In a recent Politico OPED, Representative John Linder calls on the US to not jump off the cliff for climate. Looking at his truthiness-laden and error-filled opinion piece drives to the conclusion that Linder doesn’t want Americans to jump off the cliff, but more simply to wear blindfolds and walk over the cliff into catastrophic climate chaos.
As will be shown after the fold, Linder’s arguments simply don’t stand up to reasonable scrutiny and provide yet another example of a news outlet ready to published utterly deceptive material seemingly under the umbrella of ‘its an opinion and thus its legitimate’. This, again, leads to a basic question: Would the Politico editors seek to assure that the Flat Earth Society was quoted in a piece discussing a sailboat circumnavigating the globe or would they provide OPED space to someone asserting that Apollo moon landings were faked on the day an Astronaut was buried? After all, these are opinions and opinions with about the technical and scientific literacy and accuracy as Linder’s oped.
Let’s take a look at Linder’s deceptiveness which is, in fact, a repeating of talking points about ClimateGate / SwiftHack that reflects a devoted watching of Faux News rather than any attempt to represent these emails with any accuracy.
As we have seen in the past month, the science of global warming is far from settled. In fact, considering the recent e-mails that surfaced from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, it is clear that there has been a well-crafted plot among prominent global warming zealots to tamper with evidence, silence scientific opposition and stifle debate.
Wow, “well-crafted plot … global warming zealots … tamper with evidence …” Time to call in the FBI, these are people seeking to undermine the nation. Right? Well, the list of substantive and factual looks at this is getting long and deep and those looks have one thing in common when it comes to Linder’s discussion: they show Rep Linder as seeking to sell the citizen a load of b…s… rather than providing a truthful discussion.
As, for example, the AP concluded: “the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.”
Later, Linder continues his falsehood-filled diatribe.
In spite of all this, on Dec. 18, 2009, President Barack Obama will attend the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen and will very likely sign an international agreement to commit our nation to binding carbon dioxide emission targets — which will undoubtedly lead our economy to shrink, unemployment to rise and incomes for average Americans to fall, thanks to increased prices for basic goods and services.
This sort of distorting truthiness has power in the political debate despite the utter falsehoods behind it. What will the impact be of unchecked climate chaos? What would be the benefit be due to reducing fossil fuel use and fossil fuel pollution? (Note, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that burning of fossil fuels has a $120 billion annual health care impact in the United States. On top of those counted economic costs, I don’t know about Representative Linder, but I believe that there is an economic value to lowering the chances of my children developing asthma or cancer.)
Study after study have shown very small economic impacts from acting to mitigate climate change — if there would be, in aggregate, costs at all. And, every one of these studies has been overly stove-piped, not including issues like the fossil fuel burning impacts on health nor the economic value of reducing the risk of catastrophic climate change. Compared to the devastating impacts that will come from unchecked climate change (including to Linder’s citizens) the cost of action is cheap.
Of course, European leaders and radical environmentalists will applaud the president’s willingness to turn over the management of future emissions to an international body with the authority to assess costs on each nation for payment of its “climate debt.” We will be relinquishing our sovereignty to an international body and will join other developed nations in jumping off the economic cliff.
One has to wonder whether Linder has binoculars around his shoulder looking for black helicopters.
A president who takes months to decide to agree with his military commanders in Afghanistan ought to take at least as long to ask his scientific advisers to review the recent disclosures of the largest scientific fraud in history before he consigns our sovereignty to the United Nations.
Are talking points wonderful? Especially ones that have reverberated around the sound machine. Search Google for “largest scientific fraud climategate” and there are, in just a few weeks, more than 2 million hits. On the first page of those results, the non-partisan FactCheck.ORG with their Dec 10th posting of Hacked e-mails show climate scientists in a bad light but don’t change scientific consensus on global warming. One of the points, “E-mails being cited as “smoking guns” have been misrepresented.” Hmm, if we want to talk “fraud”, the more appropriate place to turn the spotlight is on those who choose, like Representative Linder, to misrepresent the stolen emails to undermine the work of 1000s of scientists.
Nor can we ignore the new science being presented every day. This past November, BBC News Online reported on a new study of Himalayan glaciers. Contrary to popular belief and what some global warming zealots have been telling us for years, the Himalayan glaciers are not melting across the board and are unlikely to completely disappear by the end of the 21st century. In fact, new scientific evidence from satellites and ground measurements show that some of the glaciers are actually advancing.
Wow, isn’t it wonderful that Linder can quote from the BBC? Let’s try France 24, from 6 December: “More than a billion people in Asia depend on Himalayan glaciers for water, but experts say they are melting at an alarming rate, threatening to bring drought to large swathes of the continent. … “When the glaciers get hotter, you get more water, but there comes a point when the water will run out. It’s like a bank balance, if you’re not putting money in, you can’t take it out.”"
More interestingly, of course, is that Linder isn’t telling ‘the rest of the story’. The scientists who have concluded that there is growth have associated the growth with global warming. Warming ocean water evaporates more water leading to moister air which leads to greater snow in some mountain areas … thus, for a period, while melting is speeding, snow accumulation is faster. Eventually, however, the melt outpaces the snow fall.
In addition, for the second time this year, the Australian Senate voted against Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s plan to impose binding carbon emission targets on Australia’s economy. The Liberal Party in the Senate was so opposed to the prime minister’s plan that it ousted its own leader for supporting it. The party’s new leader, Tony Abbot, who quite likely will stand for election against Rudd if a snap election is called, has said that the emissions plan is nothing more than a tax on Australians with little hope of affecting the climate. Abbot supports greater scientific and economic study of the issue.
That is exactly what Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe and the other Republicans [called for in their desire to delay action].
Should it surprise anyone that Linder cites as some form of authority voice to listen to another nation’s political party that is also mired in disinformation and deceptiveness when it comes to climate change and the economics of tackling it?
In light of all the evidence that the science underpinning the theory of global warming is bogus
Get it from above? The only thing “bogus” here is the dishonest representation of stolen emails.
submitting to binding targets at Copenhagen will ultimately be seen for what it is: an agreement for an international tax and global governance, not science.
Duck, the black helicopters are arriving.
I beg Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress to look at the facts before committing the United States to binding emission targets that are figments of radical imaginations and would have no measurable impact even if they could be met.
Huh … “no measurable impact”? Yet again, Representative Linder chooses to insult the quality of America’s scientists and engineers by asserting that they will not be able to measure the impact of actions undertaken to cut carbon emissions.
New evidence of our planet’s dynamic climate system is being discovered every day by scientists around the world who are brave enough to stand up and continue exploring this world for facts and knowledge. The least we can do, as responsible policymakers, is to learn from their hard work and make sensible decisions based on complete and accurate evidence.
[Quick note: “complete … evidence” provides that huge loophole. When it comes to the incredibly complex dynamics of the planetary climate system, our knowledge and understanding will never be “complete”. If a general waited for action to have 100% knowledge, every battle would be lost. We have enough knowledge for action. This is simply an excuse for inaction and delay, rather than a serious intent to use additional information to come up with meaningful policy.)
Yes, every day scientists discover more. And, with essentially every day, the science behind the Theory of Global Warming strengthens. And, with essentially every passing day, the scientific understanding of the risks to humanity due to unchecked climate chaos grows.
The least you “can do, as responsible policymakers, is to learn from their hard work” and take action to protect America and Americans.