UN Environmental Group Holds Meeting in Bali (again)

Wonder what the carbon footprint for this boondoggle will be?

The UN Environment Program, which is based in Nairobi, is convening a set of meetings this week – not in Nairobi, or New York, but at the same Bali beach resort (and convention center) where they sacrificed all that time for the greater good in 2007. Never mind the UN’s continuing campaign — in the face of its crumbling “climate science” — to restrict and control carbon emissions. Yet again, we are asked to believe the UN deserves special exemptions from its own preachings. Its conferees are jetting to Bali for the greater good of all the little folk, whose job is merely to pay the bills for such pleasures, and live with any resulting rationing and regulation. According to the Jakarta Post, some 1,500 people from 192 countries are expected to attend this shindig — where UNEP claims that envoys of some 140 governments will be present. The pre-session events (the UN goes in for a lot of those on Bali) have already begun.

Sicentists Say World May Not be Warming

See previous post on Climategate. More and more evidence is being unearthed that scientists and politicians have not been completely truthful with us on this issue.

"World may not be warming, say scientists" from the London Times, which has been doing a lot of research into this story. Read the whole thing.

Global Warming

Are you feeling the global warming effects? Here in in Illinois we are not....Doesn't seem like the world is experiencing it either...

For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

Quid Pro Quo...The Washington Way

GE has been closely tied to the government on both climate change and economic recovery issues...now they will benefit if the new Climate Bill passes.

Sen. Barbara Boxer’s climate bill set to be released today contains a provision that will compensate General Electric quite nicely for its lobbying and media efforts promoting climate legislation.

Section 821(c) requires that, by December 12, 2012, the EPA set standards for greenhouse gas emissions from “new aircraft and new engines used in new aircraft.”

General Electric is the world’s largest manufacturer of commercial and military jet engines, a business worth about $12 billion in annual revenues.

So the Boxer bill would compel airlines and the military, when purchasing new aircraft and new aircraft engines, to purchase more expensive “green” engines made by GE, according to standards set by the current and GE-lobbied Obama administration.

Keep in mind that GE CEO Jeff Immelt is member of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Council.

More evidence that GE’s political action committee (GEPAC) meant what it said in its August 19, 2009 e-mail to employees:

The intersection between GE’s interests and government action is clearer than ever.

Other payoffs to GE will likely be unconvered as Boxer’s bill virtually requires the purchase of other GE products including wind turbines, solar panels and water products.

Global Warming, Climate Change, etc.

Here is some climate change logic for you...

Assume that there really is "global warming" or some kind of catastrophic climate change (even though the climate has changed many times over the millenia).

Then assume that this climate change is primarily cause by humans and our carbon emissions (even though there is evidence to the contrary on this point).

Even if you agree with those two assumptions, our government is not behaving rationally as it tries to "fix" global warming by forcing Americans to "reduce our carbon emissions." Why?

Because China, India and other developing countries will not impose restrictions on their carbon emissions, and they have high levels of emissions!! So we could cut our emissions to almost zero (and we would all be farming and living in poverty to do so) and it still would not "fix" global warming (in 2006 the U.S. emitted 20% of the world total, with China emitting 21%).

The Administration and its Congressional allies are trying to impose a significant carbon price in the U.S. through something like the Waxman-Markey bill, while entering an international negotiation process in which as much as 60% of global carbon emissions could face little to no carbon price. The likely outcome would dramatically tilt the global economic playing field, harming U.S. workers and firms relative to their counterparts in China and India. At the same time, it would make little progress toward addressing the risk of severe global climate change, as a large portion of global carbon emissions would remain effectively uncapped.

From an American standpoint this seems extremely unwise. It is an incomplete climate change strategy, with a hole about how to deal with China, India, and other large developing nations. (emphasis added)

This is from a very interesting and readable article...check it out.