Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Top 5 Lies Of Obama's Climate Change Speech

The Top 5 Lies Of Obama's Climate Change Speech

Investor's Business Daily  6/26/13
False Witness: President Obama is being lauded for his plans to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. But the scheme looks more like the last refuge of a desperate movement, because the speech he gave in its defense was full of lies.
Al Gore called Obama's Tuesday presentation at Georgetown University a "terrific and historic speech." It was not an honest message, though.
His text was laden with myths, fables, distortions and outright lies. Here are the top five:
1. "The planet is warming."
Earth's post-1950 warming trend stopped at least 16 years ago. This is an admission made by Britain's Met Office last fall. The media have confirmed the lack of warming, including the New York Times, which says the warming stopped 15 years ago rather than 16.
2. "Human activity is contributing to it."
There is no way that Obama or anyone else can say with any degree of certainty that human activity is contributing to climate change. Weather and climate are complex, are controlled by a multitude of variables, and are only dimly understood.
Scientists are free to claim that man is causing the planet to warm. And of course they do. But if they say it's an indisputable fact, that there is no room for the possibility that humans aren't responsible for post-Little Ice Age warming, then they are being dishonest.
3. "The overwhelming judgment of science — of chemistry and physics and millions of measurements — has put all that (doubt) to rest."
There is dissent in the scientific community, and it's not insignificant.
Consider a survey of 1,077 professional engineers and geoscientists, conducted by academics and its findings peer reviewed. The researchers discovered that 24% of the respondents "believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the earth" while another 10% consider the "'real' cause of climate change" to be "unknown" and acknowledge that "nature is forever changing and uncontrollable."
Two of the study's academics reported that "skepticism regarding anthropogenic climate change remains" among climate scientists.
4. "Ninety-seven percent of scientists, including, by the way, some who originally disputed the data, have now put that (doubt) to rest."
This claim is from something called the "Doran Survey," which supposedly found that 75 of 77 climatologists agree that man is causing global warming. But 77 isn't an adequate sample size from which to draw such a conclusion and this group of scientists holds "unknown qualifications," says Lawrence Solomon, a Canadian environment writer. It's a dubious finding.
5. "Americans across the country are already paying the price of inaction in insurance premiums, state and local taxes, and the costs of rebuilding and disaster relief."
If Americans are paying steeper insurance premiums, it's not due to man-made climate change. It's because insurers have bought into the myth. Or found a way to charge more. Or both.
If Americans are paying higher taxes, it's not due to inaction. It's because greedy elected officials have found another pretext for hiking taxes.
Obama's third point is particularly specious. There has been no damage or disaster wrought by global warming. It has not caused storms to increase either in intensity or frequency.
Kerry Emanuel, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and leading hurricane researcher, once believed as Obama does — that man-made global warming will bring stronger and more frequent storms.
But he reconsidered and in 2008 told the New York Times, "The models are telling us something quite different from what nature seems to be telling us."
Even Gore has had to admit that scientists "won't let us yet" link tornadoes to global warming.
An argument that can't stand on its own has to resort to deceit and exaggeration to perpetuate its existence. Such spectacles will only grow worse as the phony debate's last days approach. This is how we know that the great global warming scare is nearing its end.


  1. Everything is lies.

    Let's consider some facts. Is the Arctic warming? Yes, like everywhere else, with a long-term trend for 500 years rising out of the Little Ice Age at the rate of about half a degree per century, due to turn to cooling at least within 200 years. But is there a hockey stick? No.

    In fact the Arctic is no hotter than it was in the late 1930's and early 1940's.

    Is there a super-imposed 60 year natural cycle that caused all the alarm during the 30 years of rising prior to 1998? Yes.

    But it's all natural - every bit of it. And it's nothing whatsoever to do with carbon dioxide, radiative forcing, back radiation, greenhouse effects or any such travesties of physics.

  2. There is no evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate change. The models that have predicted such have been wrong but the President does not know this. The President likes to say things that sound good at the time but turn out to be nothing but bs. For example the President said that the White House dog would be a mutt, "like me", from a shelter yet the dog they got was a pure breed who had never set foot in a shelter. The President is suppose to be the most powerful man in the free world yet he could not keep his word on something as trivial as the White House dog. Since CO2 is so bad, maybe the EPA should enact a total band on all CO2 emissions. Since H2O is more responsible for the greenhouse effect than CO2, maybe they should extend their ban to H2O as well.

  3. see also

  4. see also:

  5. see also

  6. see also

  7. Obama knows he lying. All he cares about is using it as an excuse to tax us some more and give it to his green buddies.

  8. Good article, but there is MUCH more. Frederick Seitz Past President of the National Academy of Sciences sponsored a petition against the whole global warming façade at Over 19,000 scientist have signed this petition , as opposed to the 600 the U.N. could scrounge up, and some of these 600 have since reconsidered their past agreement, such as Nobel Prize winning physicist Ivar Giaever who stated in an update to the U.S. Senate Minority report for 2007 that “Global warming has become a new religion” and “I am a skeptic.” Later, in 20011, Giaver upped the ante by resigning from the American Physical Society, stating “"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period."

    Japanese scientist Kiniori Itoh, another former IPCC member has called Gorian warming a “scientific scandal,” while noting that people “will feel deceived by science and scientists” when they learn the truth. For a complete list of signees to the OISM petition – which includes a simply staggering number of Ph.Ds, - see, where they are arranged in alphabetical order. Meanwhile a similar petition at as of Jan., 2010 – had 31,486 scientist signatures, including 9,029 with Ph.Ds, disagreeing with anthropogenic global warming (the minimum qualifier to be on the petition is a BA in a field related to climate).

  9. Oh yes. One more thing - Farley Mowat, the noted Canadian leftist and Greenpeace activist, wrote in his book West Viking (written while we were still in the global cooling scare) that there were probably at least dwarf forests growing in Greenland when the Vikings arrived in 985 AD and the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History reports “… Erik the Red discovered two areas of southwest Greenland which were suitable for farming, with grasslands and small stands of alder and birch.” You will note that it is too cold today for any type of forests to grow in Greenland, and there is zero ability to farm. Mowat also reported the Arctic pack ice was much less in that Viking discovery era than today. Dr. Fred Singer writes that when the Vikings first settled Greenland, they grew vegetables, and it was warm enough to allow the population to grow to 3,000 people and by 1100 AD the place was thriving enough that they had their own bishop and twelve churches. Nature reported in a 2010 article that clamshell studies also confirm Norse records. Meanwhile, the Archeological Survey of Canada has also noted around “A.D. 1000, a warmer climate resulted in the tree line advancing 100 kilometres north of its present position.” Yet, in the 1100s, Greenland cooled dramatically, briefly stabilized, and then dropped even further in the 1200s to the early 1400s. As Dale Mackenzie Brown writes “An ice core drilled from the island's massive icecap between 1992 and 1993 shows a decided cooling off in the Western Settlement during the mid-fourteenth century” . Indeed, when I was visiting Iceland at Skaftafell Nat'l Park two years ago, Icelandic historians know from extant deeds – and have put in the displays at the park - that somewhere around FORTY old Viking era farms are currently buried under the Vatnajokull glacier system (the largest in the world outside of Greenland and Antarctica). In other words, it was simply much warmer in the Icelandic settlement era than it is today.


  11. If you think back to booshes Nwo speech in '91 he talkes about ending all wars, (because no one will have weapons but them,) and then think about where all the revenue from defence contract spending will come from, (or be relaced by) you got it carbon taxes