Sunday, November 6, 2011


Green energy: Damn the facts, full speed ahead!
Neil Snyder, American Thinker

In 2008, a group of more than 31,000 scientists signed a petition dissenting from the position of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that man-made CO2 emissions are destroying our planet.  More than 9,000 of them have Ph.D. degrees in fields like atmospheric science, climatology, earth science, and environmental science.  That's fifteen times more Ph.D. scientists than are involved in the IPCC campaign.

One of the group's leaders, the late Professor Frederick Seitz, said:
The United States is very close to adopting an international agreement that would ration the use of energy and of technologies that depend upon coal, oil, and natural gas and some other organic compounds. ... This treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas.  Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful.  To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful.

Seitz was a first-rate scientist who served as president of Rockefeller University and president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.  Seitz was also a recipient of the National Medal of Science.  The agreement to which he referred is the Kyoto Protocol.

Ivar Giaever, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, resigned from the American Physical Society because of its position on global warming.  So did University of California professor Hal Lewis.  When Lewis resigned, he said that the global warming movement was a "scam" and a "pseudoscientific fraud."

Did you know that the number of global weather tracking stations has been reduced, and disproportionately, the eliminated stations are in colder regions?  Global warming alarmists have continued to report data showing global temperatures rising despite the fact that colder locations have been taken out of the data set, and they haven't bothered to divulge that fact.  If you take cold readings out of the data set, average temperatures rise, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the climate. 

. . . the U.S. is rich in energy resources.  At today's consumption levels, we have enough coal to meet our needs for the next 500 years.  We have 22,450,000,000 barrels of proven oil reserves, and we are finding new oil reserves all the time.  The U.S. has 250 trillion cubic feet of proven natural gas reserves.  We are finding new gas reserves daily, and we are discovering new ways to tap into hard-to-get gas deposits.  Putting that in perspective, the U.S. has more energy in natural gas than the entire Middle East has in oil.

Green energy alternatives may satisfy our energy needs one day, but this much is certain: today, green energy is little more than a way for President Obama to dole out federal dollars to his favorite firms at the expense of coal, oil, and natural gas producers.  The science and technology do not exist in green energy areas to meet even a smidgen of our energy needs.  That's what the facts tell us, and ignoring the facts is costing us jobs and tax revenue.

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country

No comments:

Post a Comment