Monday, May 22, 2017

A perfect example of Green/Left argumentation

We see below a sustained example of "ad hominem" argument -- argument devoted entirely to discrediting an arguer rather than addressing his arguments.  There is not a single solitary fact or statistic given in support of his belief that the slight temperature rise of last century was due to CO2

Tim Mannello

A recent letter writer makes his case against the seriousness of the many threats of man-made climate change by providing extensive excerpts from a short blog, “Environmentalists Are Dead Wrong.” The author of that blog is Dr. Walter Williams, a proud libertarian economist with a Ph. D. in, yes, Economics, not in climate science.

Dr. Williams has never done any research in climate sciences; therefore he might be expected to have based his analysis on experts in the field. Yet all but one of his citations is to someone outside the field of climate studies. Dr. Williams published his article in, which identifies itself as an anti-state, anti-war, pro-market blog founded by two self-proclaimed anarcho-capitalists, Lew Rockwell and Burt Blumert.

As Earth Day approached this year, the article was dutifully picked up by every fossil fuel-funded, man-made change denial site, network and megaphone you can shake a stick at.

The writer’s argument was based on cherry-picked, isolated, exaggerated predictions of a half-dozen scientists in fields almost exclusively unrelated to climate change. With one exception, citations from these sources are from popular magazines (one cited source is Mademoiselle).

They include Dr. George Wald, a biologist specializing in retinal pigmentation; Paul Erlich, a biologist expert on overpopulation; Kenneth Watt, an ecologist with a PhD. D. in Zoology; Gaylord Nelson, a Senator published in Look Magazine who quotes Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, who is an ornithologist; Harrison Brown, a nuclear scientist and geo-chemist predicting the disappearance of copper, lead, zinc, tin, gold and silver (this is called “throwing in the kitchen sink for good measure”); Nigel Calder, himself a critic of climate science and man-made global warming who predicts an impending ice age; David Viner, a climate scientist, (score one for you) whose predictions about the end of snow in Britain have proved to be ridiculous and ill-founded; plus totally irrelevant predictions made in the 1930’s and ’40’s by federal agencies that oil and gas supplies would peak.

Certainly, there must be better arguments against the preponderant conclusions of decades of climatological research affirming and confirming that: 1) “global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now 2) it is a growing threat to society,” 3) greenhouse gases from fossil fuels are isotopically identifiable and they, not any of the other factors that affect the earth’s climate, have had the greatest sustained positive forcing in increasing the average global temperature about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1880’s.” (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center.).

With equal certitude, you’re not going to hear reasonable counter-arguments from deniers. They are interested only in conclusions that support their absolutely cocksure, pre-conceived, ideological anti-government beliefs regardless of the source. Their arguments should not be dignified with the label of pseudo-science; they are certifiable rank idiocy.

Mademoiselle Magazine died in 1991. Maybe we should look to future Glamour or Cosmopolitan features originally written in crayon for authoritative studies on the matter. Alas, deniers never die. They don’t even fade away.


Greenland's ice is at it's highest level on record, but the Fake News Media does not want to report it


A new future for corals

Are coral reefs condemned to disappear? During the first decade of the 21st century, the intensification of cyclones, the phenomenon of coral bleaching due to ocean warming, outbreaks of a coral-eating starfish and coral diseases left us with this fear. But today, scientists are revising their pessimistic forecasts from the previous decade. In fact, recent research works show that, while numerous coral species have indeed been declining for more than 30 years, other are holding firm or even increasing in abundance. Consequently, some reefs have recently managed to recover.

Expanding coral genera

During a vast international study over fifteen years, IRD researchers and their partners observed the ecological development of seven coral reefs throughout the world: two in the Caribbean, in Belize and in the American Virgin Islands, and five throughout the Indo-Pacific Ocean in Kenya, Taiwan, Hawaii, Moorea and the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. Consequently, the scientists have shown the increase of certain genera, like the Porites reef corals, real reef builders that can resist temperature rises well.

They have also put these recent changes into perspective with regard to past events recorded in fossil reefs, showing that the abundance and structure of coral populations have already varied greatly over the course of past millennia.

Towards new underwater landscapes

These new data have enabled them to refine their mathematical models and to revise their forecasts for the coming decades. As ocean temperatures continue to rise, a subset of “winning” species will thrive: those that have the greatest heat tolerance, the best population growth rates or the greatest longevity. These species should progressively populate the planet’s reefs, until they dominate them entirely.

Consequently, the underwater landscapes of the future will be very different to the ones that have been known for millennia. However, much remains to be discovered regarding this new coral fauna and its features. One question in particular remains: will these new eco-systems continue to meet the needs of the populations who depend on them?


British retirement fund is betting on "Green" power

I am glad they are not handling my retirement funds.  If asked they would undoubtedly have invested in Solyndra -- ending up losing the lot

Millennials aren’t thinking much about retirement, but climate change is something many of them care deeply about. That’s smart, because by the time they retire, climate change and whatever humans do in the next 30 years to mitigate its effects will almost certainly have transformed the way we live; a transformation that could also have a big impact on their prospects for retirement.

Donald Trump, the US president, signed an executive order in March rolling back his predecessor’s Clean Power Plan, rejecting with a stroke of the pen what one commentator called “the most important thing any nation had ever done to reduce carbon emissions”. Will that alter the long-term picture? We don’t think so. It is not clear what impact it may have, but we believe the long-term future of the global economy is green.

The reasons are political, technological and financial. The cost of generating solar and wind power is becoming cheaper than fossil fuels in many parts of the world. Renewable capacity overtook coal-fired generation for the first time in 2016. China and India, respectively the world’s biggest and third-biggest polluters, have been investing heavily in green energy at home. China is planning to spend £292bn on its domestic green-energy market in the next three years and India’s Central Electricity Authority recently said that no coal-fired power stations will be built over the coming decade beyond those already in the pipeline. It is predicted that renewable-energy capacity in India will overtake that of new fossil fuel plants from 2018.

The energy infrastructure market appears to be heading in the same direction. Once again, where the US appears to be pulling back, China is stepping forward. Not only has it invested in more clean power at home, it is pouring money into developing economies’ energy infrastructure, spending $165bn since 2000. And the focus of that money, while fossil fuels still dominate, may be starting to shift to cleaner sources such as nuclear, hydropower and renewables. China outspent any other country in the world on overseas investments in green technology in 2016.

Closer to home, commitments made in Paris at the global climate talks in 2015 have spurred many businesses into action. Utility companies in almost every EU country pledged in March to phase out coal-fired plants from 2020. These companies are not waiting around for governments to shift the ground under their feet. Those that are not thinking about how to diversify away from heavily polluting fossil fuels will probably face future losses as markets leave them behind and policies penalise them.

For institutional investors with long-term horizons, the debate is not whether there will be a transition to a lower-carbon economy, it is about how quickly it occurs. Pension fund trustees in the UK have spent some time pondering the legalities of climate-related de-risking strategies, and some still are. Now these strategies are becoming an investment imperative. Short-term policy shifts may well have short-term effects. But for millennials saving into pensions for the next 40 to 50 years, the global transition to a low-carbon economy, which appears highly likely, is a more significant trend.

Among the world’s largest institutional investors, whose ranks "Nest" will join in the coming decade, that long-term picture is guiding our thinking. The smart money is being used to signal to businesses that a profound economic change in the way power is generated is happening. This is not about divestment. It is not in our members’ interests for companies to make losses or become unprofitable. But we do need to plan ahead and prepare their portfolios for the evident investment risks and opportunities that climate change and the transition to low carbon represent. That means finding scaleable, cost-effective ways to invest more in those companies that are well positioned for the low-carbon future, investing less in those that are not and engaging where progress can be encouraged.

Over the next 15 years or so, £1.7tn is due to flow into defined contribution pensions in the UK. We believe a significant proportion of those assets will be channelled towards a greener global economy. There may be mixed messages coming from the US at the moment, but the signals from the rest of the world, including the world of finance, are clear.


ENERGY STAR Repeal To Cause Global Depression For Progressive Media

President Trump recently announced the ‘close out‘ of the ENERGY STAR program, and has officially begun the deconstruction of one of the most corrupt federal programs in US history. This effectively ends the decades old mandate requiring that all government agencies purchase only the EPA’s brand of ‘certified’ energy efficiency products and services, opening our government contracting to honest competition for the first time in decades.

This is great news for most Americans, not so much for mainstream media outlets that helped market the EPA’s unique commodity for many years. EPA claims their brand has saved over $430 billion in utility bills since 1992, but can’t explain how the extraordinary energy saving occur or why electric bills would skyrocket from the use of ENERGY STAR products.

Mainstream media can’t report on the repeal of ENERGY STAR program which was the centerpiece of the Clean Energy Economy, because no one wants to talk about the evidence supporting those multi-billion dollar claims of the EPA anymore.

Now the media Resistance movement is anxious to end all dialog on the old Obama energy plan, and begin promoting China’s new action plan “One Belt, One Road” initiative as the path to prosperity.

Imagine the enormous challenge for bureaucrats trying to market this ‘socialist market economy’ program on behalf of the Global elites without the lucrative benefits of the ENERGY STAR brand to prop up your sales pitch.

Don’t be fooled by the current hysteria gripping the media, its only the first signs of severe depression about to set in as media foundations contemplate a future without any influence over the working class, a group they openly revile as deplorable. No amount of money will ever buy back the respect and trust of the American people for the corrupt media and their equally crooked Progressive business partners.

American businesses should stop listening to media moonbats, and start focusing on locating and competing for government contracts in every sub-division of government from the dog catcher to the largest GSA owned buildings in your area. The US government is the largest procurement agency in the world, and no longer under the monopoly control of EPA partnerships backing a European Socialist model of governance for America.

Did the media suddenly forget how China became a super power manufacturing ENERGY STAR brand products for the EPA, which are now mandated for use by government in Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Taiwan, Australia, Switzerland and the European Community but not in the USA anymore. Thank you President Trump!

The EPA claims their ENERGY STAR brand saves 25-50% more electrical energy than identical products, but can provide no proof to support their claims. There is no National Standards for the measurement or verification of electrical energy savings in technologies, government bureaucrats are solely responsible for making those energy-saving claims and our intelligence community apparently provided the only verification on the performance of the EPA’s unique product.

Leading to the question, how was it possible that FBI, NSA and CIA operatives all failed to read the 2014 Senate Report “The Chain of Environmental Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA” and not find any legal issues involving conflicts of interest, self-dealing or fraud under color of authority?

Americans should disregard the media suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome and start to research the millions of jobs and contracting opportunities coming available under President Trump’s Buy American-Hire American agenda. Congress will need time to write and pass new laws to replace decades worth of regulations, and the average citizen has no control over that portion of the process.

Relax! Understand that Progressives have no interest in competing for real jobs, have no skill-sets to create new businesses and they certainly don’t have any products or services of value to sell to our government that could ever compete against those provided by American small business. Now that’s what I call depressing!



For more postings from me, see  DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC and AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. Home Pages are   here or   main.html or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  

Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here


No comments: