Obama Says Global Warming Science ‘Is Compelling’
Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.: ‘Record 3,151 days and counting with no Florida hurricane and no major U.S. hurricane’ – Longest stretch in over 100 years
It would be a big mistake to conflate hurricane damage with storm frequency or intensity. Consider that the Great Miami Hurricane of 1926 resulted in $76 million in damage when it devastated what is today downtown Miami. Without a doubt, a repeat of that storm would result in much more damage, but how much?…
Oops. New Study finds West Antarctic Ice Sheet outlet glacier being melted by magma – not co2 global warming after all – Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
WSJ Op-Ed: Demonization of climate ‘skeptics’ should raise an alarm for anyone who takes science seriously. Skepticism is the essence of the scientific method
WSJ Op-Ed: Demonization of climate “skeptics” should raise an alarm for anyone who takes science seriously. Skepticism is the essence of the scientific method
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/06/wsj-op-ed-demonization-of-climate.html
Springtime for WarmistsA Beltway commentator endorses “dictatorial” government.By JAMES TARANTOJune 9, 2014 THE WALL STREET JOURNALLast month Rush Limbaugh remarked that the reason for “the re-establishment of climate change and global warming as a new primary impetus of the White House” is that “it offers the president opportunities to be dictatorial.”A defender of the president might counter that “dictatorial” is overwrought. After all, whether or not his proposed regulations are wise, they are based on an act of Congress and an interpretation of that law that has passed muster with the Supreme Court. They won’t take effect until members of the public have had the opportunity to make their views known to the Environmental Protection Agency. And Obama will remain in office for only another 2½ years or so, after which his (democratically elected) successors will have the authority to revise the regulations. Congress also retains the authority to change the law.But National Journal’s Lucia Graves takes a different approach. Instead of denying that Obama’s actions are dictatorial, she disputes Limbaugh’s implicit premise that there’s anything wrong with that. Lest you think we exaggerate, her piece is titled “Obama’s Thankfully ‘Dictatorial’ Approach to Climate Change.”According to Graves, Limbaugh “has it precisely backward: The decision to use executive authority is the means, not the ends.” And you’ll never guess what justifies the means: “It also makes a lot of sense when it comes to global warming given Congress’s failure to pass the Waxman-Markey energy bill in 2009, and, for decades before that, to pass any sort of comprehensive climate legislation whatsoever.”Yes, it has come to this. Americans are being urged to submit to “dictatorial” government because democracy is incapable of controlling the weather. “In college classes, climate change is taught as a textbook example of where democracy fails,” Graves asserts in the very first sentence of her column.Well, that settles it. America might have been a noble experiment, but science has proven it a failure. “Science is science,” Obama tells the New York Times’s Thomas Friedman. “And there is no doubt that if we burned all the fossil fuel that’s in the ground right now that the planet’s going to get too hot and the consequences could be dire.” Friedman asked: “Do you ever want to …