29 Responses to Policy Peril

  1. Neil F. AGWD August 10, 2009 at 4:17 pm #

    Deja vu!!!!
    I just posted this video yesterday!
    It is actually pretty good. They do, however, take the Bjorn Lomborg position at the end. But that is not neccessarily a bad thing. I agree that resources should be devoted to adapting to climate change, rather than destroying our economy in a futile attempt to stop it by curtailing CO2 emissions.
    The only thing I disagree with Lomborg on is that the planet is warming, because it isn’t.

  2. Neil F. AGWD August 10, 2009 at 9:42 pm #

    Al Gore said the ocean levels will rise 20 ft.!

    “The analysis of 53 sea level stations, distributed all over the world, suggests a decline of sea level by almost two feet, by 2100, if it continues the downward trend observed over the last three years. Even
    considering the average value for the last 9 years, this would lead to a rise of only one inch during the XXI century.”

  3. Neil F. AGWD August 11, 2009 at 5:33 am #

    This sounds like something I’ve said:

    “I think there’s a huge amount of skepticism among the public. They’ve heard all these claims, and now they’ve been informed that there isn’t any recent warming,” Ebell said. “The public, without having a lot of information about it, is pretty astute. I think the alarmists are having a hard time making the case for global warming simply because reality is against them and the public has figured it out.”

    Again, in case you blinked
    “I think the alarmists are having a hard time making the case for global warming simply because reality is against them and the public has figured it out.”

  4. Paul Wenum August 11, 2009 at 9:35 pm #

    Neil, Nice read. Keep it up!

  5. Neil F. AGWD August 11, 2009 at 10:41 pm #

    The only things that can stop me is if the world temperatures would rise on pace with CO2 levels. If the sea levels would start to rise and threaten to flood the coasts. If the planetary disasters predicted by the IPCC would come to pass.
    Then, and only then, will I shut up. Count on it!

  6. Neil F. AGWD August 11, 2009 at 11:15 pm #

    I have recently been interested in glaciers melting aledgedly caused by global warming. It seems that is actually exactly why glaciers are melting. They have been doing so for about 12,000 years. There was a climate shift 12,000 years ago that caused global warming and the glaciers to begin to retreat and melt, and now they are almost gone. This is completely natural. In fact I will refer to it as NGW, Natural Global Warming.
    Do not fall into the alarmist trap of panicing about glaciers melting because they are using this fact to say “see, AGW is real and it’s causing the glaciers to melt!” Nonsense!
    I say this is a result of NGW, which has been going on for about 12,000 years. Of course it has not been a steady increase. There have been warming and cooling events over this period, called the holocene period.
    And there will be other warming and cooling events for the next 3,000 years or so untill we reach the next glacial period.
    Remember, we are in an interglacial period. And I think even if we trippled or quadrupled anthropogenic CO2, we would not stop the next glacial period from happening. In other words, we couldn’t stop it if we tried.

  7. Neil F. AGWD August 12, 2009 at 10:45 am #

    “Global Warming is the mania of our times. While there is good scientific evidence that atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing from the burning of fossil fuels, and that carbon dioxide does indeed absorb infa-red heat radiation of certain frequencies, it is purely speculation that this will cause a climate catastrophe.

    As Mark Twain wrote over a century ago: “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”

  8. Lone Wolf August 12, 2009 at 8:47 pm #

    I copied the following 2 story titles from the National Geographic website.
    The first one concluded that the loss of sea water was from irrigation.
    My question is, how did they connect that with global warming. What am I missing?

    My question on the 2nd title is, Isn’t greening good no matter what causes it? They didn’t really blame that on global warming either. I can’t figure out why they would use either story to support global warming.

    Am i getting old and just don’t understand something here?

    News: Global Warming Stories
    BEFORE-AND-AFTER PHOTOS: Vast Aral Sea Vanishing
    Sahara Desert Greening Due to Climate Change?

  9. Neil F. AGWD August 12, 2009 at 9:56 pm #

    Lone Wolf:
    I don’t think you are missing anything, I think that you are expecting the National Geographic to be honest with you and not have a political agenda.
    But they have an inability to be honest when the facts don’t fit with their politicaly ideaological belief that humans are causing global warming.
    I think you are just feeling disappointment that they have lost all objectivity in reporting stories like these.

  10. Lone Wolf August 13, 2009 at 7:22 am #

    Thanks Neil,
    What’s hard to believe is that they are using such weak arguments.

  11. Neil F. AGWD August 13, 2009 at 4:52 pm #

    Lone Wolf:
    Take heart! Fewer and fewer people are buying into it. They think people are stupid and can be fooled easily. I think people are fooled easily because they are busy living their lives, and have no time to pay attention.
    But people aren’t stupid and are starting to realize that the world isn’t warming, and are begining to become angry at attempts to pull the wool over our eyes.
    Look at all that is going on at the health care town hall meetings. People are saying enough! We’re not going to take it anymore. We’re tired of being lied to. We will hold you accountable.
    I think global warming is going to go over in the same manner. They just do not have any facts that support the AGW hypothesis. They only have fear, ignorance, and environmental zealousey on their side.
    I don’t think they have half a chance of winning now.
    But don’t expect that they will go quietly. They will become more shrill, and the claims will become more outrageous the closer they get to defeat.

  12. Neil F. AGWD August 13, 2009 at 8:13 pm #

    Lone Wolf:
    I just read both of the articles that you posted. The first one does not mention global warming as the cause for the Aral Sea vanishing. They actually, correctly, state the reason is irrigation and diversion of feed waters.
    The second is actually describing a beneficial result of climate change. They do say it is AGW, but we know that is only speculative.
    I do not deny that the climate changes. It always has and it always will, even long after we are gone.
    I hope this is the begining of a new prosperous era for Africa, no matter what the “why’s” are.

  13. Neil F. AGWD August 14, 2009 at 9:53 am #

    Lone Wolf:
    Those stories were presnted as global warming “news” stories?
    I don’t get it either. But if that’s all they got, they are grasping at straws.
    What won’t be in the news? Stuff like this:
    Yup that ice is just melting…. slowly….. normally. No catastrophe here.

  14. Neil F. AGWD August 17, 2009 at 10:44 pm #

    Going to the North Pole? Bring your swimming trunks and sunblock………….NOT!!!!!!!!!!

  15. Neil F. AGWD August 18, 2009 at 9:17 pm #

    “The House-passed climate change bill, if enacted, would expand the federal government so much that it would take billions of dollars and thousands of new employees to implement.”

  16. Jim Hollingsworth August 20, 2009 at 7:43 am #

    I think this is an excellent film, and I would really like to get a hard copy DVD of this if anyone knows how. Send me a note to jimhollingsworth@verizon.net. I have also written a short piece on this which was posted in a number of places: The Myth of Global Warming. This copy was corrected as some posts had a small error. Jim Hollingsworth

  17. Rob N. Hood August 30, 2009 at 8:30 pm #

    Of course, the entire drama surrounding issues such as climate change is a spectacle of such titanic irony that it would be dismissed as over-the-top farce if it turned up in a novel or screenplay. The two biggest ironies are these:

    1) The working class right hates Obama for trying to impose a socialist government on the United States, when in fact he is working for the most rapacious elements of unfettered capitalism. Far from trying to redistribute wealth to the masses, Obama has presided over another robbery of the people, a vast transfer of public funds from the people to the owners of the banks. And if he gets his way, he’ll do the same thing with health insurance, by forcing the public to buy private health plans.

    2) Naive mainstream Democrats support Obama for precisely the same reason that the right hates him. Namely, they believe that Obama actually has socialist leanings and actually wants to accomplish some sort of populist reform, e.g. carbon reduction.

    Thus, both mainstream Democrats and the working class right make the same mistake in attributing populist motives to Obama that simply aren’t there. Obama is neither a socialist nor even a committed populist. In fact, Obama is nothing more than a willing corporate lackey, a smooth-talking representative of the same forces who were behind the Bushies. Obama no more intends to turn America socialist than he intended to effect a meaningful withdrawal from Iraq. Obama no more intends to create a just health care system than he intended to bring Constitutional government back to the United States.

    What is truly tragic here is that those who would take up arms to “defend” their country are actually working for the very forces who have taken over the United States. And make no mistake: the country has indeed been taken over. It has been taken over by a small group of international capitalists who have no more allegiance to the United States than they have to any of their other countries where they park their private jets. Their only allegiance is to power, profit and their own families.

    Thus, these suburban rubes with their guns and placards are far from being patriots they imagine themselves to be. They are actually traitors, unwittingly foot soldiers for the corporate swine who have raped the United States. They are the divided and the conquered. They are the half of the working class that would gladly murder the other half of the working class at the behest of their corporate masters.

  18. Paul Wenum August 31, 2009 at 11:07 pm #


  19. paul wenum September 4, 2009 at 10:47 pm #


    Think of “The Wizard of Oz.” Remember the one with no brain? Enough said.

  20. paul wenum September 6, 2009 at 9:19 pm #

    Neil, as stated, stick in there.

  21. Rob N. Hood September 6, 2009 at 9:39 pm #

    You dopes… of course I think the fix is in. Nobody, and I mean nobody becoems the President of the United States without being in the pocket of big business. The entire election process is VERY blatant about that. And if you cannot see that except as some kind of conspriacy theory, then it is I who is sorry for your insufficient brain power.

  22. paul wenum September 7, 2009 at 2:59 am #

    Love your choice of words. You never change nor ever will. Vile spews from your mouth. I assume agnostic?

  23. Rob N. Hood September 7, 2009 at 8:14 am #

    You started it Paul- maybe you should look into a mirror. I never said I was for Cap and Trade in fact I have questioned it. You are the one with a closed and unchanging mind. You are the one who thinks you know everything, and you are the one who disrespects those who disagree with your personal beliefs. I call you dopes becasue you are being dopey. That is hardly a terrible or obscene word. Are you that thin-skinned? You are defensive and self-righteous. I truly think it would be good for Neil to quit this crap for awhile- he is obssessed, and that isn’t healthy. As for you, well, I think you are just an unhappy person who looks at the world in a black and white manner. (see? I could have used some really colorful language, but I’m being nice and polite!)

  24. Paul Wenum September 7, 2009 at 8:42 pm #

    You are what you are. Enough said. By the way, it is black and white. ( Right and wrong ) There is no gray area!

  25. Rob N. Hood September 20, 2009 at 3:49 pm #

    THAT explains a lot Paul. It is I who feel sorry for you. You are obviously religious and to such a degree that seeing the world as a duality and not complicated and multi-facted. Throughout history there have been people like you, and they lose out to progress eventually EVERY time. But you and yours will never give up, they never have. Stubborness is one of the traits too. History and reality just passes them by. Too bad there isn’t more spirituality in that religion of yours. But there I go again, mucking up your perfect black and white world, which really only exists in your mind. And really, what was it that I wrote that was so “vile”?? The truth? Can’t you handle the truth Paul?

  26. Paul Wenum September 20, 2009 at 9:21 pm #

    Endeniable truth will always rule no matter the consequences. I’m a Scot. Rod Roy, William Wallace. Truth previals! Get a job I say!

  27. Rob N. Hood October 7, 2009 at 9:08 am #

    You assume I don’t have a job, just like you assume everyone who doens’t think or pray the way you do muct be some kind of deadbeat. That’s called prejudice Paul. Ever hear of it?

  28. Paul Wenum October 8, 2009 at 9:08 pm #

    They kicked us “highlander’s” out of Scotland. Came from a poor family. Not a trust baby. What say you? Actually, I hope you work extremely hard and as I said before , if you do, it will come your way.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.