Sen. Inhofe On Cap And Trade: Meaningless WIthout China And India On Board

Cap-and-Tax Cap-and-Trade dead in the water without support from China and India, who have vowed not to imperil their economies and lower standards of living:

"It’s no surprise that during today’s G8 meeting, China, India and other developing nations refused to accept mandatory emissions controls on their economies," Senator Inhofe said. "Without participation from China and India, anything we do here at home would impose burdensome costs on consumers in the form of higher electricity, gas, and food prices, all for no climate gain. Unless supporters of cap-and-trade legislation can develop a plan to convince China and India to make meaningful emissions reductions on par with the United States, no such bill will pass the U.S. Senate."

EPA Administrator Jackson appeared before the EPW Committee on Tuesday and confirmed an EPA analysis showing that unilateral U.S. action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on climate. "I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels," Administrator Jackson said.

Global Warming--Command And Control Or Technological Approach?

Sen. James Inhofe lays out the economic stakes of a planned cap-and-trade scheme that would only exacerbate current economic downturns by crippling the American economy--and offers in its stead a free market, technology approach that would likely prove immensely more successful in its state goal of cleaning the environment while also keeping the economy strong:

The United States Senate will soon begin to debate a global warming cap-and-trade bill that, if passed, would impose severe economic constraints on American families and American workers for no environmental gain. We have had this debate before, starting with the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, then again in 2003, and again in 2005. Each time, these cap-and-trade measures were defeated for two simple reasons: they did not include developing nations; and because of the significant economic impact on the American public. With the American economy facing troubles, now is certainly not the time to try this costly experiment.

What proponents of this bill fail to understand is that the American environmental success story has been built while growing our economy. Over the past three decades, Americans have proven that we can clean up our environment while expanding our population and vibrantly growing our economy. Democrats and their special interest allies have consistently taken the opposite approach and emphasized job-killing regulations and expanding the government’s power. The U.S. can follow a path of onerous government mandates or we can follow a path of developing and encouraging new technologies. A simple history lesson reveals that the technological approach is the only viable path forward as carbon cap-and-trade mandates are proving to be a failure throughout the developed world.
. . .
The Lieberman-Warner command and control path utterly fails in comparison to an approach that embraces and develops new technologies. A technology emphasis is the only politically and economically sustainable path forward. I have long advocated a technology approach that brings in the developing world nations such as China and India. My home state of Oklahoma demonstrates that tomorrow’s energy mix must include more natural gas, wind and geothermal, but it must also include oil, coal, and nuclear energy, which is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. This approach serves multiple purposes – it will reduce air pollution, expand our energy supply, increase trade, and, along with these other goals, reduce greenhouse gases. Developing and expanding domestic energy will translate into energy security and ensure stable sources of supply and well-paying jobs for Americans.

Will the United States Senate choose the economically harmful Lieberman-Warner bill or the new technology path? With five weeks to go until the debate, the question is largely up to you. If you believe, like I do that we must not impose more costly mandates on the American people, I urge you to engage in the debate and contact your Senator and make your voice heard.

Even "The People's Republic" Of Boulder, CO Can't Meet Kyoto Goals Using Heavy Carbon Taxation

"The bottom line is even if all the developed countries fully complied with the Kyoto Protocol, the effect would be minuscule. It's a completely negligible amount of global warming"--Kevin Doran, Center for Energy and Environmental Security at the University of Colorado

More evidence the moonbat plan to use carbon taxes to help reduce greenhouse gases in order to achieve the rather modest Kyoto goals (modest compared to all the new plans for "climate change" solutions) will fail across the country and present a financial boondoggle to boot--they can't even succeed in the Berkeley of the Rockies--Boulder, Colorado:

The way things are going, Boulder will only make it about halfway to its goal of cutting enough greenhouse gases to comply with the Kyoto Protocol, according to a memo released by the city staff Wednesday.

The Office of Environmental Affairs is requesting a 53 percent increase in funding, which would boost its budget from $875,177 to $1,343,133. Even if the City Council approves the increase, which would translate to a higher carbon tax, Boulder would still meet only 85 percent of its Kyoto goal.

"It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone," said Sarah Van Pelt, Boulder's environmental sustainability coordinator. "We knew we were just starting at the lowest tax rate and slowly phasing in all the programs."

When voters approved the Climate Action Plan tax in 2006, they actually gave the OK to a range of possible taxes. Now, electricity users are taxed at the lowest level, and the new proposal would up the taxes to about midway through the possible range. Van Pelt said it has always been part of the plan to increase taxes as time went on. Residential users now pay an average of $13 extra a year in carbon taxes. The new proposal would increase the average to $19.

The Kyoto Protocol calls for greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced to 7 percent below 1990 levels. Locally, that means reducing emissions, from 1.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide -- the amount Boulder residents were responsible for in 2006 -- to just under 1.5 million metric tons by 2012.

Well, 85% isn't too far off, so how will they get there? They could always deploy "greenshirt" youth to, um, "encourage" their neighbors to switch their lights off . . .

So far, the city's approach to emission reduction has relied heavily on marketing and subsidies -- most of which are offered in conjunction with Xcel Energy or Boulder County -- to convince people to take voluntary actions, including retrofitting their homes, driving less and buying wind-power offsets. The Office of Environmental Affairs would also dump the majority of new money into reducing greenhouse gases through energy efficiency.

"I feel like it's very possible that the community can meet the Kyoto target," Van Pelt said. "We just have to decide to do it."

To meet the Kyoto Protocol, city staffers project that they will have to come back to the City Council and request more money in the near future.

Of course--more money!

But change by the tried-and-true "incremental" approach won't even have much of an effect anyway, as the Kyoto Protocols "don't go far enough":

Even 100 percent compliance with the Kyoto Protocol doesn't go far in the battle against climate change, according to some researchers.

"The bottom line is even if all the developed countries fully complied with the Kyoto Protocol, the effect would be minuscule," said Kevin Doran, who works with the Center for Energy and Environmental Security at the University of Colorado. "It's a completely negligible amount of global warming."

Doran said Boulder isn't alone, and he estimates that most of the 800 cities that have signed on to meet the Kyoto demands will fall short.

"A lot of them rely on activities and reductions that are outside of their zone of influence," he said.

The real "bottom line" won't be the negligible effect these measures will have, but the tremendous costs incurred trying to achieve them.

But what's a global warming/climate change article without a scientist--I mean, where's the consensus . . .

Roger Pielke Jr., who works for CU's Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, wasn't surprised that Boulder is challenged to meet the Kyoto Protocol. He published an article in the journal Nature this week that says it will be more difficult to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than society has been led to believe.

"This is a perfect example of the challenge," Pielke wrote in an e-mail from the United Kingdom. "Even with the best of intentions and strong political support, a tiny step like meeting Kyoto proves extremely challenging for Boulder under current conditions. ... If Boulder can't meet the very small step of Kyoto, why would anyone think that the world can do something much, much more difficult?"

Takeaways?

More action, now! 'Cause if Boulder can't do it, no one can!

Wait, that isn't right. But it's the gesture that counts.

Winter Forecasts Wrong For Second Year Admit "Experts"

Blaming the failure of their predictions to match what actually has transpired on--wait for it--"global change":

Dry-winter forecasts were flat wrong this year for much of Colorado and the Southwest, and weather experts say they're struggling to understand why the snow just keeps falling.

Some forecasters blame climate change, and others point to the simple vicissitudes of weather. Regardless, almost everyone called for a dry-to-normal winter in Colorado and the Southwest — but today, the state's mountains are piled so thick with snow that state reservoirs could fill and floods could be widespread this spring.

"The polar jet stream has been on steroids. We don't understand this. It's pushing our limits, and it's humbling," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Whoops! So climate and weather conditions are 1) more difficult to predict, and 2) humans still haven't figured out a precise way of measuring or modeling the extremely complex systems that produce the droughts, floods, storms, etc. that we face each year.

Shocker.

Apparently, even historically predictable occurrences like El Niño and La Niña can still show a potentially wide range of variability in terms of outcome, as they did this year:

Wolter and NOAA both forecast a drier-than-average winter in most of Colorado. AccuWeather Inc. did the same, citing similar reasons: A La Niña weather system of cool, equatorial Pacific water had set up in the tropics last fall.

Generally, La Niña years bring dry and warm weather to Colorado in the fall and spring, and variable winters tend to be close to average.

La Niña winters have almost always brought droughtlike conditions to the Southwest, as the jet stream ferries storms farther north.

So, what the devil is causing the weather forecasters and climate "experts" to miss their predictions with an alarming rate? Why, "global change", of course!

Wolter said he's troubled that his and other long-range forecasts have been off two years in a row now.

Last year, experts predicted a wet year from Southern California across to Arizona and southern Colorado, because of an El Niño weather system of warmer Pacific water.

Instead, drought worsened in the Southwest, capped by a huge fire season in Southern California.

"So we have two years in a row here where the atmosphere does not behave as we expect," Wolter said. "Maybe global changes are pulling the rug out from underneath us. We may not know the answer for 10 years, . . . but one pet answer is that you should get more variability with global change."

This winter's forecasts were accurate in some areas of the country, Wolter and Reeves said: The Pacific Northwest has been slammed with precipitation, as predicted, and, even with snow expected overnight and today in Denver, it has been relatively dry along Colorado's Front Range.

You see, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.

"Global change" is Wolter's "pet answer". Take that one to your boss--"Sorry, sir, it's that damned global change!"


Just some of the tons of "global change" that have fallen on Colorado this winter

Snow In Colorado Exceeds Early Season Forecast For Second Straight Year

"I'm sticking with my forecast, except that I acknowledge I have some egg on my face"--Klaus Wolter, meteorologist affiliated with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.


Klaus Wolter, egg on his face

More like completely defied the weather forecasters' and climatologists' prognostications that called for a dry, warm winter:

It wasn't supposed to be this way.

The National Weather Service's "probability forecast" called for a drier than normal winter in southwestern Colorado. But as meteorologist Aldis Strautins of the National Weather Service in Grand Junction explains, probability is not cast in stone.

"When you're talking about climate and probability forecasts, saying that the probability is a little higher that it's going to be drier doesn't mean it still couldn't be a wet year. That's what's happened so far. You have a better chance of drier weather, but it's still possible you can get these other events. And the season's not through."

Of course, this isn't the first time that seasonal projections failed to adequately describe what would happen. Just remember last season's blizzard, which came on the heels of a similar three-month projection that also called for dry weather and little precipitation.

What was the prediction last November (11-27-07 to be exact)?

Mountain snowpacks are thin statewide — a quarter as deep as normal in southwestern Colorado — and weather forecasters are predicting a relatively warm, dry winter for most of the state.

The Gunnison River Basin reported snowpack levels 29 percent of normal Monday, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture; and the South Platte River Basin was at 57 percent of normal.

The next few months do not look a whole lot better.

"Oh, it's dry and grim," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorology researcher with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder.
. . .
Wolter said this winter may disappoint those who love winter storms. "Everything seems to be shifted north this year," he said.

That's despite the strong La Niña weather system that has set up in the Pacific Ocean. La Niñas usually mean dry falls and springs and snowier-than-average winters in the mountains.

La Niñas occur when temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean are lower than normal. That affects weather patterns around the globe and often brings extra moisture to Colorado in December or January.

"I don't see that happening this year," Wolter said. "The storm tracks are shifted north," along with the jet stream.

Ken Reeves, a senior meteorologist and director of forecasting for AccuWeather Inc., agreed with Wolter.

"There's going to be a tremendous amount of moisture firehosed up into the Pacific Northwest, and the question is, will any of that end up in Colorado's central mountains?"

"Right now, I think it probably won't get much closer than Utah, western Wyoming," Reeves said. "It is a possibility, but I don't see a spout of storms piling up snow there this year."
. . .
"I am very concerned that Colorado, which is essentially drought-free on the national drought monitor, might see regions of drought develop by spring," Wolter said.

Whoops!

In fact, getting the weather gurus to admit their models are flawed or that their forecasts are off is incredibly difficult, even in the face of countervailing evidence:

Forecasters are holding to their predictions of a dry winter for Colorado despite blasts of snow that have continued into mid-January and set snowpack records in the southwestern mountains.

Admitting that the string of major storms over the past six weeks caught him off guard, one top federal forecaster nonetheless said a strong La Nina effect is likely to keep the state mostly dry through March.

"I'm sticking with my forecast, except that I acknowledge I have some egg on my face," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorologist affiliated with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Wolter said his prediction applied to the January-March period, not to December - a point he said he didn't make clear enough in media interviews. Even so, he said the string of big, wet storms running through the state late last year was historic.

"I certainly can't remember in 20 years of living here anything like that," he said. "I think we should count our blessings. We got lucky."

That "moisture pipeline," Wolter said, was fueled by the so-called Pineapple Express, a weather system with its origins near the Hawaiian tropics. But, he added, it is bound to dry up.

"The writing is on the wall," he said.

That was a month ago--mid-January.

The writing is on the wall--but the meteorologists/climatologists don't seem capable of reading it.

Local snowpack numbers are at impressive levels. More amazement:

7News Chief Meteorologist Mike Nelson says in his 17 years here in Colorado, he cannot remember a more prolific snow season in the high country as they are seeing this season.

Focus The Nation Climate Change Teach-In Coming To CU Boulder

**Update--A look at some of the Focus the Nation moonbattery taking place on campuses across the country:

At the University of Rhode Island, students placed 300-pound blocks of ice around their campus and let them melt to symbolize how global warming is affecting polar ice caps.

At Missouri State University, students will pile 20 tons of coal on campus to show how much of this air-polluting fossil fuel is needed to power their school for an hour.

At UCSD, young conservationists are preparing a performance-art show that will feature a faux polar bear in an 8-foot-tall “electric” chair. It's a creative riff on the theme of climate change harming the bears.

The activities are part of the inaugural Focus the Nation, a four-day event designed to turn the nation's college students and others into global-warming activists.

Organizers of the grass-roots campaign, which ends tomorrow, bill it as the largest teach-in in U.S. history. They said about 1,700 colleges – including San Diego State and the University of California San Diego – churches, high schools and civic groups are participating.

---

Focus the Nation is unadulterated political advocacy. But my campus forbids me to use my official time, paid for by taxpayers, to advocate for particular campaign issues. But global warming is so important. But my Chancellor forbids me to engage in political advocacy as part of my job. But my Chancellor is the keynote speaker for our Focus the Nation activities. But my job is to teach not indoctrinate. But I actually agree with many of the proposed policies. But it is not my job to use my platform as a professor to tell students what to think; I am supposed to teach them how to think and come to their own conclusions. But if I don't go along I'll be castigated as one of those bad guys, like a Holocaust denier or slave owner. But doing the right thing is so obvious--Roger Pielke, Jr., director of the University of Colorado's Center for Science and Technology Policy Research and an associate professor of environmental studies


Climate change moonbattery at CU

Just received this forwarded missive urging me not to forget to attend CU's Focus the Nation Climate Change Teach-In (more detailed list of events here). No less than Colorado's Governor Bill Ritter will be in attendance to kick things off:

Subject: FW: Focus The Nation: Climate Change Teach-In

Please forward this on to your departments.
**********************
January 31st, 2008, CU Focus the Nation is part of a national teach-in
engaging millions of students about climate change and its solutions. A teach-in
is a day when an entire school turns its attention to a single issue. In this
case, it is an issue that will shape the future of current students. CU
Focus the Nation has a lot of activities planned throughout the day. Planned
events include:

* The 2% Solution Focus the Nation will stream a free, live, interactive webcast with climate scientist Stephen Schneider, sustainability expert Hunter Lovins, green jobs pioneer Van Jones and youth climate leaders, for a discussion of global warming solutions. 6:00 - 7:00 p.m. (Jan 30) / Atlas Auditorium
* Polar Visions World Premier Presented by CU climate scientist Ryan Vachon, polar climate change views from scientists and polar natives. 7:30-9:00 p.m. (Jan 30) / Atlas Auditorium
* Governor Bill Ritter kicks off Focus the Nation with his vision of a new energy economy. 9:00-10:00 a.m. / Old Main Chapel
* Discovery's Planet Earth series shown all day on the ceiling of Fiske Planetarium. 9:00 a.m.-6 p.m. / Fiske Planetarium
* Climate change panel series. Experts speak on climate justice, the difficulty of communicating climate change, and the future energy technologies that will help us fight climate change. 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. / Old Main Chapel. Check the website for individual panel times.
* Save Our Snow movie about a fearless duo of eco-minded
snowboarders traveling cross-country in a veggie-oil-fueled Winnebago to inform and
inspire people to save our snow from climate change. Enter to win a pair of HEAD racing team skis. 10:00-10:50 a.m. / Old Main Chapel.
* Ask a Climate Expert all your burning questions about climate
change in our open Q&A forum. 2:00-3:15 p.m. / Old Main Chapel
* Get FREE energy efficient light bulbs to save you money and lower your climate change impact. 9:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. in the UMC, Old Main Chapel and Fiske Planetarium
* Latin Hip-Hop by Debajo Del Agua and spoken word by LaNiece Littleton
and Jarvis Fuller. Focusing on the loss of culture due to climate change. 5:00-
8:00 p.m. / UMC cafeteria.
* The 11th Hour movie about global warming solutions followed by a
discussion with local experts. 7:00 and 9:15 p.m. / Muenziner Auditorium
/ $5 gen/$4 w student ID
* The Devil Came on Horseback about the genocide in Darfur. Hunter
Lovins, CU Law Profesor Maxine Burkett, Representative Alice Madden, and House
Speaker Andrew Romanoff and the film's narrator speak about the origins of the crisis, its link to a changing climate and why we should care. 6:00-8:00 / Cristol Chemistry Auditorium 140.

Robert Hall
Energy Program Manager
CU Environmental Center
303-492-3229

Aside from the obvious global warmongering and climate change hysteria, this "activity" appears to breach the prohibition on activism and political advocacy that CU's Chancellor "Bud" Peterson recently outlined quite clearly:

TO: Boulder Campus Teaching & Research Faculty, Staff, Deans, Directors, Dept Chairs

FROM: Office of the Chancellor

SENDER: Chancellor G.P. "Bud" Peterson

DATE: January 18, 2008

SUBJECT: Guidelines on Campaign-Related Activities by Members of the University Community

Dear Colleagues:

In light of the many political campaigns currently, or soon to be, underway at the national, state and local levels, I would like to provide you with a set of guidelines we, as members of the University community, should keep in mind as we consider our own activities and level of involvement. The guidelines were developed by the Office of the University Counsel, and if you have questions, I urge you to contact Counsel's office at 303-492-7481.

GUIDELINES ON CAMPAIGN-RELATED ACTIVITIES BY MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY
COMMUNITY

IN GENERAL, UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES MAY NOT:

* Engage in any activity during working hours designed to urge electors to vote for or against any campaign issues, which include campaigns for public office, state-wide campaign issues or referred measures, and local campaign issues or levies.

* Employees wishing to participate in a campaign activity should take personal leave.

* Use office supplies or equipment, including computers, telephones, printers or facsimile machines to create materials urging electors to vote for or against a campaign issue.

* Use their University email accounts to urge electors to vote for or against a campaign issue, or to forward materials that urge electors to vote for or against a campaign issue.

* Use University-hosted websites to urge electors to vote for or against a campaign issue.

Focus the Nation touts their endorsements:

To date, Focus the Nation at CU has been endorsed by Chancellor Bud Peterson, the Boulder Faculty Assembly, and the UCSU student government.

How do you spell hypocrisy? Nice to see you enforcing your own prohibition, "Bud".

Perhaps we should, you know, make a few phone calls.

Roger Pielke, Jr., director of the University of Colorado's Center for Science and Technology Policy Research and an associate professor of environmental studies--a self-described "nonskeptical heretic" and no fan of skeptics like Sen. James Inhofe states, "I'm so confused":

I am so confused.

Focus the Nation is unadulterated political advocacy. But my campus forbids me to use my official time, paid for by taxpayers, to advocate for particular campaign issues. But global warming is so important. But my Chancellor forbids me to engage in political advocacy as part of my job. But my Chancellor is the keynote speaker for our Focus the Nation activities. But my job is to teach not indoctrinate. But I actually agree with many of the proposed policies. But it is not my job to use my platform as a professor to tell students what to think; I am supposed to teach them how to think and come to their own conclusions. But if I don't go along I'll be castigated as one of those bad guys, like a Holocaust denier or slave owner. But doing the right thing is so obvious.

Thank goodness I am on sabbatical.

Hybrid Vehicle Survey

**Update--thank you to those who have taken the survey so far . . . still need a few more respondents. This post will remain on top through Friday . . .

Once again, the educational activities of yours truly demand the participation of the dedicated readers of this blog to participate in a voluntary survey for my Marketing Research class. The subject is hybrid vehicles:

November 17, 2007

Hello,

The growing concern over the effects of global warming have led car manufacturers to research and develop alternative fuel vehicles, including hybrid automobiles combining an on-board rechargeable energy storage system (RESS) and a fueled power source (internal combustion engine) for vehicle propulsion. Though these vehicles have proven effective at providing greater fuel economy than conventional gasoline powered vehicles, the promise of reduced emissions and a greatly diminished impact on the environment as a driving force for purchasing these new product offerings has not been clearly measured or defined.

This survey is part of a Marketing Research project conducted by a group of graduate students of the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Science Center. Your participation as one of a small number of people selected to offer their opinion on these matters will ensure that the results more truly represent the thinking of automobile consumers. It is important that we achieve a sample response that is divers in order to most precisely reflect overall consumer attitudes. It is also important that we have approximately the same amount of male and female respondents. For this, your response is very important. Please note however that we require that respondents must also be at least 18 years of age.

Your participation is greatly appreciated, and entirely voluntary. Surveys are anonymous and you can be assured of complete confidentiality. Your responses will be used only for aggregate analysis and will not be identified as an individual response. No personal contact information will be shared with any outside parties, nor will it will not be sold or made available to any commercial entity. You may receive a summary of the survey results by requesting a copy with your submitted survey response. Please do not include contact information or request for survey results on the survey itself.

We would be most happy to answer any questions you might have. Please email us at ccogdill@wdemail.com, tabascoii@gmail.com, or chocolat0506@hotmail.com.

Thank you for your assistance.

Click Here to take survey

Around The Colorado Blogosphere 110607

The Colorado Index asks rhetorically, "is environmentalism an established religion"? As Ben DeGrow points out, if Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter has his way, Al Gore's climate fearmongering dogma will be an explicit part of every Colorado school.

Best Destiny finds the Democrats' profession of faith . . . lacking.

On the other side of the political fence, Dave Chandler of Colorado Green lambastes Colorado "Dimocrats" for not impeaching Vice President Dick Cheney:

Here's the message of the day ...

"Dear George and Dick:

Permission granted to kill, maim, lie, cheat and steal.

Your friends, Charlie Schumer, Di Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and the Rest of Your Dimocrat Pals in the House."

And you're still a register Dimocrat because ... why?

---

Ben DeGrow has posted a touching tribute to his grandfather, and it encapsulates for me as it probably does for so many of us in our late 20s or early 30s the type of grandfathers we were fortunate to have--"a man with a tremendous work ethic and incredible moral character".

Eating Meat Causes Global Warming; Al Gore In Denver Oct. 2

“You just cannot be a meat-eating environmentalist.”

Two quick thoughts: first, Al Gore will be in Denver October 2, and given his past record, we should anticipate significant cold weather-related phenomena from the "Al Gore effect"; second, to think that there are actually people to the left of Al Gore boggles the mind:

EVER since “An Inconvenient Truth,” Al Gore has been the darling of environmentalists, but that movie hardly endeared him to the animal rights folks. According to them, the most inconvenient truth of all is that raising animals for meat contributes more to global warming than all the sport utility vehicles combined.

The biggest animal rights groups do not always overlap in their missions, but now they have coalesced around a message that eating meat is worse for the environment than driving. They and smaller groups have started advertising campaigns that try to equate vegetarianism with curbing greenhouse gases.
. . .
When that report came out, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and other groups expected their environmental counterparts to immediately hop on the “Go Veggie!” bandwagon, but that did not happen. “Environmentalists are still pointing their fingers at Hummers and S.U.V.’s when they should be pointing at the dinner plate,” said Matt A. Prescott, manager of vegan campaigns for PETA.

It figures that PETA would latch it's own agenda onto the current vogue of global warming hysteria in order to build visibility. Moonbats protesting moonbats--should be fun!

So the animal rights groups are mobilizing on their own. PETA is outfitting a Hummer with a driver in a chicken suit and a vinyl banner proclaiming meat as the top cause of global warming. It will send the vehicle to the start of the climate forum the White House is sponsoring in Washington on Sept. 27, “and to headquarters of environmental groups, if they don’t start shaping up,” Mr. Prescott warned.

He said that PETA had written to more than 700 environmental groups, asking them to promote vegetarianism, and that it would soon distribute leaflets that highlight the impact of eating meat on global warming.

“You just cannot be a meat-eating environmentalist,” said Mr. Prescott, whose group also plans to send billboard-toting trucks to the Colorado Convention Center in Denver when Mr. Gore lectures there on Oct. 2. The billboards will feature a cartoon image of Mr. Gore eating a drumstick next to the tagline: “Too Chicken to Go Vegetarian? Meat Is the No. 1 Cause of Global Warming.”

Wanna meat meet Al Gore? Here is the info:

Survey: Less Than Half Of All Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory

Somewhere Al Gore is dealing with yet another "inconvenient truth":

In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the "consensus view," defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes' work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.

Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

This builds on last week's report that conclusions of "man-made" global warming "bites the dust".

Global Warming Fears Unfounded?

“Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust.”

Troubling Signs Appearing In Denver

From useonlywhatyouneed.org, click to enlarge.

Useonlywhatyouneed.org, a promotion by Denver Water to reduce water consumption, promotes a water conservation pledge that sounds a little extreme--among other sacrifices, the personal pledge includes the following: "I pledge to gently nudge my neighbor toward my conservation ways, and if that doesn't work, I pledge to weld his faucet shut."

I'm sure it was meant as tongue-in-cheek, but when it comes to the use of social pressure to enforce the current fad of global warming/climate change, the humorous "pledge" sounds more like forced indoctrination. It is not that difficult to make the logical step toward informing on one's neighbor for minor infractions, and given the sometimes hostile relationships that everyone has with a neighbor (these hostilities seem inevitable, and are usually of the pettiest nature), punitive retribution seems likely. One only has to gaze around certain neighborhoods in Denver (these signs are quite prominent in the area around the old Elitch's) to note the ubiquitousness and the intent of such social pressure. "Look at me! I conserve!" and the necessary corollary--"I'm watching you!"

Can you imagine if such a pledge was made for flying the flag? Considering the types of moonbats likely to take up this cause, we find the "use only what you need" pledge very disconcerting.

EPW Now Has Competing Blogs

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, the people running the EPW's (now) minority blog have seen their competition give blogging a try--though it will be hard for the newcomers to repeat the original blog's success, including links from Drudge that shut down the Senate's servers.

The global warming debate in the Senate's EPW Committee just got a little hotter. Or colder. Or saw a change in climate--or whatever the heck global warming is supposed to do to the weather these days.

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper Begins Second Term

"I promise to plow Denver's street much quicker this term."--Mayor Hickenlooper

The Inauguration of Mayor John Hickenlooper to his second term, on July 16, 2007 at the Denver Performing Arts Complex Temple Hoyne Buell Theatre. With his wife Helen Thorpe at his side, District Court Judge Larry J. Naves administers the oath of office. (THE DENVER POST | KATHRYN SCOTT OSLER)

The second inauguration of the anointed one Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper:

Musing that residents could argue "Denver is in a league of its own," among American cities and pledging to continue remaking the city with input from its citizens, Mayor John Hickenlooper was sworn in for his second term this morning.

"The best way to ensure that Denver remains a great city is to ensure that its neighborhoods, its local republics, are great...and dynamically committed to the well-being of the communities that join them in composing the grand political and social experiment known as the Mile High City of Denver," Hickenlooper said in prepared remarks released in advance of the speech.

Rather than the classic inaugural address in which an elected official reviews accomplishments and lays out a vision for the future, Hickenlooper's speech instead focused more on his philosophy of government.

"As it is pretty apparent by now, it is my nature not always to do the conventional thing," the text of the speech read.

The Democrat instead used the speech to decry "the paralysis of partisan politics," and encourage residents to remake the city with him.

"The great City of Denver offers a new model, one with roots back in the Greek city-state and in the fertile mind of Jefferson - a model of the local republic based on the noble ideal of the common good," according to the text.

"This requires citizen participation; to put this more accurately, it gives citizens a glorious opportunity to play a consequential role in history. It invites Denver residents into the privilege - and satisfaction and fun - of creating new ideas and opportunities to make our neighborhoods vibrant, safe, and healthy," Hickenlooper was to say in the speech at the Buell Theatre.

Among those who were to be in attendance were Gov. Bill Ritter, who Hickenlooper thanked for "your partnership with the City of Denver. We are foot soldiers in your army."

Notice the subtle mention of Hickenlooper's political affiliation followed by his lament over "partisan politics". Conclusion? Only Democrats want to end the partisanship.

And what the hell does he mean by "We are foot soldiers in your army?" Imagine what the press would say if Republican said that--mindless automatons doing the bidding of Rove or Wadhams or whatever. Since when are Denver's residents "foot soldiers" in the Governor's army?

As our friends south of the border say, ¿Cómo?

The Denver Post prefaced Hickenlooper's second term with this hagiography:

In his rise from quirky outsider to one of the most watched political figures in the West, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper said he has tried to govern the city the way he ran the restaurants that made him rich.

"In the restaurant business, we spend our whole lives trying never to have an enemy," he said. "You'll do anything - even to the point of going above and beyond what you think is fair - to make sure that relationship continues in a positive way. It always struck me that that was a more useful paradigm in politics."

Over the past four years Hickenlooper has ridden that paradigm to a level of popularity that, on the eve of his second term, has him envisioning Denver as a modern-day City on a Hill.

He talks about the Mile High City almost as an evangelist, recruiting aides and advisers by asking them if they want to come to Denver to "change the world."

"We're one city," said Hickenlooper, who will take the oath of office Monday, "but I think people around the country look at us as kind of a beacon of hope. We are solving problems and addressing issues in a productive way."

In his first term, the mayor bolstered his standing in the business community and gained credibility as a successful CEO by pulling the city out of four years of budget shortfalls.

He also has managed to sell ambitious social and environmental programs such as the Greenprint Denver sustainability plan [delicious moonbat nuttiness, ed.], a plan to end homelessness and a tax increase for early childhood education. Similar measures were defeated twice before Hickenlooper threw his political weight behind the issue.http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif

"Not everyone can try and please all sides and come out looking positive," University of Denver political scientist Seth Masket said. "There are a few people who seem to be able to pull this off. I would put Hickenlooper and (California Gov. Arnold) Schwarzenegger in that category."

As his clout has grown, Hickenlooper has been able to shake off trouble.

It's the teflon, man.

What about Ref. C--the ballot redeferendum that Hickenlooper jumped out of an airplane for? Even liberal Denver Post columnist Diane Carman with this touted budget solution.

I forgot. Hickenlooper is a Democrat.

He meant well.

Inhofe Responds To RFK's "Traitor" Comment

To the video:



In other climate news--
Katrina devastation not unrivaled--in fact, coastal development, not warming oceans, should be our biggest concern.

Global Warming and Solar Radiation--is there a link? (that's sarcasm, folks!)

Al Gore's Live Earth A Dismal Failure

Not much heat generated for NBC

A "foul-mouthed flop" in the UK

Chinablogging--China Overtakes US As World's Biggest CO2 Emitter

Al Gore arriving in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1:

China has overtaken the United States as the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, figures released today show.

The surprising announcement will increase anxiety about China's growing role in driving man-made global warming and will pile pressure onto world politicians to agree a new global agreement on climate change that includes the booming Chinese economy. China's emissions had not been expected to overtake those from the US, formerly the world's biggest polluter, for several years, although some reports predicted it could happen as early as next year.

But according to the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, soaring demand for coal to generate electricity and a surge in cement production have helped to push China's recorded emissions for 2006 beyond those from the US already. It says China produced 6,200m tonnes of CO2 last year, compared with 5,800m tonnes from the US. Britain produced about 600m tonnes.

Jos Olivier, a senior scientist at the government agency who compiled the figures, said: "There will still be some uncertainty about the exact numbers, but this is the best and most up to date estimate available. China relies very heavily on coal and all of the recent trends show their emissions going up very quickly." China's emissions were 2% below those of the US in 2005. Per head of population, China's pollution remains relatively low - about a quarter of that in the US and half that of the UK.

And how are they achieving this astounding increase in CO2 output?

China is building two power plants per week. 1000s of cars are added every month to Beijing's streets alone.

But who is to blame?

Us.

Duh!:

It is estimated that the average American still pollutes between five and six times more than the average Chinese person.

Climate sceptics in the UK have been asking why Britons should switch off lights, turn down central heating and avoid foreign flights in order to save carbon when the Chinese are increasing emissions at their current a rate.

"Responsibility for China's soaring emissions lies not just in Beijing but also in Washington, Brussels and Tokyo," said Greenpeace UK director John Sauven said.

"All we've done is export a great slice of the West's carbon footprint to China, and today we see the result.

"Let us not forget that the average Chinese emits just 3.5 tonnes of CO2 per year, whereas Britons emit nearly 10 tonnes and Americans 20 tonnes.

"The West moved its manufacturing base to China knowing it was vastly more polluting than Japan, Europe or the US," he added.

"No environmental conditions were attached to this move, in fact the only thing manufacturers were interested in was the price of labour.

Tuesday Link Sweep--Ousted CU Prof Phil Mitchell Speaks

'Cause I'm too busy:

Ousted CU professor Phil Mitchell sends a letter to the CU GOP, more background here:

May 1, 2007

Dear Friends,

A few weeks ago the new director of my program at CU—The Sewall Residential
Academic Program—confirmed that she would not be renewing my contract at CU.

So I have been fired. The process that was begun two years ago is now complete. At that time I alleged my firing was motivated by hostility toward me as a
political and religious conservative. I am certain this is still the motive.

In the past year the History Department at CU sent two professors into my
classroom who gave me negative teaching reviews. Then the new director of the
Sewall program did the same. It was as though they working off the same
template. These negative evaluations were sent to the Dean of Arts and Sciences
as justification for my firing, in spite of the following:

• My student evaluations are among the highest in the history of the university
and are the highest in my department.
• I have won almost every teaching award one can win at CU, some of them many
times.
• I have won more teaching awards than all the other professors in my program
combined.
• I have won more teaching awards than all my critics combined.
• The last senior member of the History Department to evaluate my class—last
February—opened his summary with, “It was a treat to be there and watch a master teacher at work.”
• My peer evaluations have ranged from very good to outstanding for twenty-three years.
• One history professor recommended I be retained to teach the other professors
how to teach.

My firing is blatant act of political and religious discrimination. It shows
nothing but contempt for the students of the University of Colorado. Apparently
student feelings mean nothing.

If you would like to write emails or letters on my behalf I recommend the
following addresses:
• Bud.Peterson@colorado.edu; Chancellor of CU, Boulder
• Gleeson@colorado.edu; Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences
• Phil.Distefano@Colorado.EDU; Executive Vice Chancellor, CU, Boulder

It would be fine with me if you sent me copies of your correspondence. Thank you
for your support and prayers.

Phil Mitchell
micaiahministries@comcast.net

---

Best Destiny explains why Colorado "Big Education" has big consequences.

Drunkablog catches Glen Spagnuolo's long-windedness, and new plans for Ward Churchill/Recreate68/TransformColumbusDay.

The Political Pale Horse exposes the enviromoonbats' true evil.

Moonbattery updates on confessed Vail arsonist Chelsea Gerlach.

The Middle Kingdom: Chinablogging

With an imminent trip to China just a few weeks away, it wouldn't be too bad to note some China-related headlines people may have missed:

Report: China Will Pass U.S. As Polluter:

China will pass the United States as the world's biggest source of greenhouse gasses this year, an official with the International Energy Agency was quoted as saying.

China had been forecast to surpass the U.S. in 2010, but its sizzling economic growth has pushed the date forward, the IEA's chief economist, Fatih Birol, was quoted as saying in an interview appearing in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal newspaper.

"In the past couple of months, economic growth and related coal consumption has grown at such an unexpected rate," Birol was quoted as saying. China's rising emissions will effectively cancel out attempts by other countries to reduce their own, he said.

Those comments follow the weekend release of a Chinese government report detailing the costs of climate change but asserting that the country should focus on development before cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Higher than average temperatures meant spreading deserts, worsening droughts, shrinking glaciers and increased spread of diseases, said the report, compiled by more than a dozen government bodies. It said emission limits were unfair and would constrain China's current energy and manufacturing industries.

China is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gasses, but is exempt from its restrictions because it is a developing country.

The Paris-based IEA advises developed country on energy policy.

China to use Marxism to clean-up Internet:

China's leaders are hoping that Karl Marx can shift the country's Internet users away from "decadent" content and help them clean up the Web, state media reported.

The Communist Party's Politburo this week asked media and cultural groups to promote and produce more "healthy online cultural products" including promotion of the ideology of Marxism, Xinhua news agency reported late Monday.

The government wants the Internet to "represent the social progress and the splendid traditional culture of China", the agency said, quoting a release from the meeting, which was led by President Hu Jintao.

The campaign's aim is to nurture a healthy online culture and prevent "decadent" material from spreading, Xinhua said.

China's Communist Party leaders, who enforce strict curbs on the press, have made no secret of the fact they regard the Internet as a threat and that it should be subjected to the same controls as traditional media.

In January, Hu called on the party to "purify" China's Internet community, which is rapidly growing as the country's economy expands.

The numbers going online jumped by almost 24 percent last year to reach 137 million, around one in ten Chinese, Xinhua quoted the China Internet Network Information Center as saying.

The country recently launched a crackdown on Internet pornography and last month capped the number of new cybercafes allowed to open this year, a measure state media said was aimed at stemming growing Internet addiction.

Chinese pirates beat Spider-Man to the punch:

China's infamous movie pirates have done it again -- "Spider-Man 3" is already being sold on Beijing's streets almost two weeks ahead of its U.S. premier.

Costing just over $1 apiece, the pirated DVDs appear to be of the actual movie, complete with a picture of the hero in a new, black spider suit which he wears for some of the film.

There is even a warning on the back, printed in Chinese, against pirating the product.

But put the one bought on Tuesday in the machine, and it does not work -- a common problem with Chinese-made DVDs, which are often made with poor equipment in dingy backrooms.

Early pirated copies of Hollywood blockbusters are sometimes filmed in cinemas and viewers can see people walking in front of the screen or hear members of the audience coughing. Other DVDs show totally different films to what may be advertised on the cover. China has been riled by U.S. complaints to the World Trade Organisation that it is not doing enough to tackle piracy, such as the billions lost each year by Hollywood to copyright pirates.

The government says it does take the problem seriously, but faces a multitude of problems such as convincing the man on the street not to buy fakes.

"It's too expensive to go to the cinema to watch movies," said Beijing resident Duan Nana. "This has a lot to do with why people are rushing to buy fake DVDs and watch movies at home. It's very common and it's logical."

China to Force Rain Ahead of Olympics:

Chance of showers during the 2008 Beijing Olympics: 50 percent. But Chinese meteorologists have a plan to bring sunshine.

The meteorologists say they can force rain in the days before the Olympics, through a process known as cloud-seeding, to clean the air and ensure clear skies. China has been tinkering with artificial rainmaking for decades, but whether it works is a matter of debate among scientists.

Weather patterns for the past 30 years indicate there is a 50 percent chance of rain for both the opening ceremony on Aug. 8, 2008 and the closing ceremony two weeks later, said Wang Yubin, an engineer with the Beijing Meteorological Bureau.

The forced rain could also help clean Beijing's polluted air, said Wang Jianjie, another meteorologist with the bureau.

"When conditions permit, we will artificially increase rainfall," she said. "Rainfall is a way to naturally clean the air."

In 2003, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences questioned the science behind cloud-seeding as "too weak." But China frequently uses artificial rainmaking in the drought-plagued north.

Last May, Beijing boasted having generated rainfall to clear the air and streets following the worst dust storm in a decade.

Technicians with the Beijing Weather Modification Office said they fired seven rocket shells containing 163 cigarette-size sticks of silver iodide over the city's skies. They claimed it provoked a chemical reaction in clouds that forced four-tenths of an inch of rain.

Beijing's air pollution is among Asia's worst. Officials have shuttered several chemical and steel plants on the city's edge, and many polluters will shut down _ or cut back _ during the Olympics. But the city also has 2.9 million registered vehicles, and the number is expected to reach 3.3 million by the Olympics, a 13 percent increase.

Celebrate Earth Day!

If you're of the red variety--today is Lenin's birthday. If you happen to be of the green persuasion (or a watermelon, green on outside, red on the inside!) today is Earth's day.

Relapsed Catholic says Earth Day is crap.

Sen. Inhofe challenges Hollywood to take the "Gore Pledge".

Sheryl Crow implores us to be sparing with our TP--1 square only!

Cox & Forkum give us the "Farce of Nature".

Earth Day, a "Festivus" for the smug among us!