Climate Change: ‘A Shrinking President’s Last Chance to Lead?’
Obama Unilaterally Pushes Cap-And-Trade On Unwilling States
http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/02/obama-unilaterally-pushes-cap-and-trade-on-unwilling-states/…
UK Guardian: ‘It’s OK to say ‘climate change’ on the campaign trail again – ‘It could be a political plus for Democrats between now and 2016’
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/02/climate-change-campaign-trail-obama-epa-rules…
Nearly 18 Years Without Global Warming, Obama’s EPA Rule
New ad ‘compares the threat that EPA regulations pose to the country’s electric grid to that posed by terrorists’
Reprinted from https://epafacts.com/full-page-ad-highlights-epa-threat/
Full-page Ad Highlights EPA Threat
The ad reads: “What would you call a radical organization that threatens to shut down 25 percent of our electric grid?” The potential answers – anarchist, militia, and terrorist – are all struck out, leaving “Obama’s EPA” as the only answer. It then explains: “Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has issued regulations that threaten to shut down about 25 percent of the energy that powers America’s electric grid. With radicals like this in power, who needs enemies?”
Over the next two decades, EPA regulations are expected to contribute to the closing of 60 percent of America’s coal-fired power plants, according to a new report conducted by IHS Energy on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Such a regulatory onslaught threatens grid reliability. Philip Moeller, a commissioner for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), said that EPA regulations could cause rolling blackouts in parts of the country. And, acting FERC Chairman Cheryl LaFleur mentioned “new environmental regulations” alongside physical and cyber threats in her congressional testimony on the biggest challenges the nation’s electric grid faces. Our ad highlights this often overlooked threat.
…
EPA Regs ‘Guaranteed to Succeed Retroactively’: Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer predicts EPA regs will be credited with ‘solving’ global warming if temps fail to rise
…WaPo: ‘Dividing Democrats’: Obama climate regs: ‘Some of the loudest cries of opposition are likely to come from members of his party’
Al Gore: ‘Today’s EPA announcement is the most important step taken to combat the climate crisis in our country’s history’
Today’s @EPA announcement is the most important step taken to combat the climate crisis in our country’s history. http://ow.ly/xwmEJ
Obama brings back global warming from the dead: Unveils controversial emissions cap on power plants
…Climatologists: ‘An Appalling Lack of Truthfulness at the EPA’ – EPA gives false ‘impression that heat-related deaths in U.S. are on the rise’
‘The president announced his Climate Action Plan aimed at mitigating future climate change by executive fiat—in other words, avoiding Congress and public opinion—and simply commanding from on high that U.S. carbon emissions be reduced (never mind that they were already declining, or that any U.S. reductions, no matter how large, would have no meaningful effect on the future course of the climate).’
…
Perhaps there is no finer example of the politicization of “science” than what the “Indicators” report the EPA just handed us.
The figure below is a portion of a screen capture from the “Heat-Related Deaths” section of the EPA’s new “Climate Change Indicators” website. It is labeled “Deaths Classified as ‘Heat-Related’ in the United States, 1979–2010.”
We don’t know anyone who could look at this chart and not be left with the strong impression that heat-related deaths in the United States are on the rise—apparently confirming the president’s concern about climate change and underscoring his desire to do something about it.
But notice the asterisk at the bottom of the box. Here’s the text associated with it:
Between 1998 and 1999, the World Health Organization revised the international codes used to classify causes of death. As a result, data from earlier than 1999 cannot easily be compared with data from 1999 and later.
In other words, you shouldn’t plot pre- and post-1999 data on the same chart because the data are not comparable, lest you mislead the uninitiated reader. The EPA ignores its own warning and instead plots the two sets of not-easily-compared data side by side on the same chart, ensuring that they are compared!
Such an analysis would probably grade out as an F in an undergraduate paper, but perhaps the EPA is suffering from a bit of “Noble Cause Corruption.” After all, they are trying to save us from certain death.
The proper way to view the EPA chart is to put your hand over the data points on the right-hand side of the chart (1999 and onwards) and then over the data points on the left-hand side of the chart (pre-1999 data). In doing so, you’ll see that during both periods the rate of heat-related mortality does not rise.…