Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Follow the (Climate Change) Money

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Follow the (Climate Change) Money

    Follow the (Climate Change) Money

    The first iron rule of American politics is: Follow the money. This explains, oh, about 80 percent of what goes on in Washington.

    Shortly after the latest "Chicken Little" climate change report was published last month, I noted on CNN that one reason so many hundreds of scientists are persuaded that the sky is falling is that they are paid handsomely to do so.

    I said, "In America and around the globe governments have created a multibillion dollar climate change industrial complex." And then I added: "A lot of people are getting really, really rich off of the climate change industry." According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009."

    This doesn't mean that the planet isn't warming. But the tidal wave of funding does reveal a powerful financial motive for scientists to conclude that the apocalypse is upon us. No one hires a fireman if there are no fires. No one hires a climate scientist (there are thousands of them now) if there is no catastrophic change in the weather.

    Why doesn't anyone in the media ever mention this?

    But when I lifted this hood, it incited more hate mail than from anything I've said on TV or written. Could it be that this rhetorical missile hit way too close to home?

    How dare I impugn the integrity of scientists and left-wing think tanks by suggesting that their findings are perverted by hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer handouts. The irony of this indignation is that any academic whose research dares question the "settled science" of the climate change complex is instantly accused of being a shill for the oil and gas industry or the Koch brothers.

    Apparently, if you take money from the private sector to fund research, your work is inherently biased, but if you get multimillion-dollar grants from Uncle Sam, you are as pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    How big is the climate change industrial complex today? Surprisingly, no one seems to be keeping track of all the channels of funding. A few years ago, Forbes magazine went through the federal budget and estimated about $150 billion in spending on climate change and green energy subsidies during President Obama's first term.

    That didn't include the tax subsidies that provide a 30 percent tax credit for wind and solar power -- so add to those numbers about $8 billion to $10 billion a year. Then add billions more in costs attributable to the 29 states with renewable energy mandates that require utilities to buy expensive "green" energy.

    Worldwide the numbers are gargantuan. Five years ago, a leftist group called the Climate Policy Initiative issued a study that found that "global investment in climate change" reached $359 billion that year. Then to give you a sense of how money-hungry these planet-saviors are, the CPI moaned that this spending "falls far short of what's needed" a number estimated at $5 trillion.

    For $5 trillion we could feed everyone on the planet, end malaria, and provide clean water and reliable electricity to every remote village in Africa. And we would probably have enough money left over to find a cure for cancer and Alzheimer's.

    The entire Apollo project to put a man on the moon cost less than $200 billion. We are spending twice that much every year on climate change.

    This tsunami of government money distorts science in hidden ways that even the scientists who are corrupted often don't appreciate. If you are a young eager-beaver researcher who decides to devote your life to the study of global warming, you're probably not going to do your career any good or get famous by publishing research that the crisis isn't happening.

    But if you've built bogus models that predict the crisis is getting worse by the day, then step right up and get a multimillion-dollar grant.

    Now here's the real scandal of the near trillion dollars that governments have stolen from taxpayers to fund climate change hysteria and research. By the industry's own admission, there has been almost no progress worldwide in combatting climate change. The latest reports by the U.S. government and the United Nations say the problem is getting worse, and we have not delayed the apocalypse by a single day.

    Has there ever been such a massive government expenditure that has had such miniscule returns on investment? After three decades of "research" the only "solution" is for the world to stop using fossil fuels, which is like saying that we should stop growing food.

    Really? The greatest minds of the world entrusted with hundreds of billions of dollars can only come up with a solution that would entail the largest government power grab in world history, shutting down industrial production (just look at the catastrophe in Germany when they went all in for green energy), and throwing perhaps billions of human beings into poverty? If that's the remedy, I will take my chances on a warming planet.

    President Donald Trump should tell these so-called scientists that "you're fired." And we taxpayers should demand our money back.

    COPYRIGHT 2018 CREATORS.COM
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

  • #2
    Reminds me of the comic about a group of climate researchers at a conference:

    "Show of hands: who is willing to admit that global warming isn't real and that we should all give up a very lucrative source of grant money? Seeing no hands, we will move on to the next item on our agenda..."
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • #3
      If you can't argue against the science, then you can spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. Anything he says here is three times as true about the fossil fuel industry. You can follow the money on them as well, and think tanks they funded.

      At the end of the day the only thing that matters to me is whether the science is sound.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm a skeptic.

        Just like the skeptics I deal with when I'm sharing the Gospel.

        When somebody is not ready to believe, I don't attack them or hate them or make fun of them.... I patiently lay out the case.

        I pray for them, I encourage them, I answer questions without blowing my stack or calling them names.

        Why can't the climate preachers do likewise?

        What is there about the religion of climate science that has the preachers so full of hate and rage?
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          I'm a skeptic.

          Just like the skeptics I deal with when I'm sharing the Gospel.

          When somebody is not ready to believe, I don't attack them or hate them or make fun of them.... I patiently lay out the case.

          I pray for them, I encourage them, I answer questions without blowing my stack or calling them names.

          Why can't the climate preachers do likewise?

          What is there about the religion of climate science that has the preachers so full of hate and rage?
          Everyone has to believe in something. The curbs on behavior espoused by those who are driven by climate change do not address hate or rage, so those are likely to be unimpeded.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            I said, "In America and around the globe governments have created a multibillion dollar climate change industrial complex." And then I added: "A lot of people are getting really, really rich off of the climate change industry." According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009."
            As governments move to initiate massive spending to address the climate change threat reported to them by their scientists, obviously there are going to be recipients of that spending. But those recipients obviously can't bribe scientists backward in time. The scientists who have spent their lives working for government research institutes who continue telling the governments they are seeing evidence of climate change, are also different to those free-lancing scientists who a company might subsequently employ to do some research favorable to their own interests.

            In many traditional fossil-fuel-focused US states, e.g. West Virginia, there are now far more 'green energy' jobs than there are coal jobs. The "Green New Deal" being advocated by progressives, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is overwhelmingly popular according to polling:

            Poll:

            "Some members of Congress are proposing a 'Green New Deal' for the U.S. They say that a Green New Deal will produce jobs and strengthen America's economy by accelerating the transition from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy. The Deal would generate 100% of the nation's electricity from clean, renewable sources within the next 10 years; upgrade the nation's energy grid, buildings, and transportation infrastructure; increase energy efficiency; invest in green technology research and development; and provide training for jobs in the new green economy. How much do you support or oppose this idea?"

            81% voted somewhat or strongly support, 18% voted somewhat or strongly oppose

            Infrastructure spending is very popular in general, because people like it when the government does something clearly useful for everyone and creates some jobs. And even among those who don't believe climate change is happening, moving from coal-burning power plants that visually pollute the air to some solar panels and wind turbines that don't do so seems like an obvious improvement.
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              As governments move to initiate massive spending to address the climate change threat reported to them by their scientists, obviously there are going to be recipients of that spending. But those recipients obviously can't bribe scientists backward in time. The scientists who have spent their lives working for government research institutes who continue telling the governments they are seeing evidence of climate change, are also different to those free-lancing scientists who a company might subsequently employ to do some research favorable to their own interests.

              In many traditional fossil-fuel-focused US states, e.g. West Virginia, there are now far more 'green energy' jobs than there are coal jobs. The "Green New Deal" being advocated by progressives, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is overwhelmingly popular according to polling:

              Poll:

              "Some members of Congress are proposing a 'Green New Deal' for the U.S. They say that a Green New Deal will produce jobs and strengthen America's economy by accelerating the transition from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy. The Deal would generate 100% of the nation's electricity from clean, renewable sources within the next 10 years; upgrade the nation's energy grid, buildings, and transportation infrastructure; increase energy efficiency; invest in green technology research and development; and provide training for jobs in the new green economy. How much do you support or oppose this idea?"

              81% voted somewhat or strongly support, 18% voted somewhat or strongly oppose

              Infrastructure spending is very popular in general, because people like it when the government does something clearly useful for everyone and creates some jobs. And even among those who don't believe climate change is happening, moving from coal-burning power plants that visually pollute the air to some solar panels and wind turbines that don't do so seems like an obvious improvement.
              In the abstract, switching entirely to clean, renewable sources is an excellent idea. Now, tell those being polled it will triple their energy bill, and see if it's still way popular.
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                In the abstract, switching entirely to clean, renewable sources is an excellent idea. Now, tell those being polled it will triple their energy bill, and see if it's still way popular.
                Why would it do so? Let's say the federal government is paying for the costs of the building of the new solar and wind power stations out of general taxes that might otherwise be spend somewhere else (e.g. military-industrial complex), what the average person with their energy bill is then paying for is the running costs of the power stations. If those are coal power stations they are paying for buying the coal each year that is burned to provide the power. If those are wind or solar power stations they are paying for no fuel. It would seem likely to be cheaper then for them?
                "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • #9
                  We have had a carbon tax added to our energy bills since the NDP came into power 4 years ago. The money is going into general coffers and to my knowledge not one bit has been used to pay for anything other than needless things the government wants to buy.

                  It has effectively doubled my natural gas bill, added considerably to the electric bill, and adds dollars to every tank of gasoline that I buy.

                  If governments had real interest in fixing the environment they would spend the money collected on things that fix the environment, not willy nilly on whatever suits their fancy.

                  In the meantime, they've shut down coal production in the province, putting thousands of people out of work. And they are doing nothing constructive to get oil moving to tidewater, so thousands more are out of work.

                  Thankfully, there is a provincial election in the spring. And a federal election next fall. Because the feds are no better, and want to slap a federal carbon tax on top of what we're already paying.

                  It stinks, frankly.


                  Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                    As governments move to initiate massive spending to address the climate change threat...
                    The way you misused the quote function, it makes it appear I'm the one who said that to which you are responding.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So any research topic that is heavily funded should be blindly discounted regardless of methodology. Got it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Why are you so reluctant to accept global warming when the consequences if true, as seems likely, are so harmful?
                        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                          Why are you so reluctant to accept global warming when the consequences if true, as seems likely, are so harmful?
                          We've been through this before. I'm already living "greener" than a lot of people I know who are climate preachers. And me believing or not isn't going to change the outcome.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            We've been through this before. I'm already living "greener" than a lot of people I know who are climate preachers.
                            And yet you openly resist the scientific consensus for global warming with such cynical OP's as this one and sneering comments such as “climate preachers". Why, when the consequences are predicted to be so dire?

                            And me believing or not isn't going to change the outcome.
                            It was because of your beliefs and those of your ilk, that Trump precipitously withdrew from the Paris Agreement, so as to appease those that comprise his base.
                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              I'm a skeptic.

                              Just like the skeptics I deal with when I'm sharing the Gospel.

                              When somebody is not ready to believe, I don't attack them or hate them or make fun of them.... I patiently lay out the case.

                              I pray for them, I encourage them, I answer questions without blowing my stack or calling them names.

                              Why can't the climate preachers do likewise?

                              What is there about the religion of climate science that has the preachers so full of hate and rage?
                              This level of skepticism, after all that you have learned, simply means that you hate your grandchildren.
                              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                              “not all there” - you know who you are

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by whag, Yesterday, 05:11 PM
                              0 responses
                              20 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:25 AM
                              32 responses
                              206 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post oxmixmudd  
                              Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 01:48 PM
                              24 responses
                              104 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, 03-17-2024, 11:56 AM
                              52 responses
                              285 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seer
                              by seer
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-16-2024, 07:40 AM
                              77 responses
                              386 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X