$4 Billion For Global Warming Research In 2011 Budget
Raj Pachauri head of the UN IPCC...
---
Source - Pajamas Media
If you want to know where to save money in the budget, cut the vast sums of redundant funding headed to redundant federal agencies doing redundant climate change research. Four billion dollars to study climate change — and that’s just for this year!
Check the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s 2011 budget request, and go to chapter 15: Climate Change in the FY 2011 Budget. The numbers are staggering. In 2011, your government will spend $10.6 million a day to study, combat, and educate about climate change.
The big winner in the climate change money train is the National Science Foundation — they are requesting $1.616 billion. They want $766 million for the Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability program, a 15.9% increase from their last budget. They also need another $370 million for the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), an increase of 16%. They say they also need another $480 million for Atmospheric Sciences, an increase of 8.1%, and Earth Sciences, up 8.7%.
Oh, and $955 million for the Geosciences Directorate, an increase of 7.4%.
---
Do not skip this under any circumstances...
Video - Climate Change Pain by Al Gore - Dec. 2009
Global warming poetry from Mr. Awesome.
This is a new low even for Al Gore as he reads a personal global warming poem to a CNN reporter.
The problem for Gore is that his home is a carbon-sucking machine; he traveled on more than 200 private jet flights last year (return & departure); his voice and inflection are impossible to bear, and he's the most smug, bastard ex-politician I've ever come across.
Other than that, he just sucks as a poet...
---
Further reading...
Jan 21, 2011 at 6:03 AM
Reader Comments (27)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/copper-hits-new-high-as-gold-gains-2011-01-19
LABCOAT CONSULTANT says: "Ahha............. ya! Sure!”
“Guha, where’s we gonna put all those them thar millions of horses and barns needed by the year 2000?”
1986to2011:
“If we all just did less, bought less, consumed less, lived with less, needed less, wanted less, and be less, …… and be useless…………our poor little 5 billion year old helpless planet will be like it should be, like the inside of an indoor shopping mall. And all thanks to the good politicians promising to lower the seas and make the weather colder with taxes. And as the good trusted scientists that made environmentalism necessary in the first place with their chemicals say: “We must have SOME affect on the environment: probably: UNSTOPPABLE WARMING.”
--
The Met Office fries while the rest of the world freezes
As the Met Office desperately tries to salvage its reputation, another of this 'warm' winter's ice disasters is unfolding in the Sea of Okhotsk, writes Christopher Booker.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8248146/The-Met-Office-fries-while-the-rest-of-the-world-freezes.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/01/time-magazine-and-global-warming/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100072360/warmists-we-cant-win-the-game-so-lets-change-the-rules/
The BBC's stunt of taking an electric Mini to Edinburgh reveals just how impractical rechargeable cars are, writes Christopher Booker
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8262095/London-to-Edinburgh-by-electric-car-it-was-quicker-by-stagecoach.html
Britain’s largest exam board has been accused of “brainwashing” pupils by forcing them to use an inaccurate temperature graph that exaggerates the scale of global warming.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8210501/Exam-board-accused-of-brainwashing-pupils-with-inaccurate-climate-graph.html
Australia was told to prepare for droughts as a result of climate change, and let down its guard against flooding, writes Christopher Booker
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8262064/What-was-the-role-of-warmists-in-the-Queensland-flood-disaster.html
Fools.
“Continued belief in Climate Change’s “death threat of unstoppable warming” is dividing environmentalism, if not all of progressivism too. I can’t look my kids in the eyes anymore and tell them they won’t have kids of their own if they don’t’ start turning the lights off more often and help to SAVE THE PLANET! Issuing CO2 death warrants to our children means we have become the neocons of fear mongering with our Iraq War of lies called Climate Change. Call it a mistake if you like but it isn’t sustainable in voter consensus anymore. We all know it was just an exaggeration that got away on us. I know, it’s hard to let it go. But we have to face reality and know that support is lost and cant’ possibly come back because that would have people hanging onto THE END OF THE WORLD for another 25 years? Let’s remove the CO2 and start anew. Pollution is real. We get it now. Let’s all grow some and face the future challenges of over population, pollution, energy and waste with courage, and not lead environmentalism down the wrong road any further. DROP THE CO2 AND NOTHING CHANGES, except the fear. Let’s stop the fear and stop the lies. System Change, not Climate Change. Signed, Former Believer.”
I remember when the cold fusion story broke. Initially, other universities confirmed the presence of nuetrons. About a month later, everybody started saying it didn't work. But in 2009, the US navy said it did.
It's a great story. I don't know whether or not it works or is practicle, but we've got so much money to spend on observing problems, but no money for potential solutions. Wind technology is a loser and solar's got a long way to go. There has got to be better out there, no one wants to find it.
There was an old man with a cause
He never stopped lying because
For profits obscene
He bawled 'go green!'
And never quit flapping his jaws.
This comment says it all.
Evergreen Solar closing plant and moving operations to China after receiving $58 million in grants.
http://www.boston.com/business.../
[snip]
Evergreen will now have to repay $3 million of $21 million in direct grants, state officials said yesterday. In addition, the company will forfeit $20 million to $21 million of future tax breaks.
Last week, Evergreen abruptly announced it would close the plant by the end of March and eliminate more than 800 jobs, saying it could not compete with lower-cost rivals in China, where the government provides generous subsidies to solar companies.
[snip]
Robert Tannenwald, a Massachusetts economist who has long studied tax incentives, said the Evergreen investment is a prime example of how “these subsidies usually don’t pay off.’’
“At best they are a bad risk,’’ said Tannenwald, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington and a former vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. “At worst, they are inefficient, inequitable subsidies that government could spend in better ways.’’
http://hedgefund.net/publicnews/default.aspx?story=12121
Daniel Posner will be the chief investment officer for a credit-focused hedge fund for Golub, a first for the firm, according to a statement. He will be located in New York.
The focus of the fund will be on opportunistic and distressed credit assets with particular emphasis on event-driven investment opportunities in the United States and Europe, the statement said.
Chicago-based Golub is a middle-market lender.
---
Junk science has long been the staple food feeding the AGW scam, from Climategate through to the fear fantasy that was the 2007 IPCC report, the science was found wanting.
Now the Universal Ecological Fund have produced an AGW Fear text that is so ludicrous even the Guardian can see it for what it is, junk science.
http://toryardvaark.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/agw-junk-science-so-bad-even-the-guardian-questions-it/
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70J5JW20110121
[snip]
The EU on Wednesday halted spot trade for one week after the theft of emissions permits worth up to 30 million euros ($40.2 million)
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/05/yale-says-global-warming-is-better-distorted-phrase-for-propaganda-dump-climate-change/
Yale says “Global Warming” is a better misused-phrase for propaganda — dump “climate change”…
The average punter just doesn’t talk as much about climate change, and it isn’t as scary:
[Time] In a new report by the Yale Project on Climate Communications, researchers led by Anthony Leiserowitz surveyed Americans and found that “global warming” is used much more commonly than “climate change,” both in conversation and in Internet searches, and that “global warming” is significantly more engaging than “climate change.” That’s because global warming generated more alarming associations, causing survey respondents to think of disasters like melting ice, coastal flooding and extreme weather, while “climate change” generated more banal associations with generation weather patterns.
“Global warming” was also associated with:
Greater certainty that the phenomenon was happening
Greater understanding that human activities were the primary driver of warming, especially among political independents
A greater sense of personal threat, as well as more intense worry about the issue
A greater sense that people are being harmed right now by warming, and a greater sense of threat to future generations
Greater support for both large and small-scale actions by the U.S. (although “climate change” generates more support for medium-scale efforts, especially among Republicans.)
Among republicans the effect was curiously the opposite: some Republicans have apparently learned to hate “global warming”. But luckily they are irrelevant because they are mostly lost to the faith anyhow — they were never going to convert back. Phew:
[Time] The Yale report found that Republicans don’t really care which term is used, though “global warming” will sometimes generate stronger negative feelings among conservatives. Not that it much matters—a recent Gallup poll found that 65% of conservatives said they were skeptical of climate change, compared to just 24% of moderates and 9% of liberals.
The meaning of “global warming” was destroyed a long time ago. It used to mean the globe warmed, but has come to mean coal-oil-and-gas have caused all the global warming since 1780 (but none of it before then.) No, seriously, they define it that way:
“Global warming refers to the increase in the Earth’s average surface temperature since the Industrial Revolution, primarily due to the emission of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels and land use change, whereas climate change refers to the long-term change the Earth’s climate including changes in temperature, precipitation, and wind patterns over a period of several decades or longer.”
The point of a conversation, after all, is not so you can agree on terms and convince people of something, it’s so you can cajole, coerce and trick them into giving the answer you want...
Yes, global warming and climate change no longer have actual meanings in English, now they both just mean We’re saving the world, give us your money. Repeat after me: If it is climate, it is warming (there is no cooling). All change is bad. The globe is changing. Global equals warming. Climate means heat, death, fires and flood. Any questions?
Naturally since people who believe in Carbon Disaster were never interested in a real conversation, we can expect to see them go back to misusing “Global Warming” immediately, ad infinitum.
FYI:
Climate Change in the American Mind – conducted by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication. The research was funded by the Energy Foundation, the 11th Hour Project, the Grantham Foundation, and the V.K. Rasmussen Foundation.
http://phys.org/news/2015-06-countering-science-denial.html