of life but it is already dead. And its deathly movements provide an especial problem.
Nobody will declare the AGW-scare dead: it will slowly fade away. This is similar to the ‘acid rain’ scare of the 1980s. Few remember that scare unless reminded of it but its effects still have effects; e.g. the Large Combustion Plant Directive (LCPD) exists. Importantly, the bureaucracy which the EU established to operate the LCPD still exists. And those bureaucrats justify their jobs by imposing ever more stringent, always more pointless, and extremely expensive emission limits which are causing enforced closure of UK power stations.
Bureaucracies are difficult to eradicate and impossible to nullify.
As the AGW-scare fades away those in ‘prime positions’ will attempt to establish rules and bureaucracies to impose those rules which provide immortality to their objectives. Guarding against those attempts now needs to be a serious activity.
Richard
264
Nobody, unless insane, would claim that large bureaucracies are efficient. They are slow, cumbersome, inefficient and costly. They propagate themselves by growing in size, expense and control over matters not directly related to their supposed mission. Unfortunately in many countries the combined size of all those on the government payroll is around 50% of the voting public, making it virtually impossible to dismantle them. In the UK the BBC, many charities and other NGO’s are getting funds from the EU; guess how they will campaign in any referendum about leaving the EU.
The only hope is that they overreach themselves and cause pain and suffering to the general voting public. They are going this way in the EU, the UK and in the USA with their energy “policy” which will end in blackouts. There will have to be a reversal but that will be too late and determined governments should be able to cut back on the “public sector”.
As for Obama, he is now entering the lame duck stage. Current politicians and top bureaucrats will be weighing up the disadvantages of being seen on his side when the new administration takes charge. The result will be delays and lack of action in some areas. If the worst happens then the coal and gas fired power plants should shut down for 3 days, preferably in safe Democrat states. That will end all enthusiasm for getting rid of CO2.
160
They are already doing exactly that. What do you think Donald Trump is all about?
90
Roy Hogue:
You ask
Classic USA ultra-right political ‘huff and puff’ that makes much noise but achieves nothing.
There have been several US popular, very rich, far-right political candidates who were ‘front runners’ but won nothing and whose election campaigns are long forgotten. They include, for example, the Naz1 supporters Henry Ford and Charles Lindberg.
Richard
11
Spot on, Richard.
00
Roy, you do know that Richard is a Socialist? Not that that would necessarily cause him to dislike or even a stinky Red Herring Ad-Hom Mr. Trump with a Straw Man Nazi noose?
00
Not that that would necessarily cause him to dislike or even offer a stinky Red Herring Ad-Hom to Mr. Trump with a Straw Man Nazi noose?
[post comment button bump]
00
Yes, I know Richard is a socialist. About Trump I agree more or less with him — Trump is pure trouble. My reason for saying that might differ from Richard’s but I don’t like Trump a bit.
00
Mark D:
In what way do you think my political affiliation has affected the accuracy of my reply to Roy Hogue’s question?
I ask because I don’t see you making any valid dispute with my answer but you do make untrue accusations of “red herring”, “ad hom'”, “straw man” and “Naz1 noose”.
Your post reminds me of why Shakespeare wrote, “Methinks the lady doth protest too much”.
Richard
00
Oh no. You’ve been reading the newspapers and believing them again, haven’t you?
Is it a far right position to value the votes of the people who live in the country more than the people who enter illegally? Well, not really. All countries have laws for allowing immigration. Some are very restrictive (Japan), and Japan isn’t far-right. Neither is Hungary, the Czech Republic, or Poland. Historically, having and enforcing immigration law hasn’t been a far-right position. As memory serves, it’s a position that has been embraced by every single US president up until Clinton.
Trump endorses Obamacare. That’s not a far-right position.
Trump doesn’t care much for religious liberties (cf. Kim Davis). Again, a far-right position? Not really.
Trump is very much a deal-maker, which means he’s no ideologue. You really can’t be one of those scary people without having some solid core of scariness.
You might want to read up on what Trump, the man, actually endorses before you characterize him as “far right”. Then again, you’d be better off to ditch that scare phrase completely and describe his positions.
10
InRussetShadows:
In attempt to justify his racist remarks, Trump made untrue assertions about Muslims making it impossible for the Metropolitan Police to operate in parts of London.
Richard
00
‘Nobody will declare the AGW-scare dead: it will slowly fade away.’
Not so sure, imagine the satellites and ground stations all reporting a deep drop in temperatures, surely that would quicken the pace of destruction.
80
el gordo:
You suggest
Well, I can’t “imagine” the surface stations indicating “a deep drop in temperatures”: they would be “adjusted” to avoid that;
please see this http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/giss/hansen-giss-1940-1980.gif
and read this http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc0102.htm
I can see nearly two decades of no “rise in temperatures” is already indicated by satellites while atmospheric CO2 continues to rise, but the AGW-scare continues to slowly fade away and not exhibit “destruction”.
Richard
51
‘I can’t “imagine” the surface stations indicating “a deep drop in temperatures”: they would be “adjusted” to avoid that.’
The Klimatariat is going to fight tooth and nail to hang onto the ring, but if a serious cooling trend develops only on satellite then Ted Cruz might feel obliged to point out the divergence between terrestrial and satellite observations. The game should theoretically be up.
This is the reality as of 2010 and we are in for a drop.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/hadley/Hadley-global-temps-1850-2010-web.jpg
21
el gordo:
You say
That ignores the facts that for the period since 1997
(a) satellite data indicates a cooling trend at 95% significance
(b) ‘surface’ data indicates a warming trend at 95% significance.
See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/01/27/final-2015-statistics-now-includes-december-data/
To date Ted Cruz has not felt “obliged to point out the divergence between terrestrial and satellite observations”.
Richard
10
Not yet, steady as we go.
“The satellites that actually measure the temperature, that we’ve launched into the air to measure the temperature, they have recorded no significant warming whatsoever for the last 18 years.”
Ted Cruz
30
el gordo:
OK, you have quoted Ted Cruz demonstrating that he knows of the divergence between terrestrial and satellite observations but he has not felt “obliged to point out the divergence between terrestrial and satellite observations”.
Richard
00
Timely to revisit Maurice Strong’s life & works:-
http://thedailycoin.org/?p=61099
50
The chief engineer of using natural climate change and the last warming period for political agenda purposes.
50
Maurice Strong, Climate Crook
70
http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2015/12/discovering-maurice-strong/
50
The same strategy was used by PM Hawke, external treaty obligations, to can the second stage of Gordon power scheme several decades ago against the democratic wishes of the state. The 180 MW would have been useful and saved a lot of CO2 as well, but that’s history now, instead they require 720 MW of subsidised windfarm for equivalence!
120
Unfortunately it still isn’t equivalent…Hint, what happens when the Basslink shuts down? They have to start up a gas fired station, so much for wind power.
190
Some other interesting questions to ponder:
a) Would the $2m expended on securing 24 Diesel gen sets be necessary had TVPS continued to operate post HT acquistion in the manner in which it operated continuously since Sept 2009? Should they be required, the fuel bill would be in the order of 285 litres per MWh. About $500?
b) Would the diesel gen sets be necessary had HT made the decision to address the issues with the 60 Mw Trent60WLE when these issues came to light?
c) Would the diesel gen sets be necessary had maintenance of the PWPS twinpaks not been curtailed following the HT acquisition? As opposed to wasting it on a miscreant propaganda campaign to convince King Island residents they wanted and needed noisy bird slicing giant fans?
d) How would the current situation be different had HT opted to build a 250 Mw coal fired power station at Fingal rather than wasting it on useless windmills?
e) How much did Canberra’s interference in the electricity market cost the typical consumer of electricity in Tasmania?
e) If public ownership means each and every voter and customer owns a part of an SOE, who is responsible for the cost of errors in judgement?
f) The current situation is indicative of the drawbacks entailed in reliance on unreliable so-called “renewables”. Yet many clamber for “more renewables”. When proved wrong, only an [snip] will double down.
So many questions. Too few answers. The opposition is requesting an inquiry. One could hope that if such is the case the right questions are asked rather than swept under the carpet.
[“Uncle Fred”, avoiding what I snipped will keep you out of moderation.] AZ
40
I note that the dams have held their levels this week no doubt due to the TVPS coming back on line. Interesting questions about the 24 MW of diesel gensets, and another 34 being contemplated. Was the cost of the gensets offset by the revenue obtained from running the dam levels so low in the first place?
20
The assumption was a capacity factor of 25%, but widely dispersed farms to avoid an Adelaide brown-out.
30
There are thousands of UN Treaties signed by UN member nations, the plan was engineered by a former Australian Labor Party Attorney General Evatt who presented his plan in the 1950s. That was to create as many treaties as possible covering every possibility to be used to get around the sovereign laws of nations if deemed necessary by governments.
40
Yes Obama, do it, do it! Please, please do it.
It will solidify your position as the worst President ever. C’mon Obama, do it!
60
Let’s see what happens when the shit hits the fan for real and society begins to actually shut down.
Since there’s nothing left to do but watch it, I’m going to be laughing at the climate change “experts”, whether they be scientists, politicians or even lawyers. I imagine that blaming the other guy will be the most popular game in DC.
60
I guess the description of reality isn’t approved of anymore. So I’m in moderation. Nuts.
40
I don’t know which scares me more, fear of words or my government.
50
When I am tempted to think about Socialism as a benign nuisance, I hark back to the true face of the Left, and how the Bolsheviks ruthlessly eradicated the Romanov royal family in Russia in 1918…..
80
A wise elderly man replied to a question regarding why do leftists support Islam.
He replied that’s because they have a common political enemy, capitalists.
60
OriginalSteve:
When the far right obtained power in Germany they attempted to exterminate Jews, socialists, communists and Romanies. And when I am tempted to forget that, then I remind myself of supporters of the right who pretend Bolsheviks were socialists.
Richard
00
Their definition of “pollution” would be interesting.
70
Getting around congress means more vacations …
2008
“The future president was talking about how those running for president need to be prepared to “give their life to it.”
“The bargain that any president strikes with is, you give me this office and in turn my, fears, doubts, insecurities, foibles, need for sleep, family life, vacations, leisure is gone,” Obama said.
“I am giving myself to you.”
He “then proceeded to hit the golf course 186 times (and counting).”
POLITICS FLASHBACK: Obama Promises No Vacations For Himself As President [VIDEO]
80
Newsflash
‘Texas Senator Ted Cruz has won the Iowa Republican caucuses, the first vote of the US 2016 presidential election.’
90
Good News
90
I wouldn’t mind Cruz but look at the stats on how often Iowa results predicted the outcome. If Rubio votes were split, who would have gotten more of them? Cruz or Trump?
I find the Democrat race more interesting, I would have never thought there were so many willing to side with an avowed socialist. This is where the Democrat party has morphed. Then Hillary must be panicking because she may face indictment over her e-mail abuses and negligence. If that happens Sanders would be the Democrats only choice (or a write-in) since several states candidate registrations have closed and more will soon. Against Bernie Sanders it should be an easy win for any Republican. I think Bernie is too much on the fringe and his give-away policy proposals are way too expensive (taxes are never popular)
Interestingweird times….20
Off topic but mentioned over the weekend: Dr. Bowman was on ABC 24 TV this morning talking about the Tasmanian Central Plateau fires being a direct result of climate change and the havoc of killing 1000 year old Pencil Pines. Well most of the trees will die depending at what time of the day the fire passed. If it crept by in the evening I imagine those will survive albeit singed.
The fires were caused by an atypical weather system travelling through Bass St. from east to west, and dry lightning strikes, both of which are atypical events in Tasmania. Apparently, there was a lack of Spring rain and the vegetation was fairly dry.
Growth of the alpine pines is very slow, but I would point out most trees are only 40 to 60 cm. diameter (at 1.30m from the base) and with a diameter increment of 1-3mm. per an. most are only 200-300 years of age. A 1000 year old tree would have survived several such fires over its lifetime. There will be a slow recovery of the vegetation, cushion plants, etc. as has occurred on Mt. Wellington after the disasterous 1967 fire. Since the native pines are very easily grown from cuttings a small planting program would be helpful. The pencil pine only seeds every 10 years or so and seedling growth is minimal.
If the same weather conditions had occurred in southern Tas., the result would have been catastrophic due to accumulated fuel loads and lack of active management due to World Heritage status. I am not sure how this will not occur in the near future even if climate change is not real, and perhaps it merits urgent consideration. This summer there have been some large fires in the country areas of WA, Victoria and now Tasmania, either coming out of National Parks or from unmananged crown land, and there is a strong case to resume fuel reduction burning programmes which have been stymied by the Greens.
70
Did Bowman explain exactly how AGW caused these fires, or added to their intensity, or whatever else propaganda sprang to his mind ?
Or did he do a “Trenberth” and assert without evidence that ALL “extreme” weather is caused by anthropogenic climate change ?
We have reached the stage, long expected, where evidence is not required, not at all. Obviously I’m not surprised but not much depressed either. It’s like the web of traffic cameras – not going to go away, probably ever, so one lives with it
70
No, he didn’t explain anything, just an assertion.
50
Pretty hard to argue about there being a lack of spring rain: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/index.shtml#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ%5Bgraph%5D=rain&tQ%5Barea%5D=tas&tQ%5Bseason%5D=0911&tQ%5Bave_yr%5D=0
As a keen bushwalker, I have seen how dry it has been recently and therefore it wasn’t surprising that dry lightning strikes started more fires than usual and these fires then kept burning. It would be interesting to see some figures about lightning strikes and dry lightning strikes as these are allegedly unusual and a result of…. you all know how this goes.
Interestingly, and despite it also being a very dry spring in 1914 some of my warmist friends just say that they don’t believe in calling it a 1 in 100 year event!!! Perhaps after I’ve told them 100 times this might change, at least I have hard facts.
40
This would be a great abuse of Process and a repudiation of Democracy. A takeover.
We have all heard from the progressives that they want Democracy suspended in some cases.
Little is it known the plans are so far advanced and there is a belief imbedded in the
young that Democracy is not the best system of government, but no poll has said what system they
believe is.
Meanwhile, I believe Europe is falling into such a deep mire over Merkels loss of reality on migration
that the last thing it will be interested in for a while will be creating more problems pushing AGW.
I would think that especially applies to Merkel’s Germans. Is Obama looking for a UN job to fill his time
as he doesn’t seem too popular in America and this being inflicted could be his valete gift / salute.
60
BLAME CANADA
I can see this happening as a move by the new Liberal Trudeau government – as one of Obama’s “pincers” – makes sense why was so giddy to meet with Trudeau.
It will play well for Trudeau as well as it will be seen as “payback” for Obama cancelling the Xcel oil pipeline
to the Gulf last year – plus Liberals are closet “anti-americans”.
It will be a perfect solution for both traitors to their nations.
20
Can’t wait to read what the warmist have to say about csiro latest find…..an erupting volcano on heard island in Antarctica…you think it might have caused some ice to Melt? Surely it contains more heat than manmade CO2….
20