Audacity of Truth
Rahmbo:
"Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn. He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive."
-Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) on Obama's COS, 3/7/10
Velvet Lair- Legends March 18, 2010
- Some things are just not cute March 18, 2010
- The adventures of the lady spider killer continue March 11, 2010
- Intermission February 19, 2010
- People who allow their dogs to poop in other people’s yards February 16, 2010
Obama’s climate change speech: Choosing fear over hope
Via Fox News:
President Obama promised the United Nations Tuesday that his administration is “determined” to do more to address the nation’s climate change obligations.
But left out of the speech to the General Assembly special session on climate change was the political reality the president faces in trying to keep that promise.
While the House passed a sweeping climate change bill this year, it has stalled in the Senate as health care reform dominates the domestic agenda.
Yet Obama asserted Tuesday that, while the United States was slow to respond to the global warming threat, his administration is doing more to combat climate change than any in history.
He touted progress that has been made during his term, including new standards for fuel efficiency in automobiles and the House version of the so-called cap-and-trade bill — which he called the most important part of U.S. efforts.
“We understand the gravity of the climate threat. We are determined to act. And we will meet our responsibility to future generations,” he said.
Obama warned that a failure to address the problem could create an “irreversible catastrophe.” Obama said time is “running out” to fix the problem but that, “we can reverse it.”
What was that you said last year about “choosing hope over fear,” Mr. President? And does he even have a clue about how arrogant it is to state that human beings have the power to completely “reverse” climate change?
And speaking of climate change arrogance, I wonder if Prince Charles will be giving up his Audis and Jags?
The Prince, who has two Jaguars, two Audis, a Range Rover and still drives an Aston Martin given to him by the Queen on his 21st birthday, said developers had a duty to put public transport and the pedestrian at the heart of their housing schemes.
Speaking about the “domination of the car over the pedestrian”, the future King said: “We must surely be able to organise ourselves… in ways in which we are not dependent on it to such a great extent for our daily needs.”
The Prince said the principle of “elevating the pedestrian above the car” was one of the guiding factors of Poundbury – his model development in Dorset. The importance of “pedestrian friendly public space” is central to the Poundbury ethos.
This kind of public transport-oriented development is fundamental to achieving the ultimate goal of a low carbon community, and it is very likely that such communities, far from being austere, will actually become the sought-after places where people will choose to live and spend their time.”
We anxiously wait for the Prince to lead by setting an example instead of continuing to be another one in a long line of climate change hypocrites (more here).
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
14 Responses to “Obama’s climate change speech: Choosing fear over hope”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Do you think this is Obama being prophetic about the 2010 elections??
Now I know this is about the 2012 elections!!!
Yes We Can!!! – Lorica
Ian Pilmer’s book Heaven and Earth, Global Warming: The Missing Science (LINK), is a blockbuster that explodes the global warming myth. It turned the tide in Australia. I am sending a copy to my Representative and Senators. Maybe if Tea Parties across the nation sent a copy to their Representative and Senators, perhaps even news organizations and well known alarmists? This strategy would make a huge difference in turning the tide against global warming hysteria and could stop cap-and-trade dead in its tracks.
One of the most remarkable changes brought about by Pilmer’s book occurred on April 13, when leading global warming hysteric Paul Sheehan—who writes for the main Sydney newspaper, the Sydney Morning Herald, which has done as much to hype the threat of global warming as any Australian newspaper—reviewed Plimer’s book and admitted he was taken aback. He describes Plimer, correctly, as “one of Australia’s foremost Earth scientists,” and praised the book as “brilliantly argued” and “the product of 40 years’ research and breadth of scholarship.”
What does Plimer’s book say? Here is Sheehan’s summary:
[Much of what we have read about climate change, [Plimer] argues, is rubbish, especially the computer modeling on which much current scientific opinion is based, which he describes as “primitive.”…
The Earth’s climate is driven by the receipt and redistribution of solar energy. Despite this crucial relationship, the sun tends to be brushed aside as the most important driver of climate. Calculations on supercomputers are primitive compared with the complex dynamism of the Earth’s climate and ignore the crucial relationship between climate and solar energy.
To reduce modern climate change to one variable, CO2, or a small proportion of one variable—human-induced CO2—is not science. To try to predict the future based on just one variable (CO2) in extraordinarily complex natural systems is folly.]
In response, this is Sheehan’s conclusion: “Heaven and Earth is an evidence-based attack on conformity and orthodoxy, including my own, and a reminder to respect informed dissent and beware of ideology subverting evidence.” This cannot be interpreted as anything but a capitulation. It cedes to the global warming rejectionists the high ground of being “evidence-based,” and it accepts the characterization of the global warming promoters as dogmatic conformists.
I think we can do this. I know we can.
re: Prince Charles: Ok for thee, but not for me.
Typical thread that runs through the screeds of all the MMGW prophets, especially Algore.
Looks like energy secretary Chu has a few choice words for us dumb folk, calling those who dissent with global warming hysteria “teenagers”.
Hey Chu, it’s not called dissent – it’s called science. Remember science? You know, hypothesis, test, verification, repeatability. Repeat after me Mr. Chu – science is not about your opinion, it is about established facts, you know, those inconvenient truths you and the rest of the global warming empty heads are missing – in droves. Now I would not go and call you a teenager – nope, that would be to kind. A child is a better descriptive for you, Mr. Chu. Now go suck on your thumb and let the grown ups do the real work.
OMG, I hope so! Now we all know what it is like to view the Chicago Political machine on target. This idea that not acting in lightening speed means catastrophe is a “crock.”
I have my inflatable ready just in case this fool finally gets something right, meanwhile I’ll continue to drive my SUV while towing my 26′ boat.
Now GJ, why would Dr. Chu be interested in scientific fact? That would only hamper his (and his prophets’) ability to scare the living bejeebers out of those amoung us too dumb to figure out all they want is power, not to actually DO anything about global warming. I suspect they’ve come to the same conclusion we have, that mankind would have less than a gnat’s chance of actually doing something to affect global warming, but it’s great for getting folks to give up freedoms and donate more to theft vigorish (taxes).
Global warming science is so immature its like blood letting to let th ebad blood out. Most scientists that back it are being paid or pressured to do so. the temperature of the earth changed 5x greater on its own in the last 5000 years than since man has been petrol burning and tree chopping. What a bunch of arses these politicians are, they are going to tax energy consumption and the “brokers” will get rich, just like AGI. Its all ready 100B business and the USA isnt involved. Who do you think will pay for those monsterous brokerage fees? Yep, all the rest of us, including the poor. As a PhD scientist, I am insulted by these arrogant claims, its as bad as their budget estimates.
We need our brilliant politicians to read that book GJ Merits, they are idiots and need an education.
You know, in some less enlightened cultures, if somebody makes a claim based upon “science,” that person is expected to provide proof of his claim, including the raw data and methods used, in order for other people to replicate and test the claim.
As I said, less enlightened cultures. Us, why we’re so sophisticated that when the failed divinty student Al Gore says “Sun God angry! Sun God say, ‘give High Priest Al money! High Priest Al speak special juju to make Sun God calm down!’” we actually pay attention to him. The Professor on Gilligan’s Island was held to a higher standard of proof.
So if the Earth is warming up, why don’t we insist these alarmists provide evidence that it is happening? Dismissing actual drops in global temperatures with “Oh yeah, we knew about this all along – we meant, ummmm, in thirty years it’s going to get hotter” won’t do it. If they claim the sea levels are rising, it is unreasonable to ask for proof of, oh I dunno, this is just me brainstorming here, proof of riisng sea levels? The Maldives have been disappearing for about two decades now (ever since they Paul Erlcih Brigade decided the glaciers we’re rampaging through the streets) and yet – there they sit. No less than they were fifty years ago.
I know, I know, don’t bother pointing it out – I’m a racist, thenkyewveddymuch.
YES!!! More good news!!
LINK
Pretty soon Greenland will be green again and actually start being used to produce livestock and other essentials for people. That ice sheet is a big damn waste of space….much like the space between the ears of most global warming alarmists. – Lorica
Good Lord, Save us please!!! I am so tired of everything that Obama does as being “historic”. Sorry folks, but pandering to the heads of state who have their heads up there a**es, isn’t “historic”. – Lorica
LINK
Headline on Yahoo! home page today:
“In a remarkably blunt address to the U.N., President Obama challenges America’s critics.”
He’s challenging himself, one of the most outspoken critics of the United States in the past eight months? I’m sure he believes this himself as much as he believes in his “solutions” for everything from global kumbayah to the “final solution” for peace in the Middle East (which is the direction he’s headed).
Why don’t their heads just explode?
Great point!