Nicholson
© www.acting-man.comThe dawning of reality, a very cold prospect.
Lock­heed Mar­tin, a recent Wash­ing­ton Post arti­cle notes, is get­ting into renew­able energy, nuclear fusion, "sus­tain­abil­ity" and even fish farm­ing projects, to aug­ment its reduced defense prof­its. The com­pany plans to forge new ties with Defense Depart­ment and other Obama ini­tia­tives, based on a shared belief in man­made cli­mate change as a crit­i­cal secu­rity and plan­e­tary threat. It is charg­ing ahead where other defense con­trac­tors have failed, con­fi­dent that its exper­tise, lob­by­ing skills and "socially respon­si­ble" com­mit­ment to pre­vent­ing cli­mate chaos will land it plen­ti­ful con­tracts and subsidies.

iceberg
© futureofwork.glider.comAs below, not above.
As with its polar coun­ter­parts, 90% of the titanic cli­mate fund­ing ice­berg is invis­i­ble to most cit­i­zens, busi­ness­men and politi­cians. The Lock­heed action is the mere tip of the icy mountaintop.

The multi-billion-dollar agenda reflects the Obama Administration's com­mit­ment to using cli­mate change to rad­i­cally trans­form Amer­ica. It reflects a deter­mi­na­tion to make the cli­mate cri­sis indus­try so enor­mous that no one will be able to tear it down, even as com­puter mod­els and dis­as­ter claims become less and less cred­i­ble - and even if Repub­li­cans con­trol Con­gress and the White House after 2016. Lock­heed is merely the lat­est in a long list of reg­u­la­tors, researchers, uni­ver­si­ties, busi­nesses, man­u­fac­tur­ers, pres­sure groups, jour­nal­ists and politi­cians with such strong mon­e­tary, rep­u­ta­tional and author­ity inter­ests in alarmism that they will defend its tenets and largesse tooth and nail.

Above all, it reflects a con­vic­tion that alarmists have a right to con­trol our energy use, lives, liveli­hoods and liv­ing stan­dards, with no trans­parency and no account­abil­ity for mis­takes they make or dam­age they inflict on dis­fa­vored indus­tries and fam­i­lies. And they are pur­su­ing this agenda despite global warm­ing again being dead last in the lat­est Gallup poll of 15 issues of great­est con­cern to Amer­i­cans: only 25% say they worry about it "a great deal," despite steady hys­te­ria; 24% are "not at all" wor­ried about the cli­mate. By com­par­i­son, 46% per­cent worry a great deal about the size and power of the fed­eral government.

But Cli­mate Cri­sis, Inc. is using our tax and con­sumer dol­lars to advance six simul­ta­ne­ous strategies.

1) Cli­mate research. The US gov­ern­ment spends $2.5 bil­lion per year on research that focuses on car­bon diox­ide, ignores pow­er­ful nat­ural forces that have always dri­ven cli­mate change, and gen­er­ates numer­ous reports and press releases warn­ing of record high tem­per­a­tures, melt­ing ice­caps, ris­ing seas, stronger storms, more droughts and other "unprece­dented" crises. The claims are erro­neous and deceitful.

They are con­sis­tently con­tra­dicted by actual cli­mate and weather records, and so alarmists increas­ingly empha­size com­puter mod­els that rein­vent and sub­sti­tute for real­ity. Penn State mod­eler Michael Mann has col­lected mil­lions for headline-grabbing work like his lat­est asser­tion that the Gulf Stream is slow­ing - con­trary to 20 years of actual mea­sure­ments that show no change. For­mer NASA astronomer James Hansen received a ques­tion­able $250,000 Heinz Award from Sec­re­tary of State John Kerry's wife, for his cli­mate cri­sis and anti-coal advo­cacy. Al Gore and 350.org also rake in mil­lions. Alarmist sci­en­tists and insti­tu­tions seek bil­lions more, while vir­tu­ally no gov­ern­ment money goes to research into nat­ural forces.

2) Renew­able energy research and imple­men­ta­tion grants, loans, sub­si­dies and man­dates drive projects to replace hydro­car­bons that are still abun­dant and still 82% of all US energy con­sumed. Many recip­i­ents went bank­rupt despite huge tax­payer grants and loan guar­an­tees. Wind tur­bine instal­la­tions butcher mil­lions of birds and bats annu­ally, but are exempt from Endan­gered Species Act fines and penalties.


Comment: 2012 global statistics claim 13M to 39M birds and bats killed every year from 39K wind turbines. 440,000 bald and golden eagles, hawks, falcons, owls, cranes, egrets, geese and other birds EVERY YEAR in just the US were part of this atrocity. Geez...a little chicken wire could solve that problem!


Tesla Motors received $256 million to pro­duce elec­tric cars for wealthy elites who receive $2,500 to $7,500 in tax cred­its, plus free charg­ing and express lane access. From 2007 to 2013, corn ethanol inter­ests spent $158 mil­lion lob­by­ing for more "green" man­dates and sub­si­dies - and $6 mil­lion in cam­paign con­tri­bu­tions - for a fuel that reduces mileage, dam­ages engines, requires enor­mous amounts of land, water and fer­til­izer, and from stalk to tailpipe emits more car­bon diox­ide than gaso­line. Gen­eral Elec­tric spends tens of mil­lions lob­by­ing for more tax­payer renew­able energy dol­lars; so do many other com­pa­nies. The pay­offs add up to tens of bil­lions of dol­lars, from tax­pay­ers and consumers.


Comment: Tesla applied for SGIP money (false claims) as did Bloom Energy (false claims), Fuel Cell Energy and General Electric (as of 2012 $3B). SGIP: Self Generation Incentive Program, via the California Public Utilities Commission's incentives. Qualifying techs included wind turbines, waste heat to power, pressure reduction turbines, internal combustion engines, fuel cells...etc. Junk loans and cronyism.


3) Reg­u­la­tory fiats increas­ingly sub­sti­tute for laws and car­bon taxes that Con­gress refuses to enact, due to con­cerns about eco­nomic and employ­ment impacts, and because China, India and other coun­tries' CO2 emis­sions dwarf America's. EPA's war on coal has already claimed thou­sands of jobs, raised elec­tric­ity costs for mil­lions of busi­nesses and fam­i­lies, and adversely affected liv­ing stan­dards, health and wel­fare for mil­lions of fam­i­lies. The White House and EPA are also tar­get­ing oil and gas drilling and fracking.

Now the Obama Admin­is­tra­tion is unleash­ing a host of new man­dates and stan­dards, based on arbi­trary "social cost of car­bon" cal­cu­la­tions that assume fos­sil fuel use imposes numer­ous cli­mate and other costs, but brings min­i­mal or no eco­nomic or soci­etal ben­e­fits. The rules will require oner­ous new energy effi­ciency and CO2 emis­sion reduc­tion stan­dards that will send con­sumer costs sky­rock­et­ing, while chan­nel­ing bil­lions of dol­lars to retail­ers, installers, banks and mostly over­seas manufacturers.

As ana­lyst Roger Bezdek explains, water heaters that now cost $675 - 1,500 will soon cost $1,200 - 2,450 - with new­fan­gled exhaust fans, vent pipes and con­den­sate removal sys­tems. Pickup trucks with more fuel effi­ciency and less power will nearly dou­ble in price. Microwaves, cell phones, vac­uum clean­ers, hair dry­ers, toast­ers, cof­fee pots, lawn mow­ers, pho­to­copiers, tele­vi­sions and almost every­thing else will cost far more. Poor and mid­dle class fam­i­lies will get clob­bered, to pre­vent per­haps 5% of the USA's 15% of all human CO2 emis­sions toward 0.04% of atmos­pheric CO2, and maybe 0.00001 degrees of warming.

4) A new UN cli­mate treaty would limit fos­sil fuel use by devel­oped coun­tries, place no bind­ing lim­its or timeta­bles on devel­op­ing nations, and redis­trib­ute hun­dreds of bil­lions of dol­lars to poor coun­tries that claim they have been harmed by emis­sions and warm­ing due to rich coun­try hydro­car­bon use. Even IPCC offi­cials now openly brag that cli­mate pol­icy has "almost noth­ing" to do with pro­tect­ing the envi­ron­ment - and every­thing to do with inten­tion­ally trans­form­ing the global econ­omy and redis­trib­ut­ing its wealth.

5) Vicious per­sonal attacks con­tinue on sci­en­tists, busi­ness­men, politi­cians and oth­ers who dis­agree pub­licly with the cat­e­chism of cli­mate cat­a­clysm. Alarmist pres­sure groups and Demo­c­rat mem­bers of Con­gress are out to destroy the stud­ies, fund­ing, rep­u­ta­tions and careers of all who dare chal­lenge cli­mate dis­as­ter tau­tolo­gies. At Pres­i­dent Obama's behest, even dis­as­ter aid agen­cies are pil­ing on.

New FEMA rules require that any state seek­ing dis­as­ter pre­pared­ness funds from the Fed­eral Emer­gency Man­age­ment Agency must first assess how cli­mate change threat­ens their com­mu­ni­ties. This will mean rely­ing on dis­cred­ited, worth­less alarmist mod­els that rou­tinely spew out pre­dic­tions unre­lated to real­ity. It likely means no fed­eral funds will go to states that include or focus on nat­ural causes, his­tor­i­cal records or mod­els that have bet­ter track records than those employed by the IPCC, EPA and President.


Comment: Is it evident yet that the PTB are disguising upcoming cosmic and natural climatological threats and ultimately seek to have an unprepared public?


6) Thought con­trol. In addi­tion to vil­i­fy­ing cli­mate chaos skep­tics, alarmists are deter­mined to con­trol all think­ing on the sub­ject. They are ter­ri­fied that peo­ple will find real­ist analy­ses and expla­na­tions far more per­sua­sive. They refuse to debate skep­tics, respond to NIPCC and other stud­ies exam­in­ing nat­ural cli­mate change and car­bon diox­ide ben­e­fits to wildlife and agri­cul­ture, or even admit there is no consensus.


Comment: NIPCC: Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (independent panel of international scientists not predisposed to manmade global warming scam)


They want the news media to ignore us but can­not put the inter­net genie back in the bot­tle. The White House is try­ing, though. It even sent picketers to FCC Chair­man Tom Wheeler's home, to demand that he knuckle under and apply 1930s' tele­phone laws to the inter­net, as a first step in content control.

States must refuse to play the cli­mate cri­sis game. Through law­suits, hear­ings, inves­ti­ga­tions and other actions, gov­er­nors, leg­is­la­tors, AGs and other offi­cials can delay EPA dik­tats, edu­cate cit­i­zens about solar and other nat­ural forces, and explain the huge costs and tri­fling ben­e­fits of these dra­con­ian regulations.

Con­gress should hold hear­ings, demand an account­ing of agency expen­di­tures, require solid evi­dence for every cli­mate claim and reg­u­la­tion, and cross-examine Admin­is­tra­tion offi­cials on details. It should slash EPA and other agency bud­gets, so they can­not keep giv­ing bil­lions to pres­sure groups, pro­pa­gan­dists and attack dogs. Hon­esty, trans­parency, account­abil­ity and a much shorter leash are long overdue.