Scientists Say New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria ~ By Michael Bastasch

But incorporate the Max Planck study results and warming would only be as high as 1.8 degrees Celsius — less than half what the IPCC originally predicted.

Michaels and Knappenberger say Lewis’s findings basically eliminate “the possibility of catastrophic climate change—that is, climate change that proceeds at a rate that exceeds our ability to keep up.”

“Such a result will also necessarily drive down estimates of social cost of carbon thereby undermining a key argument use by federal agencies to support increasingly burdensome regulations which seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” write Michaels and Knappenberger.

Being that I am not a scientist, I'm not sure that I understand everything discussed in this article, so I can not say with complete confidence that the global warming theories have been disproved. But what I can say with absolute conviction is that Global Warming doesn't appear to have the unanimity of everyone in the various fields of science, as the various academic and government authorities want us to believe.

Forgive me, then, for being a global warming denier or climate change skeptic. I always have been since the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) agitators first came on the scene. Or, maybe I should say, ever since everything changed and they went from fear mongering about global cooling to somehow transforming into global cooking. And when that didn't work, especially after the East Anglia Climate Research Unit fraud was revealed, it was reverted to Plan C: Climate Change. However, when Al Gore profited big-time off of the global warming thing known as carbon credits, and that cutting back on American industrialization efforts to limit carbon emissions was a Marxist ruse to transform America and set up a global government, that should eliminate ALL doubts of what a scam it is. Just sayin'...

Scientists Say New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria

Michael Bastasch

By Michael Bastasch

March 31, 2015 @ 10:07 PM

From DailyCaller.com

A new study out of Germany casts further doubt on the so-called global warming “consensus” by suggesting the atmosphere may be less sensitive to increases in carbon dioxide emissions than most scientists think.

A study by scientists at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Meteorology found that man-made aerosols had a much smaller cooling effect on the atmosphere during the 20th Century than was previously thought. Why is this big news? It means increases in carbon dioxide emissions likely cause less warming than most climate models suggest.

What do aerosols have to do with anything? Well, aerosols are created from human activities like burning coal, driving cars or from fires. There are also natural aerosols like clouds and fog. Aerosols tend to reflect solar energy back into space, giving them a cooling effect that somewhat offsets warming from increased CO2 emissions.

~~~ READ MORE on DailyCaller.com ~~~

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: Obama's Power Grab of the Power Grid

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

It’s the Climate of Propaganda That Should Worry Americans ~ By Dan Gainor

Remember this? The World Meteorological Organisation was quoted by Greenpeace’s Energydesk: “No single weather episode can prove or disprove global climate change.”

OK, if that wasn’t good enough, there’s this, from the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. It’s run by the liberal Pew Center’s founder and former president Eileen Claussen. They say the same thing, “no single weather event can be linked directly to a long-term driver, such as global warming.”

Now none of that matters. Journalists are on the climate beat, so named because it’s the issue they and the liberals intend to beat the American public with till we scream, “Uncle Al.”

This should concern us, as the reaction on the MSM networks to the President presenting the National Climate Assessment (NCA) on May 6, 2014 was all about propaganda and hype.  Even former Fox News Correspondent Major Garrett, now with CBS Evening News (go figure!), entered into the fray by saying, "No region of the country will be spared."  And then he later said, "Republicans dismissed this report as an election year ploy to scare voters and pave the way for pollution regulations that sidestep Congress." That was about the only thing mentioned that referred to any objection to the NCA, from anybody. Of course, only Republicans would be mentioned as critics of Obama's climate agenda. Garrett never mentioned why the Republicans would be against the administration sidestepping Congress. That's the way the MSM works as the propaganda arm of the Obama regime.

I was able to find another article which came from the leftist Think Progress website. Their story was, "The Worst TV News Reactions To The National Climate Assessment." And who do you think that they criticized? If you guessed Fox News Network, ding ding ding, you nailed it. And... wait for it... they also went after Pat Robertson of the 700 Club, via a youtube video, coming from Right Wing Watch:



Of course, the left wing media is going to disparage anyone that criticizes the climate assessment that was pushed by Obama, because they can not afford to have anybody disagreeing with the President's agenda. That is what we call propaganda on steroids.

I felt it was necessary to let the readers of this blog know that there really are people out there that know why the Obama agenda is using climate change to make national economic change, which would be to lead America to Socialism.

Charles Krauthammer said this on Fox News Channel:

"All that we're doing is committing economic suicide in the name of do-goodism that won't do an iota of good."

Proving that it isn't just Fox News that is not falling in line with the climate change agenda, S.E. Cupp said this on CNN:

"Surprise, surprise, today President Obama is keeping his liberal elite base happy by trying to scare us with new reports on climate change."

Yes, Dan Gainor hit it out of the park. Americans should have a lot to worry about when it comes to the "climate of propaganda." Americans who don't bow down to the climate change hype are being denigrated by the left in the mainstream media, and that is dangerous. Just sayin'...

It’s the Climate of Propaganda That Should Worry Americans

By Dan Gainor

May 12, 2012 at 11:00am

From theblaze.com

“Global Warming.” “Climate change.” “Global weirding.” “Climate disruption.”

The terms are unavoidable as news stories that deploy them. The American media love nothing more than claiming weather events are part of some greater pattern – whether they are or not.

With President Barack Obama’s latest climate push, journalists are once more linking every random weather happening they can find and saying, “See!” with a giant I-told-you-so look on their faces.

They aren’t covering the story, they are acting like the bearded lunatic on the street corner holding a sign saying, “The End Is Near!” Instead, they parrot the White House saying: “It is already happening.” It sounds almost like a bad movie trailer.

~~~ READ MORE on theblaze.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: Listen very closely: Limiting CO2 is not without cost

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

MIT Professor Urging Climate Change Activists To ‘Slow Down’

“Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. The opportunities for taxation, for policies, for control, for crony capitalism are just immense, you can see their eyes bulge.”
  ~ MIT Professor Richard Lindzen, a leading international expert on climate change.

But here is the hypocrisy in the Global Warming spending. While Massachusetts Democrat Gov. Deval Patrick and others painted a dire picture of what global warming might do to us, they have to tell FEMA to slow down the roll-out of new flood maps, because the property insurance rates are soaring. And what do you know? It turns out that the real reason for "slowing down" the "catastrophism" is possibly because of the unintended consequences.


MIT Professor Urging Climate Change Activists To ‘Slow Down’

January 14, 2014 5:54 PM

CBS Boston

While Gov. Deval Patrick and others painted a dire picture of what global warming might do to us, others are more skeptical.

MIT Professor Richard Lindzen is a leading international expert on climate change.

“The changes that have occurred due to global warning are too small to account for,” he told WBZ-TV. “It has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with where we live.”

Lindzen endorses sensible preparedness and environmental protection, but sees what he terms “catastrophism” in the climate change horror stories.

~~~ READ MORE at CBS Boston ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

The Great Pretender ~ By Robert Ringer

It is always more fun putting these blogs together when there is a relevant video to include, especially one that is entertaining. This one here was the perfect fit for Robert's column:

The Platters - The Great Pretender

Video provided by bintangtheater1

Of course, as fun as it is to entertain you for a few moments, I don't want the above video to distract you from what Robert was saying in this column. I noticed that Robert was mentioning Huckabee's show last week, where "He paraded out one guest after another – entrepreneurs, inventors, engineers and chemists – to present remarkable solutions for cleaning up the oil in the Gulf." And yet, Obama did nothing. It reminded me of what I wrote regarding Erik Rush's column last night, "It's the sabotage, stupid!" I wrote:

It's probably just me, but it's almost as if the Obama administration allowed the oil rig disaster and resulting spill to get as bad as it is so that there would be a much bigger crisis that they wouldn't let go to waste.

And this column by Robert Ringer seems to be even more support for my suspicions. Just sayin'...

Obama has been following FDR's dictatorial playbook to the T. In his 1937 inaugural address, at a time when unemployment was still rising (15 percent on Inauguration Day), FDR bodaciously said, "Our progress out of the Depression is obvious."

Sound familiar? It should. With the economy on the verge of total collapse, The Great Pretender continues to look his teleprompters in the eye and tell Americans how he's saved the country from a depression and that "the worst is now behind us." He always sounds so darn convincing when he says these things, but I hear through the White House grapevine that on at least one occasion after slinging this kind of B.S., he was overheard singing to himself in the Oval Office:

Oh yes, I'm the great pretender,
Pretending that I'm doing well.
My need is such, I pretend too much,
I'm lonely but no one can tell.

Lacking a really great crisis, The Great Pretender, hopefully, is going to feel a lot lonelier starting next January.

By Robert Ringer

Posted: June 18, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The Marxmeister in the White House now says he takes full responsibility for ending the oil mess in the Gulf. He also says he wants to "know whose a-- to kick," that he "can't suck it up with a straw," and … well, you know … the ongoing narcissistic spiel – "I, me, my … blah, blah, blah" – day after day, week after week, ad nauseam.

Watching his recent performances on the Gulf oil disaster made me think about a monster hit The Platters had in the '50s called "The Great Pretender." Little did they know that the champion Great Pretender wouldn't even be born until 1961 – probably in Kenya … but, then, no one is really sure about that because no one is allowed to see his birth certificate.

Everyone but 1) those on the far left, 2) Bill O'Reilly and 3) the loons (O'Reilly's word) who have yet to return from lunch realizes that The Great Pretender has had a Marxist agenda since even before his pot-smoking days at Columbia. Names like Wright, Ayers, Lloyd, Dunn, Sunstein, Holdren and Jones (both Jeff and Van) are well-known to those who have taken the trouble to learn about The Great Pretender's agenda.

As ever more people come to realize that the country has been hijacked by this angry young Marxist, many would argue that a better title for him might be The Great Reactor. Obama listens to the news – especially Fox News – then reacts to his critics by saying or doing whatever they accuse him of not saying or doing, or by changing his tune regarding something he's said or done that offends too many people. Sort of humorous to watch – if the fate of an entire country were not at stake, that is.

Perhaps I'm getting soft with age, but I almost feel sorry for The Great Pretender. His flipping and flopping and spinning and twisting and contradictions have become downright embarrassing. He's Abbott and Costello and Laurel and Hardy all rolled into one. I admit it – I'm truly embarrassed for him.

Now, of all people, Mike Huckabee – continuing his swift turnabout in an effort to make voters forget about his slobbering interview of Michelle Obama (who, he tried to convince us, wakes up every morning frantically worrying about childhood obesity) – has succeeded in making The Great Pretender look like an incompetent, arrogant boob.

Hopefully, you saw The Huckster's show last weekend. He paraded out one guest after another – entrepreneurs, inventors, engineers and chemists – to present remarkable solutions for cleaning up the oil in the Gulf. It truly was amazing to watch the simplicity of the methods presented, as contrasted with The Great Pretender's spending his time talking about kicking a--, wagging his finger at everyone and bending over and picking up a lonely tar ball on the beach in his daily photo-ops.

Was the oil spill really just an accident? Probably. BP America Chairman and President Lamar McKay recently said that it was caused by "a failed piece of equipment." I'll buy that, at least for now. But it doesn't matter. Rahm never said that you have to create a crisis. He already knew there are crises popping up all the time. All he said was that you should never allow a good one to go to waste.

In the case of the BP oil accident, it was a slam-dunk. More to the point, it was like unlocking the door to the EPA's cage. Obviously – surprise, surprise – offshore drilling is now out of the question, right?

So it puts a few hundred thousand people out of work (ripple effect) … so what? The progressive must do what he must do to protect "the people," even if it means taking away their jobs and giving them higher gas prices to boot. What in the world would we do without government to protect us?

So, yes, the BP crisis will not be wasted if it results in an end to offshore drilling. Nevertheless, I think The Great Pretender is going to have to come up with another crisis – or two – before November to pull off a number of miracles for the Demagogic Party.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

'Hockey stick' graph was exaggerated

The key word in this story is "exaggerated." Wasn't that the whole point shown by the emails from East Anglia Climate Research Unit in the "climategate" scandal? Global warming and climate change being a threat to the world is being exaggerated.

The 'hockey stick' that became emblematic of the threat posed by climate change exaggerated the rise in temperature because it was created using 'inappropriate' methods, according to the head of the Royal Statistical Society.

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent

Published: 2:52PM BST 14 Apr 2010

Professor David Hand said that the research – led by US scientist Michael Mann – would have shown less dramatic results if more reliable techniques had been used to analyse the data.

Prof Hand was among a group of experts charged with investigating the "climategate" email scandal that engulfed the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) last year.

Sceptics claimed that the hacked messages showed scientists were manipulating data to support a theory of man-made global warming.

However the review, led by Lord Oxburgh into the research carried out by the centre, found no evidence of ''deliberate scientific malpractice".

Lord Oxburgh said the scientists at the research unit arrived at their conclusions ''honestly and sensibly''.

But the reviewers found that the scientists could have used better statistical methods in analysing some of their data, although it was unlikely to have made much difference to their results.

That was not the case with some previous climate change reports, where "inappropriate methods" had exaggerated the global warming phenomenon.

Prof Hand singled out a 1998 paper by Prof Mann of Pennsylvania State University, a constant target for climate change sceptics, as an example of this.

He said the graph, that showed global temperature records going back 1,000 years, was exaggerated - although any reproduction using improved techniques is likely to also show a sharp rise in global warming. He agreed the graph would be more like a field hockey stick than the ice hockey blade it was originally compared to.

"The particular technique they used exaggerated the size of the blade at the end of the hockey stick. Had they used an appropriate technique the size of the blade of the hockey stick would have been smaller," he said. "The change in temperature is not as great over the 20th century compared to the past as suggested by the Mann paper."

READ FULL STORY at Telegraph.co.uk

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

I wanted to be a scientist ~ By Patrice Lewis

In reading this column by Patrice, I was reminded of something I wrote back in January, called "The Religion of Consensus Science." Fortunately, there are many more people than just Patrice and I that know about the corruption of science, especially when it comes to the way scientific studies that are funded by various government agencies. Again, as Patrice will say in this column, FOLLOW THE MONEY! And, as Patrice points out, the best example of this problem is the hysteria that was promoted by Al Gore about Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Not all science is controversial or influenced by government opinion even if it is government funded – merely those fields that can add to government power grabs and reduce our personal liberties (light bulbs, cap-and-trade, etc.).


I grieve that science is no longer the lofty and noble endeavor I once thought it was. I still believe in the purity of the Scientific Method and the wonders that true and honest scientists have discovered.


But remember: "Whoever controls the environmental rules controls the economy and our choices." Beware of "science" that is determined only to "prove" things that can enslave us.

By Patrice Lewis

Posted: March 06, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

All I ever wanted to be when I grew up was a scientist.

While other girls my age dreamed of becoming singers or actresses, I dreamed of being an ethologist. Science had a luster of nobility and integrity that appealed to me. I wanted to be another Jane Goodall, living outdoors and studying wildlife for months on end. That was the life for me!

I entered college in 1980 and studied zoology. During the summers, I worked enthusiastically as a field assistant to Ph.D. students conducting thesis research on marmots, deer and squirrels. I was thrilled to be involved in real scientific studies.

Life went on. After college, I got a corporate job working in agricultural technology because biology field research jobs were few and far between. But the science itch hadn't left me, and seven years after graduating from college my husband and I moved to Oregon, in part to continue my education.

Life went on. I got my Master's degree in Environmental Education. We started a home woodworking business. I got pregnant with our first child, then our second. I worked seasonally as a field biologist for several years (spotted owls, red tree voles, goshawks, etc.) while we juggled work to keep our girls out of day care. As family life took priority and my attention became diverted elsewhere, my involvement in science became distant. But the appeal never faded.

That's why it is with sorrow that I realize a significant amount of scientific research is corrupt and fraudulent. How can that be?

In an essay entitled "How government corrupts science," Dr. Arthur Robinson defines a scientist – a true scientist – as "a person who seeks the truth about the world we can see by means of direct observations of that world. He often originates hypotheses about how the things in the world work and then tests those hypotheses with experiments and observations. Entirely on the basis of experiments or observations, he refines or rejects hypotheses and extends his knowledge."

Most people don't enter science to defraud. Most enter for the same reasons I did – a desire to learn new things about the natural world. Then how can something as elemental as science become corrupt?

Much of the blame can be laid at the feet of government. If government funds research, then the research results must (almost by definition) reflect the government's agenda. The sad truth is many federally funded scientists have become political lackeys, spouting whatever nonsense the government says they should spout and giving it the veneer of credibility because of a few letters after their names.

We tend to elevate scientists to towering status because they possess great knowledge and have the ability to draw conclusions based on unbiased data. We think just because someone has academic credentials, his methods are sound, his ethics above reproach and his conclusions infallible.

But such is not always the case. It's the old rule of "Follow the money." Just as we would never trust data concluding that smoking is harmless if the only study was conducted by Phillip Morris, so we must logically deduce that any studies funded by the government only conclude what the government wants us to see – regardless of the truth.

Of course not all scientists are fraudulent. To make such a statement would be, well, scientifically inaccurate. But the honest scientists are often pummeled into silence and refused publishing opportunities if they deviate from the authorized agenda. We only hear from the corrupt scientists – the political lackeys – because the mainstream media are ignorant of the Scientific Method, and, being in the pocket of the government, they report only what the government gives them to report. Even peer-reviewed scientific journals are not immune to suppressing papers that disagree with a predetermined agenda.

What a mess.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Sarah Palin: “Global Warming” – More Like a Snow Job

Sarah Palin weighs in the "consensus science" of the mythical man-cause global warming hysteria, and how it prevents America from having a common sense energy policy.

The man-made global warming hysteria isn’t based on sound science, and the Obama administration’s energy policy isn’t based on sound economics. If the climategate revelations teach us anything, it’s that we need to cool down the rhetoric and fire up our common sense.

By Sarah Palin

Friday, February 19, 2010 ~ 12:31 a.m.

Over the last few months, and even again today, very unsettling revelations have come to light about the “settled science” of man-made global warming. With all of these shoes dropping you’d think every member of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would be barefoot by now.

One thing after another keeps popping up to further discredit the theory of man-made global warming. The IPCC’s supposedly definitive report proving the theory is riddled with serious errors. The organization has been publicly chastised by everyone from its former chair to the heads of the UK’s biggest funder of climate research and Greenpeace UK. One of the world’s top climate change scientists, Prof. Phil Jones, has conceded that there’s been no significant warming since 1995; that the medieval period may have been warmer than today; and that he’s had trouble even keeping track of raw data crucial to the global warming theory. Yet President Obama still seeks to create a federal office for global warming, and they’re still talking about mandating their cap-and-tax plan that's based on discredited data.

READ FULL STORY at Sarah Palin's Facebook Notes

BURGERS DON’T LIE ~ By Tim Blair

From The Daily Telegraph

By Tim Blair

Tuesday, February 02, 2010 at 04:59am

In 2007, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published its Fourth Assessment Report on climate change, warning of catastrophic results if global warming continued.

In 2009, a Burger King store in Memphis, Tennessee, put up a sign reading “Global warming is baloney”.

The IPCC subsequently won a Nobel Peace Prize, while Burger King has never even been short-listed. Yet which of the two is truly more deserving?

Before we answer that question, there is the small matter of the IPCC report’s post-Nobel credibility. It was riding high in 2008, when Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told 60 Minutes that the IPCC report established the basis of his fears about climate change – fears that are driving the government’s plans for an economy-shattering emissions trading scheme.

“I just look at what the scientists say,” Rudd told 60 Minutes. “There’s a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change – 4000 of them. Guys in white coats who run around and don’t have a sense of humour. They just measure things. And what they say to us is it’s happening and it’s caused by human activity.”

Maybe they should stop all that running around, then. And if Rudd actually believed these “4000 scientists”, maybe we’d be seeing the phrase “acting Prime Minister Julia Gillard” less often while Rudd is busy yelling at people about sandwiches as he flies to his latest international conference.

“I stand by what the International Panel of Climate Change scientists have had to say,” Rudd continued, before allowing that “I am not, myself, a qualified scientist. I’m elected as Prime Minister of Australia to act on the basis of the considered scientific advice.”

Some of that scientific advice is currently being reconsidered, which we’ll get to shortly. Rudd concluded his 60 Minutes appearance with the usual Helen Lovejoy “won’t somebody please think of the children?” routine:

“Look at your kids in the eye tonight and ask yourself this question – if we have this much evidence available to us now on climate change and just refuse to act, then what are the consequences for them? The alternative, however, is to just stick your head in the sand and hope it all goes away.”

Less than two years later, it’s Rudd who is hoping it all goes away. Following the Copenhagen climate conference debacle – during which Rudd implored delegates to heed the words of “little Gracie”, a concerned six-year-old whom the PM claimed had written to him about carbon emissions – our Prime Warmister has suddenly discovered that climate change isn’t such a high priority after all.

READ FULL STORY >

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Give Al Gore his due ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: February 03, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 I never thought Al Gore was very bright, but you've got to give the guy his due. He's got the whole world trading carbon credits and measuring carbon footprints. He has turned the economic order of the world upside-down. He's whipped up more apocalyptic hysteria than the Mayan calendar. Al Gore did all that with his invention of manmade, catastrophic global warming. And, make no mistake about it, unlike his claim to birthing the Internet, Al Gore really did invent climate change out of nothing more than computer models, a fertile imagination and political necessity. People like Al Gore actually don't like America. They want to change it in fundamental ways to make it more to their liking and so that America serves their interests rather than the interests of the American people. Think back 20 years if you are old enough. Do you remember what people like Al Gore were pushing back then – before he invented "global warming"? For one thing, they were telling us we had to produce smaller cars and drive them. Before carbon dioxide was the menace that was going to destroy the planet, it was other auto emissions. Back then it was poisonous, toxic emissions that were the problem. And Al Gore used the coercive power of the state to force automakers to reduce those emissions. When no one could rationally argue that those emissions still posed a threat to the quality of life, a new argument to change lifestyles was needed. Leave it to Al Gore to come up with the notion that carbon dioxide and water vapor emissions now threatened to destroy the world. You see, it was never about cleaner air with Al Gore in the first place. It was never about health or the environment. It was always about attacking American industry, prosperity and the free-enterprise system. So he came up with a threat that could never be solved – a phony threat that could never even be measured. READ FULL STORY >

Who needs energy independence? ~ By John Stossel

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By John Stossel Posted: January 20, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 When you gas up your car, do you think that you're doing something evil? After all, I'm told that burning gasoline helps "murder the Earth," not to mention fills the coffers of terrorists and despots. So we must move away from oil. Al Gore says, "The future of human civilization is at stake." But I need the gas. I need to drive. I need electricity to light my home. What can I do? Is there an alternative? There is, I'm told. "What if we could use fuels that are not expensive, don't cause pollution and are abundantly available right here at home? We have such fuels," Gore says. "In fact, we can start right now using solar power, wind power and geothermal power to make electricity for our homes and businesses." In 10 years, he says, we can get all our electricity from these carbon-free sources. Global-warming hysteria is just one reason Gore and others push for alternative fuels. We're also told that America's goal should be energy independence. Today, we do buy oil from some very nasty people: dictators in Venezuela and the Middle East. What if they cut us off? That fear is one reason almost every president and presidential candidate – from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama – promised to end our "intolerable" reliance on oil imports. When Nixon was president, we imported 25 percent of our oil. Since then, our "leaders" have wasted billions on subsidies for alternative energy. The result? Today we import nearly 70 percent of our oil. Terrible as that sounds, I say, "So what?" Interdependence is just fine! And journalist Robert Bryce, author of "Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusion of Energy Independence," agrees. He'll be my guest on "Stossel" tomorrow night (Fox Business Network, 8 p.m. Eastern, and again Friday at 10). Bryce points out that while Saudi Arabia and Iran are oil exporters, they are gasoline importers. "If even Saudi Arabia and Iran are energy interdependent, why wouldn't we be?" he says. "Energy interdependence" is just a way of saying "division of labor" and "comparative advantage." READ FULL STORY >