masthead-highres

Wednesday, February 03, 2010

Bizarre Climategate Update #5: Perhaps Our Children's Fourth Grade Class Should Help the IPCC

ALT TAGMaybe the IPCC used a primary school geography book that wasn't peer-reviewed?


Steve McIntyre reports that the last IPCC report (AR4) claimed 55 percent of land on which 60 percent of the Dutch live is below sea level. The true figure is 20 percent.

Over the last few days there has been a dustup between climate scientist Michael Tobis and a number of bloggers and commentators after Tobis questioned whether a woman who had raised nine kids is qualified to question climate scientists (because, as he put it, she hadn't had the time "to think about complicated grownup stuff").

By the time a mom has helped nine kids through their primary school science homework, she might have a pretty good idea about the geography of the Netherlands.

Obviously, the racy-novel-writing economist and engineer who runs the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, doesn't.

Maybe he should have helped his kids with their homework more often.

Put a mom in charge, I say. Or my kids. At least when fourth graders do a job, someone checks their work.

Addendum, 2/6/10: Michael Tobis ended the conversation about parenthood on a gracious note (here and here).


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:59 PM

Bizarre Climategate Update #4: IPCC Chairman Wishes Painful Death Upon Critics

ALT TAGQuestion this report, and a top UN official will wish you dead


Under fire for the Glaciergate, Amazongate and Please-Fund-My-Institute-Gate sectors, among others, of the ever-broadening Climategate scandal, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and a man who cares so much about global warming, he doesn't use his free electric car because it isn't big enough for his chauffeur), has now all but wished a slow and painful death upon his critics.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Pachauri said:
I don't want to get down to a personal level, but all you need to do is look at [my critics'] backgrounds. They are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder - I hope that they apply it to their faces every day - and people who say that the only way to deal with HIV/Aids is to screen the population on a regular basis and isolate those who are infected.
Typical of IPCC research, everything here except, presumably, Pachauri's wish that we would put a carcinogen on our faces daily is an invention, and a strikingly obvious one at that.

The man doesn't even lie well.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:05 PM

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Journalists Against Transparency?

ALT TAGThe IPCC's Compromised 2007 Assessment Report (AR4)

In response to my "Three Steps the IPCC Must Take," which, among other things, urged the IPCC to "adopt an uncompromising transparency policy, which includes the release of all data, all emails, all meeting minutes, all drafts and all other documentation related to the development of assessment reports and all other policy pronouncements, in the past and from this date forward," I received the following communication:
Will your Center also be adhering to this stringent transparency standard?

If so, when will such information from your group be available?

Thanks,

Steven Dolley
Managing Editor, Inside NRC
Platts Nuclear
I am amazed that a journalist took umbrage at my call for IPCC transparency (which is how I read his response, which I posted in full).

I believe Mr. Dolley misses the point in several ways.

First, (alas!) no nation has ever signed a treaty pledging to undertake actions based on pronouncements made by the National Center for Public Policy Research, as they have for those of the IPCC;

Second, the IPCC is funded by, among others, U.S. taxpayers (we are a tax-exempt institution -- that is, donations to us are tax-deductible; we still pay many taxes -- but we do not accept government funding);

Third, we are not doing peer-reviewed science, though if we did, we would make all the relevant documents public as we urge the IPCC to do;

Fourth, our management is not profiting on the side based on statements made, or conclusions published by, our personnel, as media reports indicate has been going at the IPCC;

Fifth; as we are a tax-exempt institution, like all other such U.S. institutions, our internal documents are not private, as the IRS can request a review of them, including all emails going back three years, at any time, just by asking. No such check exists on the IPCC.

Should at some future date governments around the world start lining up to brag about how strongly they are trying to implement policies based on NCPPR conclusions, I would be happy to suggest to our board of directors that we make all our internal emails, and any other relevant documents, related to the development of those policies, public.

In the meantime, I remain intrigued by the notion of a journalist being opposed to transparency.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:01 AM

Monday, January 25, 2010

Three Steps the IPCC Must Take

IPCCLogo.jpgIn the wake of admissions the IPCC knew all along it was putting bogus science in its 2007 Assessment Report, that the false prediction was included specifically for its "impact on policymakers and politicians," and that this allegedly was covered up as long as it was because the IPCC chairman was raising money for his personal pursuits based on the prediction, the IPCC must immediately take three steps to restore its credibility. If it does not, the Obama Administration should use its influence to have it shut down.

To restore its credibility, the IPCC should:
1) Return its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize and replace its current leadership;

2) Adopt and enforce a strict conflict-of-interest policy;

3) Adopt an uncompromising transparency policy, which includes the release of all data, all emails, all meeting minutes, all drafts and all other documentation related to the development of assessment reports and all other policy pronouncements, in the past and from this date forward.
Step one would signal to the world that the IPCC is serious about reform.

Step two would reduce, though not eliminate, the temptation faced by IPCC personnel to tailor conclusions to moneymaking, career or fundraising opportunities for themselves or affiliated businesses or institutions.

Step three would be a constant reminder to IPCC personnel that their work genuinely will be peer-reviewed, in a universal sense, which is as it should be given the gravity of the IPCC's work.

Politicians relying upon IPCC recommendations are considering policies that would limit the access of billions of people to low-cost energy in an effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. This is a grave step that should be undertaken only if the alternative is worse. As many have considered the IPCC to be the institution that can answer that question, given the gravity of these circumstances, no level of transparency and ethics can be too high.

Global warming believers and "skeptics" do not often agree, but this is a subject upon which we should be able to reach a true consensus. No one benefits when the IPCC knowingly publishes bogus science.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:56 AM

Sunday, January 24, 2010

IPCC Breaking Scandals: Where to Get News

ClimateDepotTomNelsonPlainPNG.pngNews is breaking fast and furiously in the breaking IPCC scandal. We'll have more to say about it shortly, but won't have time for a full roundup of links to news about all the breaking events. For that, I strongly recommend visits to Climate Depot and Tom Nelson.

Don't go to one; go to both.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 11:37 PM

Message to IPCC: Time to Return the Nobel Peace Prize

Kids holding candlesChildren in Kenya light candles to illustrate the need for access to energy in their community. Many of the pictured children cannot do homework at home after dark, as they do not have electricity in their homes. Photo by David Ridenour

The relevant scientist at the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has now admitted false information on the alleged aggressive melting of Himalayan was placed in the 2007 IPCC report to "impact policy-makers and politicians," and that he knew the information was not based on a solid scientific foundation.

For this work, the IPCC won half the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 (sharing it with Al Gore, who was awarded half in his own right).

For committing this fraud, the IPCC should voluntarily return the Nobel Peace Prize, and, if they want the IPCC to ever have credibility again, people who believe in the global warming theory should join us in this call. Unless there are severe repercussions -- in the case of the IPCC, mostly embarrassment -- for intentionally committing scientific fraud, we'll get more and more of it. There is money to be made if the global warming theory is proven true, which leads to a lot of temptation that not every scientist or allegedly scientific organization is going to resist.

The stakes are high here: People in developing countries need low-cost access to energy to reach the living standards we in the U.S. mostly take for granted. Policies to combat carbon raise energy prices, retarding that development.

Anti-global warming policies also disproportionately hurt the poor in developed countries.

To be brutally frank, our politicians have enough trouble delivering sound energy policies when they do have access to accurate information; the odds get significantly higher when scientists intentionally feed them lies.

To prove it has learned its lesson (and thus is worthy of being trusted in the future), and to send a strong message to every scientist that deceit will not be tolerated, the IPCC should immediately return its half of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. Furthermore, it should accept the resignation of its chairman and clean house, top-to-bottom, putting a strong error-checking and strict anti-conflict-of-interest system in place.

Addendum: Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters points out that this story was broken by the British press, and chastises the U.S. mainstream media -- quite properly -- for ignoring important global warming-related stories their counterparts abroad cover deeply. For additional developments on this breaking story (and there are plenty of them), visit Climate Depot.

Addendum 2: We may be looking at a criminal case.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:44 AM

Friday, January 22, 2010

International Bureaucrat Criticizes Supreme Court Free Speech Ruling

Fortunately, it's none of his business, but it is a sad and twisted commentary on the international human rights situation when one of its top spokesman speaks out against free speech.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 5:39 PM

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Greg Pollowitz: More on Pat Robertson and the Devil

PlanetGoreLogo.png
Greg Pollowitz of Planet Gore picked up on David's post about Pat Robertson and Haiti and took it further, tracking down that infamous commercial featuring Pat Robertson and Al Sharpton.

The commercial, directed personally by Al Gore, asked viewers to visit one of the websites of Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection, where, among other things, they would be asked to sign a petition calling for a global climate treaty.

I am not a regular viewer of Robertson's CBN show, The 700 Club, but I had not previously presupposed it to be a support network for global governance.

Possibly CBN personnel were similarly mystified. In an article David linked to in his post, a CBN spokesman tries to say Robertson doesn't have a "firm position" on global warming:

Maybe he didn't, but as the video on Greg's post shows, the commercial encouraged viewers to visit Gore's website wecansolveit.org, which, at the time of the commercials, greeted viewers with these words...

...and then urged people to sign Gore's petition for a global climate treaty.

Robertson, by the way, wasn't the only person on the right to film a commercial asking people to visit Gore's website, and be asked to sign the global climate treaty petition:



The global climate treaty Al Gore has been pushing for is run through the United Nations. Even if Robertson and Gingrich choose to believe in the global warming theory -- in fact, especially if they believe in the global warming theory -- why would they want to address the issue through the useless and corrupt United Nations?


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 5:05 PM

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Administration Concludes UN "Impossible" Forum for Climate Negotiations

The Obama Administration appears to have concluded that if the world's nations continue to try to negotiate a climate treaty at the United Nations, there won't be one.

It almost makes you want the U.S. to stay a member...


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 5:34 PM

Sunday, December 20, 2009

An Environmentalist is Asked About Climategate


A global warming activist at the UN's COP-15 climate conference is asked by David Ridenour about Climategate, and whether it is ever proper for scientists to destroy their raw data.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:25 AM

From Hopenhagen to Nopenhagen

Copenhagen, Denmark - The climate change conference in Copenhagen adopted a new, bold, historic agreement...

... to continue to talk. Wow, and accomplished in just two weeks!

The last-minute deal, helped along by our deal-closer-in-chief Barack Obama, was three-pages long (not counting appendices) and included a number of non-binding commitments, including...
* The U.S. and other developed countries will help raise $100 billion per year by 2020 to help developing nations with climate change mitigation and adaptation. In return, these nations agreed to accept the cash. The cash specifies on that "[m]itigation actions... be subject to... domestic measurement, reporting and verification."

* Developed nations also agreed to provide some $30 billion in aid between 2010 and 2012, with the U.S. pledging $3.6 billion of that amount.

* China and other developing countries agreed to what is being widely reported as international verification of their action to address climate change, but they agreed to do nothing of the kind. The agreement calls for the establishment of "guidelines" for international "consultations and analysis," but significantly, no international verification. And, lest there be any doubt that China won't tolerate such verification, the agreement specifies the guidelines it issues "will ensure that national sovereignty is respected."

* China, now the world's largest emitter of carbon, agreed to cut its "carbon intensity" by between 40% and 45% by 2020. Sounds good, doesn't it? But there's a difference between reducing carbon intensity (the amount of carbon emitted per dollar of GDP) and overall carbon reduction, which the U.S., EU and other large emitters committed to undertaking. India, too, vowed only to reduce its carbon intensity by between 20% and 25% by 2020. Both countries could meet these targets and still see their emissions grow substantially.

* State parties agreed to a goal of limiting global warming by 2 degrees Celsius, but as the above makes plain, they didn't establish a blue print – certainly not one that is binding to achieve this goal.
Obama hasn't had such a stunning success in Copenhagen since he closed the deal for Chicago to host the next Olympic games. Oh right - scratch that.

Though the climate summit was a spectacular failure for President Obama, it was a great victory for the American people.

The Heritage Foundation estimates that the imposition of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade regime, the type of system most likely to be imposed to ensure the U.S. meets its carbon reduction targets under a binding treaty, would destroy an average of 1.15 million jobs every year between 2012 and 2030. So President Obama's failure to deliver a treaty may have been his single biggest contribution to fighting unemployment in the United States.

Even if he didn't mean to do it.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.



Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 12:05 AM

COP-15: A Chance to See What Life Would Be Like...

COP15WaitinginLine121409.jpgCopenhagen, Denmark - COP-15 has provided a glimpse of what life might be like under a global climate change agreement... and it isn't "A Wonderful Life." It's been a real Frank Capra moment, only in reverse.

I've already reported that some 45,000 people representing accredited non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had registered to participate in the conference and that some 38,000 of that number were turned away the first few days of this week. Many had flown thousands of miles to participate at great expense and were forced to wait up to 10 hours in the cold before being told they wouldn't be admitted.

As my colleague Tom Borelli noted, "It was easier to get out of Casa Blanca than to get into the Bella Center."

On Monday, one person standing in line ahead of us collapsed.

This was completely unnecessary. The UNFCCC knew that they weren't going to allow additional people in for at least hours before announcing their decision. One Canadian NGO representative told me that she'd learned from one government delegate that the decision had been made before the conference began.

But the UNFCCC wanted to break the spirit of those gathered so that they would go away -- not just for this COP meeting but future ones.

Decisions by the UNFCCC were arbitrary, subject to constant change and it provided no information to those left in the cold and no mechanism for redress of legitimate grievances.

UNFCCC staff did offer a telephone number to those in line on Tuesday morning that instantly went to voice mail, which NGOs were told to expect. I called the number and left messages numerous times before an UNFCCC staffer -- apparently in error -- answered. Here's how my conversation went.
Me: Hello. I'm calling because we're having a problem registering for COP-15 because we need a secondary pass to enter the building. How can I obtain one?

UNFCCC staff: We don't do that here.

Me: Isn't this the UNFCCC?

UNFCCC staff: Yes. I said we don't do that here.

Me: Okay. Can you provide me with the right telephone number?

UNFCCC staff: No.

Me: But if you work for the UNFCCC, why can't you?

UNFCCC staff: Click.
None of my messages were ever answered.

Then on Wednesday night, the UNFCCC Secretariat decided -- or so they said that's when they decided -- to restrict the number of NGO representatives to 300 (about 0.6 % of those who showed up).

Speaking at a meeting of Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organizations (RINGO), RINGO's Marilyn Averill reported that the UNFCCC had obtained emails in which some of the more radical environmental organizations detailed plans to hide in the Bella Center throughout the night and then take over the building by opening the door to all their activists on the outside. This is what the secretariat said prompted the decision to so severely restrict access.

I'm no fan of the environmental left. But how is it that the UNFCCC intercepted these emails -- through infiltration of these groups or by reading private emails sent through the center's "free" WiFi?

Either way, it should frighten all civil libertarians.

The environmental left created a monster and that monster -- as conservatives and libertarians could have told them -- has now turned on them.

Having provided the political pressure needed to create this treaty process, the environmental serfs have now been instructed to return to the manor while the nobility divvy up the spoils.

Since the Magna Carta was forced upon King John in 1215, political and economic power has been on a more or less steady path toward decentralization.

That could be all about to change.

Global climate change regulation is about returning to the old economic and social order.

Regulation of fossil fuels -- and thus power -- is about political power. The preservation of our right to keep and bear fossil fuels is every bit as important to the preservation of our liberty as the preservation of our right to keep and bear arms.

Our liberty is inextricably linked to our economic well-being as well as our ability to move freely to wherever we choose. An energy-restricted world will mean greater dependence on government for our transportation and such dependence increases the ability of governments to control us.

What government gives, it can easily take away.

The COP-15 meeting gave us a taste of what could be in store for all of us. When the UNFCCC wanted to stop political protests, they had the Metro station at the Bella Center closed down. They could have closed down the entire government-run transportation system upon which so many hapless Danish citizens now depend.

The UN body did everything in its power to limit participation of anyone not part of a government delegation while limiting press access to heads of state so the citizens of the world saw exactly what they wanted them to see.

There was no transparency and no accountability. Even environmentalists now recognize this. Two Canadian environmentalists to whom I spoke very early on Thursday morning suggested that it was time to abandon the UN process in favor of more productive uses of their time.

I agree.

It's time to return power to the people... in more ways than one.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 12:00 AM

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Hypocrisy Offsets, Anyone? A Video


David Ridenour asks some global warming activists at the COP-15 climate conference about their use of fossil fuels to travel to the conference, and offers them some Hypocrisy Offsets.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 11:11 PM

Copenhagen Accord

David Ridenour e-mailed me a final copy of the so-called Copenhagen Accord; you can download a PDF of it here if you are interested.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 2:40 PM

Vision of the Future?

MayfairHotel4AdelgatanMalmoSwedenA.jpg

At least one member of the National Center's delegation to the COP-15 climate conference figures this is what the area around their hotel -- the Mayfair, at 4 Adelgatan in Malmo, Sweden -- will soon look like if the anti-energy global warming activists get their way.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 7:48 AM

Friday, December 18, 2009

Offsets Help Environmentalists With Feelings of Guilt

COP-15HypocrisyOffsetFullSize121709.jpg
Open Hypocrisy Offset in a new window or tab to see full size

The National Center for Public Policy Research is showcasing the hypocrisy of the carbon-emitting travels of global warming activists at COP-15 in Copenhagen by offering conscience-clearing "hypocrisy offsets" (as a humanitarian act) to attendees.

The hypocrisy offsets parody carbon offsets sold and traded allegedly to allow people to live carbon-neutral lives. The hypocrisy offsets also highlight the insincerity of world-traveling, energy-guzzling COP-15 delegates.

In a press release we issued about the offsets, David Ridenour, who has personally distributed the offsets in Copenhagen, explained, "Many of those in attendance to press for additional commitments for carbon reductions traveled thousands of miles and used substantial amounts of carbon-emitting jet-fuel just to get to the conference. We are exposing the hypocrisy by offering them 'hypocrisy offsets' to alleviate their green guilt. As one who is skeptical of the necessity of draconian carbon cuts, I plan to do my part to ensure plenty of hypocrisy offsets are available. I'll refrain from reducing my own personal carbon footprint."

Environmentalists are in Copenhagen demanding global limits on emissions, but they don't want to follow the very rules they are proposing for the rest of the world. Their participation may earn them some media coverage, but it is having no effect on an agreement. In fact, the United Nations mostly banned them from even entering the conference, so their voluntary contribution to carbon emissions -- emissions they insist imperil the planet -- from this unnecessary travel is a stunning act of hypocrisy.

Because we know they must be feeling very guilty about what they've done, and in most cases intend to continue doing indefinitely, we invented hypocrisy offsets as a humanitarian act.

Aren't we nice?


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 5:29 PM

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Green Activist: "We're Going to Stay Until We Can't Stay Anymore"


The National Center's David Ridenour talked to some protesters at the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen. The protesters were carrying signs announcing their sit-in protest: "We will stay until you reach a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement."

David asked them what they planned to do if conference officials clear the building.

Turns out, they're protesting until they're asked to leave.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:37 PM

The Poet Al Gore

Al Gore is testing out a new strategy to incite fear of catastrophic global warming. Not content to be a seer limited to prophecies in prose, Gore has treated us to a rare glimpse of his more sensitive, artistic side.

Yes, Al Gore has penned a poem (included in his most recent book, "Our Choice - A plan to solve the climate crisis"), detailing his apocalyptic forecast for a planet subjected to human progress based in carbon consumption.

...And for your viewing pleasure: a reading by the author himself (feel free to follow along):
Untitled

by Al Gore

One thin September soon
A floating continent disappears
In midnight sun
Vapors rise as
Fever settles on an acid sea
Neptune's bones dissolve
Snow glides from the mountain
Ice fathers floods for a season
A hard rain comes quickly
Then dirt is parched
Kindling is placed in the forest
For the lightning's celebration
Unknown creatures
Take their leave, unmourned
Horsemen ready their stirrups
Passion seeks heroes and friends
The bell of the city
On the hill is rung
The shepherd cries
The hour of choosing has arrived
Here are your tools
In celebration of America's most recent climatological poet laureate, I too have penned a poem -- albeit a short and quick limerick (...but praise is in order for the self-restraint I marshaled to keep such a notoriously obscene style of poetry clean) and I encourage anyone with a moment of artistic inspiration to take a dive into this new world of Algoretry - poetry pertaining to, addressed to, or by the great Al Gore and his hypocritical liberty-hampering plans for we plebs.
Al Gore's Motivation

by Caroline May

There once was a huckster named Gore
Whose speeches were oh such a bore
He spoke nothing but lies
And filled us with "whys?"
Seems his green eyes just wanted more!
Written by Caroline May, policy analyst at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.


Labels: , , ,

Posted by Caroline May at 10:31 AM

More on COP-15 Walk-Out

Climate Justice Action vowed Wednesday to take over the COP-15 meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark to convene a "people's assembly." Hundreds of people who'd been denied badges to attend Wednesday's events reportedly met at nearby Oredstad and Sundby metro stations, the two closest metro stations to the Bella Center (the Bella Center station had been closed by police), to converge on the center.

They were met by heavily fortified Danish police. So many police converged on the area that the police had to convert rental cars into police cars.

COP15Securitycars121609.jpg

An estimated 250-300 people were arrested.

The protestors were joined by delegates and NGO representatives who'd already gained admittance to the conference. The UNFCCC responded by not permitting them to return to the Center.

Evidence of this can be seen throughout the Bella Center as booths set up by environmental groups remain empty (see pictures below).

Many side events at the conference had to be canceled.

COP15EmptyBooth121609g.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609f.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609e.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609d.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609c.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609b.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609i.jpg

COP15EmptyBooth121609h.jpg

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 12:20 AM

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

USA! USA! America Wins Climate Award Three Days Straight!

It's not meant to be a compliment, but it is.


Forget Climategate; all you need to know to be skeptical of the global warming theory is that the people starring in this ghastly Climate Action Network production believe in it.

They even have an anthem, which you can hear on the video if you can stand to watch it to the end.

(Video shot at the COP-15 conference on December 16 by David Ridenour)


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:52 PM

Non-Governmental Organizations Kicked Out of Global Warming Conference - Again




The UNFCC Secretariat decided late tonight to kick out most participants from non-governmental organizations, claiming the action is necessary due to security concerns.

After spending most of the day waiting for details on how I could obtain one of the prized 1,000 passes to enter the Bella Center for the Thursday session (down from 7,000 passes awarded today), the UNFCCC once again broke its word by reducing the number of passes it will award tomorrow from 1,000 to 300.

I attended a meeting of the Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organizations (RINGOs) group (of which the National Center for Public Policy Research is a member), which is tasked with distributing passes to groups such as ours. RINGO was given 20% of the passes.

Attached is video in which Marilyn Averill of RINGO describes how its 60 slots will be divied up. Twelve passes were to be used by leaders of RINGO, 40 would be given by lottery to RINGO groups that attended the group's meetings this session, and just eight would be distributed by lottery to those that are on the RINGO membership list, including those that attended the group's meetings.

Special consideration was given to groups that participated in RINGO's meetings because RINGO wanted to encourage greater participation – something that should have been irrelevant to the decision.

Significantly, due to the utter incompetence of the UNFCCC (or perhaps feigned incompetence), many members of RINGO (including yours truly) were unable to participate in the meetings because they were standing outside the Bella Center trying to gain entry.

The RINGOs lottery was clearly a sham. The Pew Center, Stanford University, U of California Santa B and others advocating action on climate change received more than one pass – statistically, a rather unusual result. Not a single one of the 60 passes went to an organization from the right.

(Please note: Marilyn Averill appears on my video because she announced the decisions of the RINGOs management, but she is not responsible for what it decided.)

The security concern cited was the growing violence from environmental organizations, including the environmental organizations' vow to take over the Bella center.

If that was the case, why did they restrict the number of passes available to RINGOs, and not just put a limit on those awarded to environmental activist groups?

A response to a question I posed is illuminating.

The sharp limits on participation weren't about ensuring security. They were about stifling voices.

And that may be the best reason of all to stop this treaty dead in its tracks.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 10:34 PM

Agreement Reached in Copenhagen... The U.N. Shouldn't Be in Charge of Climate Change Policy

After waiting hours in the cold with intermittent periods of snow on Monday and Tuesday in unsuccessful bids to get into the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP-15) of the United Nations Conference on Climate Change, many of those who have long-supported a strong global response to the threat of global warming began questioning the wisdom of leaving these decisions to the United Nations.

The venue for the conference, the Bella Center in Copenhagen, has a maximum occupancy of 15,000, yet the U.N. organizers permitted some 45,000-50,000 people to register.

If they can't get something as simple as math correct, why should be expect them o get anything as complicated as climate science correct?

To resolve the problem, the organizers decided to scale back the size of delegations by cutting their size by - according to some reports - up to 80% after they'd already travelled vast distances at great expense to be here by requiring them to obtain highly-rationed "secondary passes." To say Non-Governmental Organizations were angry about the cuts would be an understatement.

On Monday, those who'd waited for up to 10 hours before being turned away began chanting "Shame on You U.N.," while others yelled "the U.N. Sucks."

Hmm... People angered about rationing... an 80% cut... something sounds very familiar about that figure.

One woman from the World Business Council on Sustainable Development, a group that has long supported climate change action, told me that if the U.N. can't handle something as simple as a conference, how can we trust them to set the right emissions levels and enforce compliance.

Quite.

She, like other environmental activists, was also concerned about accountability. There seemed to be no one to which they could address their grievances.

When some tried to find out, they were hauled away by security.

Last night, one man, one of the last to get into the Bella Center to receive his credentials, was turned away when his name did not appear on the UNFCCC's list of registrants.

The UNFCCC has a policy of not acknowledging receipt of delegation lists, increasing the possibility of problems.

When officials told the man he would have to leave, he asked for the UNFCCC official's name and was told, "I'm not allowed." When the man pressed further explaining calmly that he needed it because he intended to file a complaint, the official summoned security and had him thrown out.

Another climate change conference like this, and the entire world will be filled with skeptics.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 1:44 PM

"Carbon Credit Gum: World's Biggest Bubble"

CarbonCreditGumMany.jpg
Caption on gum packages reads: "Carbon Credit Gum: World's Biggest Bubble"



The National Center for Public Policy Research is warning of the dangers of creating a new "carbon bubble" based on an artificial market in carbon credits by distributing bubble gum balls bearing the warning: "Carbon Credit Gum: World's Biggest Bubble."

The Bubble gum is being distributed at the COP-15 climate meeting in Copenhagen by Project 21 Fellow Deneen Borelli (seen in video, above), National Center Vice President David Ridenour, and National Center Free Enterprise Project Director Tom Borelli.

Distributing candy is a light approach to a serious policy question, but bubbles are bubbles. If our government creates an allegedly-tradable product in carbon allowances, it will be creating an artificial market that eventually will burst. Seasoned policy pros such as Al Gore presumably will leave the market long before that, their money made, but what will be the impact on regular folks? As we saw with the mortgage bubble, regular folks get hurt -- including very many who never profited from the original bubble.

We already know an artificial carbon market won't make a measurable difference in the planet's temperature -- even if all the dire but often contradictory warnings by global warming theory believers somehow turned out to be true. It very likely would not make even an unmeasurable difference. All a carbon market would do is move money around. I understand why designated recipients and profiteers are in favor of this, but that doesn't make it a good idea.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:59 PM

The Church of Global Warming

It is a lie that the United Nations wants to maintain religious neutrality at COP-15. No, Global Warming is the established religion at this international event.

This was made especially clear when, days before the event's commencement, the Denmark Foreign Ministry rejected a donated delivery of Christmas fir trees. "We have to remember that this is a U.N. conference and, as the [Bella] center then becomes U.N. territory, there can be no Christmas trees in the decor, because the U.N. wishes to maintain neutrality," explained Ministry official Svend Olling.

Religious objectivity, however, is impossible at a conference explicitly engaged in blind adherence to an unproven premise - a faith in the veracity of global warming. For though the science is not settled, participants have convened to devise strategies for what they believe will be the world's environmental salvation, the capping of carbon dioxide emissions.

Global Warming devotees' religious fervor commands action, even if their deliverance comes at the expense of economic devastation. American disciples such as Al Gore and President Barack Obama are more than willing to sacrifice economic stability at the altar of Global Warming.

The faith dictates absolute advocacy for draconian carbon dioxide regulations such as the cap-and-trade scheme detailed in the House-passed "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009." To Warming enthusiasts, the $9.4 trillion reduction in aggregate GDP, increase in annual unemployment by 2.5 million jobs, and increase in inflation-adjusted electricity prices by 90 percent, gasoline prices by 58 percent, and residential natural gas prices by 55 percent, all estimated to occur within the first 24 years under such a cap and trade scheme, are merely an afterthought.

Though economists have highlighted the dire financial implications of energy restriction ad nauseam and questions remain about the actual science behind the Global Warming Theory, adherents are steadfast in their belief. Ironically, it seems that most of these Warmers - many of whom are often quick to proclaim creationists as backward - stick to their faith with the unbending will of a St. Paul.

Even in the wake of Climategate and new peer-reviewed studies (which give lie to the notion that apocalyptic climate forecasts are supported by consensus) by such renowned scientists as Brookhaven National Laboratory's Dr. Stephen E. Schwartz, MIT's Dr. Richard Lindzen, and the University of Auckland's Dr. Chris de Freitas, Warming adherents remain loyally convinced that man's evil energy usage is destroying Mother Earth.

Faith is belief without verifiable evidence. The unquestioned adherence to the theory of Global Warming bears all the markings of what traditionally would be recognized as a religion. Complete with sin (the emitting of carbon dioxide), scriptures (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports), commandments (drive a Prius, use Compact Florescent Light bulbs, do not eat meat, etc.), indulgences (carbon offsets), proselytism and prophets (Al Gore), priests (scientists), prophecy and apocalypse (floods, hurricanes, dead polar bears), infidels (Warming skeptics), and salvation (the halting of carbon-emitting industrial progress), the religion of Global Warming fits the mold.

Great Britain has already recognized belief in anthropogenic Global Warming as a religion. In November, in a landmark case brought before the UK Employment Appeal Tribunal, the court found that under the "2003 Religion and Belief Regulations," "belief in man-made climate change, and the alleged resulting moral imperatives" qualified for the same employment discrimination protections as a traditional religion.

Though we have yet to see Al Gore or James Hansen walk on water, COP-15 is far from religiously-neutral. Instead, participants are expected to adhere to their one true faith: Global Warming.

Consequently, it makes sense that Christmas trees are welcome at the Church of Global Warming. When was the last time you saw a menorah in a Cathedral?

Written by Caroline May, policy analyst at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Caroline May at 12:18 PM

Not British Health Care


If the United Nations can't run a climate conference, how could it possibly run climate policy? This video of the waiting line outside the COP-15 UN climate conference in Copenhagen on 12/15/09 shows the United Nations is equipped for neither task.

As David Ridenour notes in the video, which he shot, this may look like a waiting line for health care in a country with government-run medicine, but it's actually a waiting line for a conference attempting to establish a world government-run energy rationing scheme.

This liberal scheme is so badly thought-out, even the left is walking out on it.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:50 AM

Environmental NGOs Walk Out of COP-15 in Protest


Environmental non-governmental organizations staged a walk-out of the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen today, protesting the fact that so many of their properly-registered fellow NGO delegates were banned from entering the conference.

I wonder if some of these individuals and organizations are beginning to re-think their desire to have the world run by the United Nations.

Video shot by David Ridenour


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:03 AM

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Kookookaburras Advocating that Australia Abandon Coal


David Ridenour shot this video of a group of Australians at the COP-15 climate conference protesting Australia's use and sale of coal. Coal is very important to Australia's economy, and, I believe, is that country's largest energy source.

I can't improve on commentary someone going by "Noodles691" posted on YouTube about this video: "How much CO2 did it take to fly these 4 idiots from Australia to Copenhagen to put on this pathetic display?"


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 5:35 PM

''The Struggle Does Not Stop Here,'' Say Witnesses, Apparently Seriously

The propaganda in this reminds me of the fictional Nobel Peace Prize-winning left-wing "biography" I, Rigoberto Menchu.

People often believe dumb stuff because they want to believe it. Whether it is accurate is of no account to them.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 4:21 PM

Environmental Activism: Think Globally, Act Locally (Or Not)

Although I still have every sympathy for members of environmental groups that had to stand outside in the cold for eight hours outside the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen yesterday, only to be turned away at the end of the day anyway, I am still going to post two short videos my husband David shot on the scene.




Apparently, when a green group says it wants to clean up the planet, it doesn't intend to be taken literally.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 3:30 PM

COP-15 Climate Conference Admittance Update

Thanks to CNSNews.com (and many bloggers) for covering the story of the National Center for Public Policy Research's efforts, and the efforts of very many thousands of accredited NGO delegates, to gain admittance to the COP-15 climate conference.

Thanks also to those of you who wrote us to express support.

I am pleased to report that the National Center for Public Policy Research delegation of David Ridenour, Deneen Borelli and Tom Borelli did (finally!) gain admittance to the COP-15 Bella conference center at about 5:45 PM Copenhagen time Tuesday. They also apparently had the opportunity to distribute educational materials (about which, more later) earlier in the day to relevant parties as those officials and media representatives entered the building.

Unfortunately, the news is not so good for all accredited organizations. Although others got in, still others did not.

I had not realized this yesterday, but I learned today that the many thousands of NGO delegates forced to stand in line for eight hours yesterday in 32 degree F cold before being turned away at nightfall also had one other indignity to deal with: if they left the line to use one of the outdoor portable toilets, they lost their spot in line.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:33 PM

Video: United Nations Rep Tells NGOs They Are Out of COP-15 Climate Conference


American conservatives aren't the only ones booing the United Nations. Here's a group of (mostly) liberal environmentalists doing it.

This is video of the announcement Monday at the COP-15 climate conference that non-governmental organization (NGO) delegates who had not yet been admitted to the conference would not be admitted for the rest of the week.

Crowd members booing are accredited NGO delegates who had waited eight hours in line in 32 degree F cold to get into the conference and (mostly) travelled long distances to be there. To be accredited, they would have applied for and received credentials more than a month ago.

The U.N. later announced it would permit each accredited NGO to have four members attend the conference, and said it would send an email to each NGO with the new credentials, without which, they cannot get in.

This is welcome news, but it may well not be true. We are an accredited NGO and our delegation stood out in the cold for eight hours Monday, but we have received no email from the United Nations containing the new credentials needed to get in on Tuesday. My inquiry to the United Nations has met with no reply, and the conference starts in less than an hour.

(Video shot by David Ridenour)


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:24 AM

Monday, December 14, 2009

United Nations Kicks NGOs Out of COP-15 Climate Conference

Here's a press release on the COP-15 climate conference we are putting out about now...
United Nations Kicks NGOs Out of COP-15 Climate Conference

Washington DC: The United Nations announced today it is permanently banning thousands of accredited non-governmental organizations* from the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen.

The restriction was announced today outside the Copenhagen conference center after several thousand accredited NGO conference delegates, including three from the National Center for Public Policy Research, waited outside for eight hours or longer in 32-degree F temperatures for admission.

NGOs apparently are being banned because the United Nations accredited 45,000 people for a building with a capacity of 15,000, although the stated reason was "security concerns." The "security concerns" may be related to the fact that, after waiting several hours in the cold, delegations began to chant, "Let us in! Let us in!"

"To be an "accredited" or "admitted" NGO to a COP conference, NGOs must apply months in advance, and typically only make travel plans to attend after receiving complete credentials from the United Nations," said Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, an accredited COP-15 NGO organization that is as of now banned from the conference. "To give credentials to 45,000 people while choosing a building that holds 15,000 people is insane, though the United Nations, to be fair, has never been known for competence."

"What makes this an even greater travesty," said Ridenour, " is the COP-15 conference ostensibly is trying to find ways to reduce the burning of fossil fuels. If 30,000 people fly to Copenhagen for no reason, doesn't that put unnecessary greenhouse gases into the atmosphere?"

Ridenour has formally asked the U.N., which is permitting some NGOs to have many delegates inside while others are permitted none, to limit each NGO to one representative as long as space limitations remain a concern.

"Some of these NGO delegations are from rich countries like our own," said Ridenour, "but for some NGOs, raising the funds to attend a conference in Copenhagen is a real financial hardship. The least the U.N. can do is let in at least one member of these delegations so all of their money won't be wasted."

For more information, visit http://www.nationalcenter.org or call.

-30-


* Non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, are usually referred to as "non-profit organizations" in the United States.



E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 2:21 PM

COP-15 Observation: So These Are The People We're Going to Let Run the World Economy?

COP15-Outside1214094PMCopenhagenTime.jpg
Waiting line to get into COP-15 conference at about 4 PM Copenhagen time

I heard this morning from the National Center for Public Policy Research's delegation to the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen. Seems they've been standing in line outside the conference (in 32 degree F weather!) for nearly six hours (so far) in a so-far fruitless effort to get insie.

No, they didn't forget to get credentials. It seems the geniuses at the United Nations selected a building site for the conference that holds 15,000 people, and then gave credentials to 45,000 people. So, naturally, at any given time, two-thirds of the people (almost all of whom used carbon-intensive energy to travel to Copenhagen) are unable to participate.

Such incompetence highlights the idiocy of the entire enterprise. Climate science, especially when done honestly, is immensely complicated -- so complicated, anyone who tells you that humanity understands how the climate works is either deluded or lying to you. Likewise, every proposed "solution" to global warming is complicated -- far more complicated than figuring out that 45,000 people cannot fit into a building designed for 15,000.

If the United Nations can't manage the simple conference logistic of making sure the building facility is large enough to handle the number of people to whom it handed out credentials, why should we assume it can handle correctly interpreting the nuances of climate science and the regulation of a significant portion of the world economy?

The U.N.'s COP-15 climate conference organizers may face the irony of having global warming conference attendees hospitalized for exposure -- assuming that hasn't happened already. Six hours is a long time to stand outside in 32 degree weather, and many of the people forced to wait outdoors presumably dressed for the commute to the conference, not for a day standing outside.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.



Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 9:58 AM

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Green Weenie

As John Hinderaker reports on Powerline, longtime global warming alarmist Stephen Schneider spoke at a press conference at the COP-15 climate conference in Copenhagen.

When journalist Phelim McAleer asked a polite question about Climategate, Schneider's staff called in security to shut down the questioning. A United Nations security officer actually tells the journalist, "If you don't shut that [the camera] off, I'm going to take it away from you." (How typical of the corrupt United Nations!)


Stephen Schneider is too scared to answer a simple question, which tells you all you need to know about Climategate: If it wasn't a big deal, the global warming alarmists wouldn't be so afraid of it.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:01 AM

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Which Group Is Really Grassroots?

John Hinderaker has posted a photograph of a leftie rally at the COP-15 climate conference under the headline "What Astroturf Looks Like."

Check out his post to see that picture. Then compare that picture to some David Almasi took at the 9-12 Tea Party in Washington, D.C. and decide for yourself: Which group is really "grassroots"?

TeaParty091209Almasi1.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi2.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi3.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi4.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi5.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi6.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi7.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi8.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi9.jpg

TeaParty091209Almasi10.jpg


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 11:04 PM

Thursday, December 03, 2009

Hypocrisy, Thy Name is United Nations

Go here.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:19 PM

Friday, November 13, 2009

COP15 and the Shameless Manipulation of Children


The United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen is fast approaching, and with cap and trade legislation languishing in Congress, developing nations averse to binding regulations, and the public preoccupied with a faltering economy, hopes by climate treaty advocates that a climate agreement will be reached this December are diminishing. Nevertheless, advocates for a sovereignty-usurping, economically-devastating, wealth-redistributing and environmentally-fraudulent treaty are tirelessly churning out materials meant to sway the public and assert pressure on leaders to reach an enforceable agreement.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) provides an example. Agitating for a "green industrial revolution," the WWF is a vociferous advocate for global warming legislation and environmental activism - regardless of the practical consequences. Last month, for example, the outfit came out with the breathless pronouncement that the world has less than five years to drastically cut carbon emissions or, it claims, climate catastrophe will be inevitable. (To be fair, this was less absurd than British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's October 19 prediction that the global community had only 50 days to avert disaster.)

Several days ago the WWF crossed a line, releasing a propagandistic video of children of WWF staffers parroting the illogical doomsday scenarios the group works to propagate. The WWF explained the video's objective:

"To urge the President to lead us in Copenhagen and outline what we'd like to see in the agreement, we invited children of WWF staffers to tape a personal message to the President asking for his support... We hope you'll be inspired to send an email or write a letter to the White House that tells President Obama that you want him to go to Copenhagen to protect our planet."

The Video:

http://www.worldwildlife.org/climate/international/kidsvideo.html?intcmp=224

Child welfare officials have investigated the now infamous parents of "Balloon Boy" for allegedly coaching him to lie in a publicity scheme. These WWF parents coerced their children for political influence, and, should their efforts succeed, a thoroughly destructive climate treaty.

Which is worse?

Written by Caroline May, policy analyst at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. Please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private.


Labels: , , ,

Posted by Caroline May at 5:26 PM

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Climate Alarmist Says "Do As I Say, Not As I Do"

Concerned that the increasingly shrill warnings by environmentalists on the dangers of global warming are beginning to undermine the credibility of everyone calling for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, some scientists are calling for them to... um... cool it.

One of these scientists is Vicky Pope, head of the climate change branch at the MET Office (the UK's national weather service), who told the Times of London, "It isn't helpful to anybody to exaggerate the situation. It's scary enough as it is."

But Vicky hasn't been beyond a bit of scare-mongering of her own. Here's part of my report on her presentation at a United Nations Convention on Climate Change 12th Conference of the Parties (COP-12) event in Nairobi Kenya three years ago:
Vicky Pope, head of the Hadley Centre's Climate Prediction Program, offered some very scary scenarios for Africa and the rest of the world. Using the Palmer Drought Severity Index, which uses temperature data (to estimate evaporation) and rainfall data to determine drought severity (as opposed to measuring soil moisture), her Centre has found that incidence of drought has increased sharply since the 1980s. Moderate droughts, says Pope, affected 10-15 percent of the landmass in the 1980s, but today they affect closer to 25 percent of the land. By 2100, the Hadley Centre projects that this figure will double to 50 percent. What's more, Pope says, this climate change-induced drought will result in a "profound injustice" by hitting poor nations the hardest.

To underscore this point, Pope showed a series of color-coded world maps -- one for the period 1950-1969, one for 1970-1989 and one for 1990 to today -- which show significant and increasing drought in Africa, South America and parts of Asia but negligible drought in North America and Western Europe.

The starting point for these maps struck me as peculiar. North America experienced severe drought in the 1930s and, if memory serves (I don't have access to research materials here in Nairobi), 1936 still has the record for being North America's hottest year in the 20th Century. Including this information, of course, would significantly undercut Pope's argument that drought disproportionately harms the developing world. Perhaps it even undermines her assertion that drought and temperature increases coincide.

When I asked her why this information wasn't included, Pope said it wasn't included because their objective was to provide a global drought picture and reliable temperature readings were not uniformly available before 1950. (More here.)
Pope goes on to tell the Times, "People pick up whatever makes their argument, but this works both ways. It's the long-term trend that counts..."

I may have gotten through to her after all.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 12:08 AM

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

What's Happening Now

If All Nippon airways really wanted to reduce carbon emissions, it wouldn't ask its customers to pee; it would ask them to stay home.

Here's hoping the idiotic sports reporters who attacked Rush Limbaugh over his perfectly-appropriate Donovan McNabb comment in '03 gag on this news.

Which health insurer denies the most claims? Find out here.

Tell me again why the USA gives one penny to the United Nations.


E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to this blog's feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download our book Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:01 AM

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Netanyahu Asks World: "Is This a Lie?"

Netanyahu delivered a terrific speech before the U.N.

He asked the nations that didn't boycott the Iranian dictator's speech, or who didn't walk out during it when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched into an anti-semitic tirade, "...but to those who gave this holocaust denier a hearing... Have you no shame? Have you no decency?"

The U.S., fortunately, was one of a little over a dozen that did the right thing. Canada was the best. It didn't wait to hear what was said and boycotted from the outset.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 6:27 PM

Monday, August 10, 2009

United Nations Scandals Get Weirder

You wouldn't think it possible, but United Nations scandals are getting weirder.

In this one, a United Nations employee bites a security guard who is trying to drag him out of a superior's office, where he had gone to make a nepotism allegation.

I do wish we'd drop out of that ridiculous (on a good day) organization.


E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at [email protected]. | Subscribe to this blog's feed. | Follow on Twitter.

Labels:

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 4:46 PM

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Ban Ki-moon Rejects Waxman-Markey as Insufficient

The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade global warming bill would "reduce aggregate GDP by $7.4 trillion, kill 844,00 jobs and raise the energy bill paid by a typical family by about $1,500 annually" (based on a study by the Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis).

Is UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon concerned about the impact this supposedly anti-global warming legislation* would have on working Americans?

No, he says working Americans aren't being hurt enough.

* The bill, if adopted and if it worked perfectly -- both very large assumptions -- would have negligible impact upon the climate, if any.


Hat tip: Dr. Benny Peiser.


E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at [email protected].
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 8:23 AM

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Outrage of the Day: United Nations Threatens Bush Administration Officials

From "European Nations May Investigate Bush Officials Over Prisoner Treatment" by Craig Whitlock for the Washington Post:
...Martin Scheinin, the U.N. special investigator for human rights and counterterrorism, said the interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration clearly violated international law. He said the lawyers who wrote the Justice Department memos, as well as senior figures such as former vice president Richard B. Cheney, will probably face legal trouble overseas if they avoid prosecution in the United States.

'Torture is an international crime irrespective of the place where it is committed. Other countries have an obligation to investigate,' Scheinin said in a telephone interview from Cairo. 'This may be something that will be haunting CIA officials, or Justice Department officials, or the vice president, for the rest of their lives.'"...
Tell me again: Why do we remain in the United Nations? We're paying nearly the quarter of the budget for a corrupt, bloated organization that sits by (or goes to dinner) while corrupt dictators kill and imprison suspected political opponents (and sometimes their children), but let George W. Bush try to keep Americans alive, and it is all over it.

The United Nations is an affront to our sovereignty, our pocketbooks, and to every sane notion of decency.

America must get out of the United Nations.



E-mail any comments to [email protected].
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Labels: , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:36 AM

Copyright The National Center for Public Policy Research