EPA chief can’t answer question about Obama’s global warming claims

Gina McCarthy

In November 2012, President Barack Obama claimed that the global temperature is”increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago,” adding that further carbon emissions regulations were needed to combat climate change.

But Gina McCarthy, director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was unable to corroborate that claim yesterday when pressed by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) during a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing.

The exchange was tense. Sessions pointed to a chart showing that the global temperature had flatlined in recent years, despite predictions that it would rise to dramatic levels. A recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) draft report found that there had been a pause in warming over the last 15 years.

McCarthy said that she didn’t know what the context of President Obama’s claim, adding her belief that 2010 was the “warmest year on record.” That claim, however, is meaningless, which even noted climate alarmist James Hansen has admitted.

As Sessions continued to press her on President Obama’s claims, the EPA chief interrupted him, prompting the Alabama senator to ask, “Do I not have the right to ask the director of EPA a simple question that is relevant to the dispute that is before us?”

“Is the temperature around the globe increasing faster than was predicted, even 10 years ago?” Sessions prodded.

Earth’s Cataclysmic Destruction Postponed Indefinitely

Climate Alarmism

Don’t you just hate it when you predict the end of the world and nothing happens? It’s a bit embarrassing. Not to worry though, because recent reports revealing the Earth is actually cooling have not deterred the Soothsayers of Global Warming Doom from still claiming that the end is near, even if it has been delayed just a bit.

Sorry, I forgot…it’s not “global warming” anymore, it’s “climate change”; because up until a few decades ago the Earth had stayed at a constant 78-degrees for millions of years. Then mankind, the great global parasite, invented cars and SUVs and coal-fired power plants, refrigerators and washers and dryers, computers and TV’s, and then everything went to hell in a handbasket. So here we are, destroying the Earth, all because we are too selfish to give up refrigerated food and convenient transportation, and unwilling to go back to living in hovels and eating salt pork.

You can imagine how devastating it was to the global warming doomsayers, who have for years now predicted a rapid acceleration in global temperatures leading to polar ice to melting, sea levels rising until it immersed the Empire State Building underwater, causing the deaths of thousands of innocent, cuddly polar bears who failed to master the art of surfing. Now, unless you hate the environment, please just forget that it was just forty years ago or so that these same environmentalists were predicting the “Coming Ice Age” which was going to turn the world into a giant ice cube, starving us all to death for lack of arable land.

UN climate panel can’t explain warming slowdown


The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is expected to release another report on climate change this fall. But we already have an idea of what they’re expected to say:

An unreleased draft of the U.N.’s next major climate report reportedly states that scientists are more certain than ever that man’s actions are warming the planet — even as the report struggles to explain a slow-down in warming that climate skeptics have seized upon.

Global surface temperatures rose rapidly during the 70s, but have been relatively flat over the past decade and a half, according to data from the U.K.’s weather-watching Met Office. Climate skeptics have spent months debating the weather pattern, some citing it as evidence that global warming itself has decelerated or even stopped.
A draft of the upcoming AR5 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is set for final release in Oct. 2014 and used by governments around the world, offers a variety of explanations for the mystery, Reuters reported, from ocean storage of heat to volcanoes.

The Economist notes that there is some doubt among members of the panel that greenhouse-gas emissions are as big of a problem than they’ve claimed in the past. The magazine points out that this is a huge deal given that the IPCC has been used by many countries, including the United States, to determine climate change policies.

We should welcome a debate over climate change

Al Gore -- climate alarmist

In his inaugural address on Monday, President Barack Obama touched on “climate change,” an issue that he unsuccessfully pushed during his first term.

“We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves, but to all posterity,” Obama said, adding, “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.” Obama, who even invoked God when addressing the topic, then criticized those of us “still deny the overwhelming judgment of science.”

Ironically, these comments came at the beginning of the coldest week in Washington, DC in nearly a decade. The low at Reagan National on Wednesday morning was a bone-chilling 15 degrees, according to The Weather Channel. My iPhone showed 14 degrees at Nationals Park — nevertheless, it has been pretty cold in the nation’s capitol this week.

But is climate change really a threat? A plurality of Americans agree with President Obama, according to a new CNN poll, though that number is down from recent years. Moreover, a Gallup poll from last summer showed that the issue ranked dead last on Americans’ list of concerns.

Carbon Tax Follies

Written by Chip Knappenberger, Assistant Director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute. Posted with permission from Cato @ Liberty.

There seems to be a noticeable murmur around town about a carbon tax—a tax on the amount of carbon dioxide that is released upon generating a unit of energy. Since fossil fuels—coal, oil, natural gas—are both the source of over 75% of our energy production and emitters of carbon dioxide when producing that energy, a carbon tax insures that the price of everything goes up.

There is one and only one justification for a carbon tax—an attempt to influence the future course of the earth’s climate (or, as some people prefer, to mitigate anthropogenic climate change) by trying to force down the emissions of the most abundant human-generated greenhouse gas.

But of all the things that a carbon tax will do (raise prices, increase bureaucracy, elect Tea Partiers, etc), mitigating anthropogenic climate change in any meaningful manner is not one of them.

The annual carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S., currently about 5,500 million metric tons per year, only contributes roughly 0.003°C/per year of warming pressure on global temperatures (see here for a handy way of making that calculation). So the best that a carbon tax could ever hope to achieve, climatically, would be to prevent this amount of warming each year by completely eliminating all carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S.

Scientists casting doubt on climate change

It appears that scientists may be taking another look at whether the world is actually warming or not.

The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.

In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.

It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

While the climate alarmists often say winter weather is not an indiction that global warming doesn’t exist, it’s hard to to convince people when they see stories about snow in 49 of 50 states. Here in Georgia, we’re bracing for another couple inches. We may get one good snow every few years. We’re not used to two systems in the same weekend.

It does seem that the climate alarmists face a believability problem. Just 35 years ago, they were telling us to brace for another cooling period. Notice now how they are changing how they phrase their message. It’s no longer “global warming,” it’s “climate change.”

Whatever it is, it looks like the collectivists will have to find another means to convey their message.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.