French “Supreme Court” Says No to Carbon Tax

Ah, more childish [removed] from Cherman.

I wish he and Dvorak would explain — because I’ve asked a dozen times with no response — why a scientist would try to make money by affirming climate change, when they could make ten times more money taking grants from big industry and publishing studies *against* climate change.

Now wait for the total silence.

ANSWER: It is not just about the money, it is about power. Plus, most scientists haven’t seen nor fabricated the research… it’s just a elite group that has.

Your “friends” are in fact making a major killing off the green energy, global warming political movement. If it goes south they are out of work. They are discredited. They will be lucky to get jobs sweeping floors unless they can come up with something else to scare people with.

These hucksters can’t make more money working for the so called evil oil companies many of whom are set to make billions off the green movement.

I know a cheaper and easier way to get people to take global warming seriously.

Scrape up about 40 million dollars and pay Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh to declare that global climate change is real and human accelerated.

The conservative will all become true believers and stop blocking solutions.

They won’t even notice that they changed their position on the subject!

Seriously, these conservatives believe what their leaders tell them. Science be damned.

Wretched Gnu,

If I worked for the oil companies, and *proved* AGW was false, I’d be out of a job in 5 years.

If I claimed, but was unable to *prove*, AGW was real, I’d have work for myself, my children, my grandchildren, and my great grandchildren. The work would last until the next ice age.

That is your answer.

If 100% of all the taxes and fines went to non-government supported charities, and not a single penny went to government, how many politicians would still support it?

everyone gets caught up in arguing their point, no matter how annoying correct all points may be.

we can all agree that being environmentally friendly is a sign of being an enlightened person.

Al Gore got his Nobel for convincing unenlightened people to be environmentally friendly, whether through poor extrapolation of data on a Hollywood stage or political affiliation, not for being wise. He is a swimsuit model reading poems to push his product

Cap and Trade is just another ill conceived bureaucratic program on top of many others. It is nothing new to politics and all cost will be passed on to the consumer. Reason enough to be opposed to the idea of it.

#5 Gregg – I doubt you could buy off Limbaugh with $40 mil. Beck, maybe. O’Reilly, probably. Palin? Depends on how her book sells.

First let’s get out of the way the one thing that virtually all climatologists do agree on including the alarmist: Even if passed and rigidly enforced Cap and Trade will have virtually no impact on Global Temperatures because the impact on CO2 levels will be trivial. Please do not take my word for this. Go on line and do some research.

That being the case Global Warming is not a reason to pass Cap and Trade.

#5 Actually I believed the “experts” trusting them to go with the data until I tried looking at the data and found out they weren’t publishing much data or letting people look at what they were basing their claims on.

Dude I was taught if your results can’t be repeated by others it’s crap. That is the normal rule in science and these people were and are breaking it. They were doing research largely being paid for by the government based on information paid for and collected using government money so what gives? The only thing I have come up with is this won’t stand up to a careful examination.

I already knew the guy from NASA had been caught doing third rate science or more bluntly his numbers out of Russia were bogus (He made the mistake of publishing some data.) so I went looking at what the other side had to say and they weren’t hiding their data. There results didn’t match up with the claims of the alarmist either.

To repeat in science if others can not repeat your results your results are suspect.

If you say trust me or this is privileged information and you aren’t working for a private cooperation keeping trade secrets…My confidence levels in your claims are in negative numbers.

Worse their modals for predicating future climate trends have already been falsified. The planet has been cooling for the last few years and their modals keep saying that the planet is getting warmer so they are bleeped. None of the alarmist modals work although the various preponets vary greatly on how bad the outcomes are supposed to be. The problem is the real world fails to cooperate.

Last and not least let’s not lose sight of something nearly all climatologist do agree on when it comes to global warming: Cap and Trade will have virtually no impact on global warming even if passed and rigidly enforced according to their modals because the change it will produce on CO2 levels is to small to have a meaningful impact on the outcome.

#16 Examples please…

The AGW religion is at least asleep here in Oslo, Norway where temperature has dropped below -22dgrC and is expected to remain low for the next couple of weeks. Actually, the entire continental Europe is under a cold spell, just as it used to be a few years back.
Global warming has not been an issue since Copenhagen 15 closed. I guess that the excellent assistance of CRU’s ‘Tricky-Phil” Jones and Penn State’s “Hockeystick-Michael” Mann is the reason for that.
It sort of fizzled out after the emails were exposed and the swindle uncovered. Maybe the French courts are giving the arguments of the skeptics a second though, looking out the window and realizing the sky has not fallen?

When human Mad Cow (BSE) first took off in Britian, I made predictions from current data that showed everyone in the UK would be dead in 10 years.

Just because there is a trend in the data, that doesn’t mean you can predict the future.

AGW is worth study, and monitoring, but it will take centuries of data collection to see a trend.

# 14 testtubebaby said, “Did you know that live whales where once the source of fuel?”

I just know I’m going to regret this: Okay TTBaby – tell me how “LIVE” whales were used as fuel. Not dead, harpooned whales that have had their blubber melted down, “LIVE” whales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_whaling

Thank goodness. After a week or so without anti-climate change story I was starting to worry if Dvorak was dead or something…

#5 Sad but true Greg. I’m bemused that global warming has become such a hot button for wingnuts. Looks like a case of “follow the money”… all the powerful interests that would be harmed if AGW was proven true are working with the wingnut leaders (Beck, Limbaugh, etc.)

And #1 was a good point too, studiously avoided by the wingnuts… reminds me of the Onion article:

Powerful Rest And Fluids Industry Influencing Doctors’ Treatment Of Colds

http://theonion.com/content/news/powerful_rest_and_fluids_industry

Damn those tree-hugging, quiche-eating global warming believers, with their countless billions of dollars swaying the debate in their favor! Or not.

#30 Back to your twittering ways I see little pedro… old habits die hard, don’t they?

I’m sure those of you who actually worry about AGW are now resting a lot easier knowing the Russians are on the job and will save us from Apophis:

NASA says collision unlikely, as Russia considers asteroid mission
December 30, 2009 14:22 EST

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia’s space chief is considering a space mission to knock away an approaching asteroid, though NASA officials don’t consider the giant rock a threat to Earth.

When the 885-foot asteroid was discovered in 2004, astronomers gave it as much as a 1-in-37 chance of hitting Earth in 2029. But scientists have been lowering their estimates ever since. Now, a NASA astronomer says the space rock isn’t “anything to worry about.”

Yet, the Russian space chief tells Golos Rossii radio that he’s heard the asteroid is getting closer to a possible impact in about 22 years. He adds that, “People’s lives are at stake.”

He says Russia’s space agency will hold a meeting on the topic soon. He says that, if an asteroid deflection mission is finalized, NASA would be among those invited to join.

If we weren’t so far into the red I’d say having a go at knocking an asteroid off course before we need to do it for real or seriously bad things happen might be a good thing to try and do.

I think the last I heard NASA has stopped looking for bad news rocks because Congress needs to build monuments for Teddy Kennedy, bridges to nowhere, hospitals in places without patients, take working trips to vacation hot spots, or some such.