Sunday, February 22, 2009

Stop the CO2 Madness!

By Alan Caruba

When The New York Times publishes a story, as it did on February 19, regarding the next step in the Obama administration’s intention to destroy the U.S. economy, it’s a very good idea to pay attention.

“E.P.A. Expected to Regulate Carbon Dioxide” was the headline of John M. Broder’s article. “The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.”

Those “top Obama administration officials” are unnamed and so too are the “scientists” claiming that the planet is “warming.” For the record, although you will never read this in The New York Times, the planet is NOT warming. It is COOLING. It has been cooling for a decade now and it is no secret to meteorologists who track the day to day temperatures or climatologists who study long term trends.

On March 8-10, more than 500 of those scientists who dispute the vast global warming hoax will meet in New York for a second international conference on climate change sponsored by The Heartland Institute, a non-profit, free market think tank.

Joining those scientists and others will be Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic and current president of the European Union. Also participating will be American astronaut, Dr. Jack Schmitt, Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and other leading scientists who have led the effort to shed the light of truth on the global warming hoax.

You can be sure of one thing. They will all continue to be attacked as crazies denying the “consensus” that Al Gore is always braying about. Science is not about “consensus”, it is about reproducible facts. All the “facts” about melting glaciers, dramatically rising sea levels, and other claims by the GW crowd have been refuted.

The claims of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the basis for the Kyoto Protocols to limit carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been demolished repeatedly but the mainstream press refuses to report this, nor the fact that the IPCC is a political, not scientific, entity designed to advance the global warming hoax. Many of the scientists initially enticed to participate have since resigned. The vast bulk, easily 80% or more of those cited as IPCC members are not scientists who deal with issues of climate.

The IPCC’s claims have been based entirely on computer models. This in itself should have raised flags long ago. These models, as Hans Schreuder, an analytical chemist, has pointed out, “regard the earth as a flat disk bathed in a constant 24 hour haze of sunlight, without north and south poles, without clouds, and without any relationship to the real planet we live on.”

The claim that rising levels of carbon dioxide are responsible for a global warming that is not happening is entirely without scientific merit and, if for no other reason, should not be the basis for implementing EPA regulation of so-called “greenhouse gas” emissions under the Clean Air Act.

While it is true that there has been an increase in CO2 since the end of the last mini-ice age that lasted from 1500 to 1850, there is no research that demonstrates CO2 and an increase in the Earth’s temperature has any relationship. What warming occurred was entirely natural. Indeed, CO2, at less than 400 parts per million by volume, cannot influence atmospheric temperature or climate in any measurable way.

CO2 represents just 0.038% of the Earth’s atmosphere. The dominant factors in the Earth overall temperature are the Sun, the oceans, and even clouds.

If the U.S. weather service climate models are unable to predict changes in the weather by more than a week’s time, why would anyone believe that the IPCC’s models could predict it twenty, fifty or a hundred years from now?

Despite this, the EPA is tasked to impose regulations on CO2 emissions that would wreck the economy by requiring a “cap-and-trade” of “carbon credits” that would impact every single business and industrial activity. The European Union tried this and it has proved a massive failure and a huge drag on its economy.

Carbon dioxide is not a “pollutant” as the Supreme Court has ruled. How can the Earth’s second most vital gas, other than oxygen, be a pollutant? Not one single piece of vegetation on Earth could exist without CO2. Without vegetation, no animal life including our own could exist on Earth.

The notion that the EPA would regulate it is preposterous. It is absurd. It is criminal. It is immoral. It has no basis whatever in the actual science of the world’s climate. It is based on a massive, global hoax masterminded by the United Nations and carried out by charlatans such as Al Gore and NASA’s James Hansen.

It is, however, the vehicle for the political control of the world’s economy that would fulfill the United Nation’s global government schemes and, if enacted here in America, would mark the destruction of an economy that is the engine of the world’s economy, despite its current difficulties.

The Earth has existed for 4.5 billion years. The assertion that human beings and/or industrial activity have any effect on its atmosphere is an instrument of fascism.


jblethen said...

Re paragraph 13, EPA has no authority to impose cap and trade. All they can do is impose and enforce absolute emission limits, which would be even more disastrous than cap and trade.

libertyforusa said...

Just to let everyone know that Alans blog links now appear on the new site for organizing and working toward finding solutions for local issues.

This site was only launched on inauguration day but is already attracting conservative talent from around the country.

The left is plowing forward to implement their socialism using any and all means and this CO2 hoax is one of their most cultivated!

Shaman Al the Buffalo Shaman said...

The greater damage is being done by those claiming to save the planet. Just like those white guys who took Native lands and said we know best how to protect you and use your lands. You go drink this fire water while build a better nation and use up all the trees and water. Trusted them once - but not again!

Rich Kozlovich said...

Having EPA regulate anything and expecting them to use science over philosophy is sketchy at the best of times. Even when seemingly normal people are running EPA, that agency is so bogged down with ideologues that it is almost impossible have a sane regulation come out of them. But when you have an acolyte of Carol Browner running EPA, the thought of them regulating CO2 or anything else is really frightening.

This shouldn’t surprise anyone who has followed the actions of this agency. Starting with the first administrator, William Ruckelshaus, down until now, they have elevated ideology over science on a regular basis.

Even the EPA director under Reagan, Anne Gorsuch Burford, was incapable of just sticking with the science and keeping politics out of it. The lies and insanity about Alar can be traced directly back to her, because she was trying to appease the greenies, and this from a director known for doing her best to dismantle EPA.

She was also known for saying that " The nation's capital was too small to be a state but too large to be an asylum for the mentally deranged", and she yet chose a path of politics over science.

This EPA administration should prove to really be scary!

Good article Alan, I will be linking it in my weekly newsletter. Rich

Clive Graham Smale said...

Alan, you took the words out of my mouth.
It is now very obvious that the ruling class has a clear objective in its demonisation of CO2 and its AGW consensus. It will not listen to any scientific truths from any valid source. It does not want to listen; it is not remotely interested in the facts and opinions of people and groups with dissenting views; it has its own agenda to which a false doomsday scenario fits its modus operandi of universal government and control, perfectly. Nothing the world's best scientists can do will swerve the official line of thought. Too many people of money and position, of high office, have bought into the line for their own greedy interests to dispell the fraud,now. It will go ahead to its climax and it will be interesting to see how the facts of cooling, once its effect become incontestable, are once more manipulated to their benefit and credibility by those who have the power of the public ear and purse. This is not a simple war of trading facts and figures, although, as I have found out, some people are profoundly ignorant of the realities of this war of verity and in their ignorance look to 'authority' as a means to establish a 'truth table'. The actual fact of investigating these 'truths' for themselves is too complex for the average, time-strapped, computer non-literate person and they go for the 'Gore Solution' because that is what is the easiest path and gives them a valid comparison with the Nat Geo or Discovery Channel or any MSM line. I mean, they must be right. Right? In their terms the recent Victorian fires can be explained by AGW. Katrina can be expalained be AGW. Now they are being told that the severe winters are down to AGW. Who are they go against officialdom and the rightous MSM? It is these people that need to be convinced of the lies pupertrated and that is indeed a hard task.
For the most part we 'followers' are all howling from the same song book and it is why we have as our favourites websites those that accord with our views. We are in effect doing nothing to promulgate new views nor to disseminate our existing views to those that are ignorant of the issue.
The massive problem is to overcome the official line of 'Warming' and 'CO2 Doctor Death' and 'windmills will save our souls' and the sheer poor science that purpetrates such folly; this is down almost entirely to the blogosphere and its cohorts of helpless-feeling followers of which is tasked with reaching out to the millions who are not so informed, have not the means to be so informed. Who is going to buy and read and take-in the specialist books and magazines which are trying so valiantly to paint the right picture in language every layman can understand? Quite simply most people have not a clue as to what is going on and, without access to on-line facilities, will never be consulted for their opinion - but before such an opinion can be exacted they need to be educated and informed of such issues
We have to accept that we are a minority of special interest groups at this time. We read; we research and for the most part we are resonably well educated and spacialy aware as to what is going on. Not so the majority.
My guess is that events will play-out with the 'official line', as history shows us, untill the obvious is too plain to ignore. The present financial disaster is going that way - do we have any reason to believe that the AGW/CO2 will be any different?
Make haste, my dear Watson, disaster is afoot.
Clive in Laoag City, RP

de said...

When Al Gore and Robert Hansen stop exhaling CO2, then I shall take all this bull about GW seriously.

libertyforusa said...

Seems even the Japanese are buckling on the consensus, not that this will dissuade the 'full speed ahead' destruction derby the left has shown since the election!

Stefan said...

I googled "global warming" and got the wikipedia site. There is a graphic there that plots the global temperatures, and it seems to be WARMING. Then I did a more thorough search, and it seems that ALL the reputable scientific sources also show evidence of warming. It seems that your statement about cooling is false and/or misleading - maybe that's why we will never read your articles in the NY Times. How do you explain the facts?

Alan Caruba said...

Sorry, Stefan, but Wikipedia is notoriously unreliable as a source of scientific data. Whatever is on Wikipedia is subject to alteration by people who want to convince you the Earth is warming.

The Earth has warmed about 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1850. It has been cooling since 1998 according to weather satellites.

I suggest you visit,, or for accurate information.

Stefan said...

That wikipedia data came from NASA scientists.
Are you asserting that:
1. NASA is part of the conspiracy?
2. Their temperature readings are not accurate?
3. This data is taken out of context?
4. All of the above?
I am not questioning you because I don't believe you. The public is counting on you, the journalists, to explain the true nature of your conspiracy theory. After looking at your suggested websites, I gather that you will say it's #3. If so, please explain!!!
The climatechangefraud site confirms that global warming is real, and CO2 is a "major cause". (?!)

Alan Caruba said...

Stefan, does NOT say that "global warming" as defined as a dramatic rise in the Earth's temperature, past, present, or future, is real. It says just the opposite.

No one denies the Earth has warmed about one degree Fahrenheit since around 1850.

However, claims based on flawed United Nations computer models have been consistently either deliberately wrong or have had to be consistently revised over the years.

You will notice that all global warming claims predict it to be five, ten, twenty or fifty years from now. That is because there is no proof that it is occurring now.

As for data from NASA, there are increasing calls that Dr. James Hansen, the director of NASA's Goddard Institute, be fired for his increasingly bizarre claims that all coal-fired plants producing electricity around the world be shut down.

So, no, you cannot trust government agency claims about a global warming that is not happening when, in fact, weather satellites are all reporting a cooling trend.

Is there a conspiracy to frighten people about global warming? Yes. You need only look at the Obama administration appointees regarding science and energy. All have long records of politicizing science, i.e., distorting or ignoring it, to make such claims.

seo expert said...

good post

website design nyc