[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Consequences of Mild, Moderate & Severe Plagiarism Plagiarism: 5 Potential Legal Consequences When Philadelphia’s Foul-Mouthed Cop-Turned-Mayor Invented White Identity Politics Trump Wanted to Pardon Assange and Snowden. Blocked by RINOs. What The Pentagon Is Planning Against Trump Will Make Your Blood Run Cold Once Revealed How Trump won the Amish vote in Pennsylvania FEC Filings Show Kamala Harris Team Blew Funds On Hollywood Stars, Private Jets Israel’s Third Lebanon War is underway: What you need to know LEAK: First Behind-The-Scenes Photos Of Kamala After Getting DESTROYED By Trump | Guzzling Wine!🍷 Scott Ritter Says: Netanyahu's PAINFUL Stumble Pushes Tel Aviv Into Its WORST NIGHTMARE These Are Trump's X-Men | Dr. Jordan B. Peterson Houthis (Yemen) Breached THAAD. Israel Given a Dud Defense!! Yuma County Arizona Doubles Its Outstanding Votes Overnight They're Stealing the Race from Kari Lake Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria Trump and RFK created websites for the people to voice their opinion on people the government is hiring Woke Georgia DA Deborah Gonzalez pummeled in re-election bid after refusing Laken Riley murder case Trump has a choice: Obliterate Palestine or end the war Rod Blagojevich: Kamala’s Corruption, & the Real Cause of the Democrat Party’s Spiral Into Insanity Israel's Defense Shattered by Hezbollah's New Iranian Super Missiles | Prof. Mohammad Marandi Trump Wins Arizona in Clean Sweep of Swing States in US Election TikTok Harlots Pledge in Droves: No More Pussy For MAGA Fascists! Colonel Douglas Macgregor:: Honoring Veteran's Day Low-Wage Nations? Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement NYT Pixar And Disney Animator Bolhem Bouchiba Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison Six C-17s, C-130s deploy US military assets to Northeastern Syria SNL cast members unveil new "hot jacked" Trump character in MAGA-friendly cold open Here's Why These Geopolitical And Financial Chokepoints Need Your Attention... Former Army Chief Moshe Ya'alon Calls for Civil Disobedience to Protest Netanyahu Government The Deep State against Trump

Science/Tech
See other Science/Tech Articles

Title: ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum
Source: News Busters
URL Source: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s ... -funds-media-mum#ixzz0ceNXQk9e
Published: Jan 16, 2010
Author: Noel Sheppard
Post Date: 2010-01-16 13:18:50 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment*     Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 2125
Comments: 200

ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
January 14, 2010 - 09:44 ET

A scientist in the middle of the ClimateGate scandal received economic stimulus funds last June.

As NewsBusters reported on November 28, Penn State University is investigating Professor Michael Mann, the creator of the discredited "Hockey Stick Graph," for his involvement in an international attempt to exaggerate and manipulate climate data in order to advance the myth of manmade global warming.

According to the conservative think tank the National Center for Public Policy Research, Mann received $541,184 in economic stimulus funds last June to conduct climate change research.

With this in mind, NCPPR issued a press release Thursday asking for these funds to be returned:

In the face of rising unemployment and record-breaking deficits, policy experts at the National Center for Public Policy Research are criticizing the Obama Administration for awarding a half million dollar grant from the economic stimulus package to Penn State Professor Michael Mann, a key figure in the Climategate controversy.

"It's outrageous that economic stimulus money is being used to support research conducted by Michael Mann at the very time he’s under investigation by Penn State and is one of the key figures in the international Climategate scandal. Penn State should immediately return these funds to the U.S. Treasury," said Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project.

Professor Mann is currently under investigation by Penn State University because of activities related to a closed circle of climate scientists who appear to have been engaged in agenda-driven science. Emails and documents mysteriously released from the previously-prestigious Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom revealed discussions of manipulation and destruction of research data, as well as efforts to interfere with the peer review process to stifle opposing views. The motivation underlying these efforts appears to be a coordinated strategy to support the belief that mankind's activities are causing global warming. [...] The $541,184 grant is for three years and was initiated in June 2009.

Potentially adding insult to injury, Penn State received additional stimulus funds to investigate the impact of climate change last week:

A nearly $1.9 million grant from the National Science Foundation is enabling a Penn State-led group of researchers to continue studies on the potential effects of climate change on the spread of infectious diseases, such as malaria and dengue. The grant is part of federal stimulus funding authorized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

This grant appears to have nothing to do with Mann's department. However, given the high-profile the university is currently under as a result of his involvement in ClimateGate, it seems absurd that any federal funds involving climate change would be going to this school while it is investigating its chief proponent of this myth.

Maybe more importantly, why are economic stimulus funds being given to a university for scientific research in the first place, especially one with such political overtones?

As NCPPR noted in its release:

"It's no wonder that Obama's stimulus plan is failing to produce jobs. Taxpayer dollars aren't being used in the ways most likely to spur job creation. The stimulus was not sold to the public as a way to reward a loyalist in the climate change debate. Nor was the stimulus sold as a way to promote the Obama Administration's position on the global warming theory...As is often the case, political considerations corrupt the distribution of government funds," said Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the National Center's Project 21 black leadership network.

Despite the obviously controversial nature of this funding and its recipient, I can identify absolutely no media coverage concerning the matter.

I'm sure now that NCPPR has exposed this hypocrisy, press outlets across the fruited plain will be aggressively investigating economic stimulus grants to Mann and others involved in the ClimateGate scandal in order to inform the public about how their tax dollars are being spent.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath. Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.

#1. To: farmfriend (#0)

ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum

I see allegations, but no proof.

There are embedded links in the article but in following them, no proof of that grant is presented. I won't just take someones word for it.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Michael_Mann_Money_011410.html mentions it too, and it was credited as a source in this article. No proof though.

PSUSA  posted on  2010-01-16   13:47:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The article was written by Noel Sheppard who is above reproach in my book.

farmfriend  posted on  2010-01-16   14:19:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

NewsBusted: The Sheppard File, Global Warming Division NewsBusters' Noel Sheppard posts claims attacking global warming that hide the agendas of those critics and ignore the full story.

By Terry Krepel Posted 6/21/2007

We know that NewsBusters blogger Noel Sheppard is eager to mislead and smear on many topics, so it's no surprise that global warming is one of them.

Indeed, Sheppard has issued dozens of posts on the subject. But many of them either baselessly attack global warming proponents or downplay or ignore the flaws in anti-global warming arguments or the dubious records of their promoters. Bashing Gore

Needless to say, chief among Sheppard's targets is Al Gore, whom he regularly insults. Bashing a Washington Post article about Gore's unusual path from failed presidential candidate to subject of the award-winning film "An Inconvenient Truth" and chief advocate of a response to global warming, Sheppard declared in a Feb. 25 post that the article was "sickening," asserting that "the text despicably read like a tabloid story about Britney Spears' shaved head or Elvis sightings in Las Vegas," finally sneering, "Had enough? I have. Those that are interested can read the rest at their own risk. I’ve got to go wash my hands, and disinfect my keyboard."

In a Feb. 26 post, Sheppard called "An Inconvenient Truth" a "schlockumentary" (an epithet he had used earlier in a Jan. 23 post, adding that it was a "farcical political advertisement") and after excerpting a section of Gore's Oscar acceptance speech, he added: "Can someone point me in the direction of the nearest water closet?" In the comments section, Sheppard elaborated: "He's a charlatan who doesn't believe in anything but himself and attaining power. And, he's commiting a fraud on the population for his own benefit, not yours, and certainly not mine." Sheppard offered no evidence to support this claim.

A Feb. 19 post by Sheppard regurgitated Fox News host Sean Hannity's attack on Al Gore for purportedly not be as "carbon-neutral" as he has proclaimed himself to be. But as NewsHounds pointed out, Hannity conflated "global warming" with "climate change" and confused "carbon imprint" with "carbon neutrality." Hannity's complaint that flying in a private jet, which he claims that Gore prefers, "does more than four times the carbon emission damage to the environment than flying a regular commercial jet" falls hollow given Hannity's own taste for the Gulfstream lifestyle, something Sheppard failed to note. Further, as Wonkette added, if there is no such thing as human-based global warming, as Sheppard appears to believe, how can Gore be causing it? Dubious track records ignored

Sheppard's chief tactic is to uncritically repeat any suggestion that counters the idea that humans cause global warming without noting any potential problems in those claims.

In a May 22 post, Sheppard promoted, as he had previously, the British film "The Great Global Warming Swindle," which according to Sheppard "presents the other side of the climate change debate the media and folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore don’t want you to hear." But Sheppard did not mention dubious claims in the film and others made by its director, Martin Durkin. Media Matters reported that, in an April 25 article in the UK's Scotsman, the film is "under fire" for claiming "that the world was hotter during the 'Medieval Warm Period' based on a graph that ended in 1975, and that volcanoes produce more carbon dioxide than humans."According to one study, volcanoes produce about 2 per cent of the emissions from human use of fossil fuels." According to Media Matters, Durkin made a film in 1999 which argued that silicone implants reduce the incidence of breast cancer, as well as a 1997 Channel 4 series called "Against Nature" that, according to The Guardian, "compared environmentalists ... to Nazis, conspiring against the world's poor" and caused the UK's Independent Television Commission to "hand down one of the most damning verdicts it has ever reached: the programme makers 'distorted by selective editing' the views of the interviewees and 'misled' them about the 'content and purpose of the programmes when they agreed to take part'. Channel 4 was forced to make a humiliating prime time apology." Related articles on ConWebWatch: NewsBusted Going to Extremes Swing to the Right The Disconnect, Part 2: The End of the Affair NewsBusted: The Finkelstein File NewsBusted: The Sheppard File Lies, Conservatives and Statistics: Marc Morano's Fantasy

In a March 21 post, Noel Sheppard signed on to do the bidding of global warming-bashing Sen. James Inhofe by reliably regurgitating Inhofe's press release claiming that, during his Senate testimony about global warming, Al Gore "refused" to take Inhofe's "Personal Energy Ethics Pledge," in which he demanded that Gore "consume no more energy for use in [his] residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008." In fact, Inhofe, apparently forgetting that he was no longer a committee chairman, repeatedly interrupted Gore as he tried to answer Inhofe's demand that he take the pledge -- one Inhofe showed no evidence of following himself, by the way -- as he explained his purchase of wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide, his efforts to be "carbon neutral" and to install solar panels at his home, all of which meets Inhofe's requirement of "reducing ... fossil fuel-based home energy usage."

A March 16 post declared that global warming skeptics "beat the believers" in a debate. Sheppard's source for this claim? A post by Inhofe's director of communications, Marc Morano, not exactly an objective source. Morano, by the way, is a former CNSNews.com reporter who is best known as the co-author of a 2006 hit piece on Rep. John Murtha. (Shortly before leaving CNS for Inhofe, he promoted the allegations of disgraced ex-NASA spokesman George Deutsch -- who was resigned his post after it was revealed that he had not graduated from college as his resume claimed -- in an attempt to discredit NASA global warming scientist James Hansen.)

A March 12 post repeated a New York Times article on global warming skeptics, commenting: "Amazing. The New York Times is suggesting that Dr. Gore might have exaggerated his claims and gone beyond scientific evidence? Somebody other than Punch should pinch me." But as Media Matters detailed, several of the skeptics cited in the Times article have have records of misinformation on the issue.

A March 19 NewsBusters post by Sheppard touted (along with CNSNews.com and NewsMax) a challenge by Lord Monckton, "a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher," to Al Gore to hold "an internationally televised, head-to-head, nation-unto-nation confrontation on the question, 'That our effect on climate is not dangerous.' " But Sheppard doesn't tell us the rest of the story: According to The Raw Story website, Lord Monckton (aka Christopher Monckton, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley) has no scientific credentials, holding degrees only in classics and journalism. So why is he in any way authoritative on the issue of global warming? His apparent main claim to fame is a lengthy article in the British paper the Telegraph claiming that, in the words of British Guardian columnist George Monbiot, "climate change is a hoax perpetrated by a leftwing conspiracy coordinated by the United Nations." Monbiot calls Monckton's article "a mixture of cherry-picking, downright misrepresentation and pseudo-scientific gibberish," adding, "There is scarcely a line in Lord Monckton's paper which is not wildly wrong."

A March 1 NewsBusters post by Sheppard misrepresented an anti-global warming theory as mainstream when, in fact, it's merely one man's idea. In what he called an "absolutely startling report about climate change," Sheppard cited a National Geographic News report on a claim by Russian scientist Habibullo Abdussamatov that global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, not by man. While Sheppard did excerpt a segment of the article calling it "one scientist's controversial theory," he went on to state, without offering evidence, that "To be sure, Abdussamatov is not the first scientist to make this claim."

However, Sheppard was vague in describing the criticism of the theory in the article: "In a piece that debunked what the supposed consensus believes on this issue, the magazine spent almost the bulk of the space alloted citing scientists that don’t buy Abdussamatov’s conclusions starting with, 'Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists.' " But Sheppard did not detail the specific -- and serious -- criticisms of Abdussamatov's theory contained in the article. Chief among them: Not only did Abdussamatov apparently fail to take into account changes in Mar's orbit and tilt that would affect changes in Mars' climate, the article adds: "Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface." Hidden backgrounds

To nobody's surprise, Sheppard used NewsBusters posts on May 3 and May 4 to tout claims made by various global warming skeptics during CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck's anti-global warming special. Also to no one's surprise, Sheppard doesn't say a thing about the energy industry links and previous misleading claims made by those same skeptics Beck featured in his special.

One of them is Timothy Ball, whose claims Sheppard touted in posts on Feb. 5 and Feb. 14. But as the DeSmog Blog noted, despite promoting himself as "the first Canadian PhD in Climatology," the record suggests a paucity of published scholarly research on the subject. Another entry makes the point clearer, claiming that "Dr. Ball has not published any research in a peer-reviewed science journal in the last 20 years."

Another is Bjorn Lomborg, whose claims Sheppard noted in his May 4 post. As Media Matters noted, Lomborg wrote a book that purported to conduct a "non-partisan analysis" of environmental data, concluding that claims about global warming were overblown. But in January 2002, Scientific American ran a series of articles from four well-known environmental specialists that lambasted Lomborg's book for "egregious distortions," "elementary blunders of quantitative manipulation and presentation that no self-respecting statistician ought to commit," and sections that were "poorly researched and ... rife with careless mistakes."

A June 5 post by Sheppard claimed that the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change -- which published a "detailed analysis" attacking claims by NASA's James Hansen about "a dire global warming future" -- is a "scientific organization." Sheppard adds: "Think this study will get much air or print space tonight or tomorrow? Neither do I." Nowhere does Sheppard mention the main reason the study will not get the attention he thinks it deserves -- the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has close ties to the energy industry, which typically funds global warming skeptics like the Center. The organization's principals -- Sherwood Idso and his sons, Craig and Keith, have all worked for the Western Fuels Association, a cooperative that supplies coal and transportation services to consumer-owned electric utilities in the western United States. Further, the organization has received $90,000 from ExxonMobil Corp. between 1998 and 2005. Sherwood Idso has defended receiving such funding, insisting that "the mere existence of funding, whether from private or public sources, does not, in and of itself, prove malfeasance on the part of the funds' recipients" (italics his). ExxonSecrets.org, though, reported that the Center "does not reveal its funding sources," which makes it difficult to judge whether how believeable Idso is on this subject. Bogus 'state climatologists'

In a Feb. 7 post, Sheppard touted the case of Oregon "state climatologist" George Taylor, who was to be stripped of his "job" because he didn't "buy into the junk science of anthropogenic global warming." In fact, as Think Progress reported, there's no official Oregon "state climatologist," Taylor is not trained in climatology, and losing the honorary title will not cost him any income or his current job as a college instructor. (WorldNetDaily's Craige McMillan and CNSNews.com also repeated the bogus claims about Taylor's position.)

In a Feb. 23 post -- after citing the bogus claim about the Oregon "state climatologist" -- he repeated an article claiming that Delaware's "state climatologist," David Legates, has been ordered by the governor to "stop using his title in public statements on climate change." Sheppard added by way of weak qualification, "I haven’t been able to identify how long Legates has held this title, but it doesn’t appear to have been given to him by her." In fact, according to the newspaper article he cited (but doesn't include in his excerpt for his post), the "state climatologist" position carries no state salary or authority.

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16   17:04:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I see nothing there other that unsubstantiated smears which take opinions then try to twist them into factual inaccuracies without once producing a factual inaccuracy.

In other words a hit piece aimed at attacking Mr. Sheppard's credibility. Convincing only to the weak of mind and true beeeeeeeeelievers in Glowbull Warming which is essentially an identity.

Nowhere in that smear piece is there anything which factually refutes the stipulated facts in the article on this thread.

Is Professor Michael Mann of Penn State under investigation for forging evidence? Yes or No?

Was he, or was he not, given a half million dollar grant by the Oh'bummer maladministration? Yes or No?

The article you posted is nothing more than an Argumentum Ad Hominem attack on Mr. Sheppard.

Your posting of it is nothing more than a Red Herring.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-01-16   17:25:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Your posting of it is nothing more than a Red Herring.

ROTFL ...

Global Warming Update: 'Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age'">

By Noel Sheppard
January 11, 2009 - 11:57 ET

As Democrats and their president-elect -- with invaluable assistance from their media minions -- continue spreading climate hysteria in order to raise taxes and redistribute wealth, a possibly inconvenient truth has just been presented to the international community: "The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science."

Additionally, the entire bogus manmade global warming theory that climate alarmists and their surrogates have been forcing down the throats of the citizenry "is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change."

Such was reported by Russia's Pravda Sunday, and it not only goes quite counter to the junk science being espoused by folks like Nobel Laureate Al Gore and his accomplices James Hansen and Gavin Schmidt, but it has also been regularly proffered by many of the real scientists and climatologists around the world that global warming loving media not only refuse to cite and/or interview, but also disgracefully ridicule as deniers and flat earthers.

According to Pravda, it is Gore, Hansen, Schmidt, and all their sycophant devotees that are the flat earthers who are distracting the world from a much more serious climate threat (emphasis added throughout):

The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.

Sounds much like what the realist side has been saying for years, doesn't it? But it gets better:

During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.

The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.

The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years -- evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.

Sounds exactly like what the realists claim, and have been claiming, correct? But there's more:

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose [sic] their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.

The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.

The conclusion:

The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.

For what it's worth, Accuweather's Joe Bastardi told Glenn Beck last Tuesday that Russia's Vladimir Putin may have cut supplies of gas from the Ukraine to Europe because he believes the globe is about to go into a cooling phase, and controlling natural gas will give his country a great deal of added power on that continent.

Maybe Putin was aware of this article about to be published by Pravda?

Regardless, it's going to be very interesting to see how much this report gets covered here in America where our media, regardless of how cold it is or how cold it might get, still believe Al Gore.

Stay tuned.

Post facto thought-provoker: the climate alarmists regularly proffer that America and the world, regardless of whether or not AGW theory becomes prophecy, should prepare for that possibility. Not doing so in their view would be foolish.

Well, what if the realists who believe we're entering another serious cooling phase are right? Wouldn't it be foolish for us not to prepare for that outcome?

After all, as most American residences and structures were built during the recent warming phase, they're not prepared for significantly colder temperatures. Neither is our current electricity grid or our supply of natural gas and heating oil.

Also, it is MUCH easier to deal with warmer temperatures than cooler ones. Maybe more important, a lot more people die from the cold than the heat.

As such, using the alarmist argument that it's foolish not to prepare for a possible outcome, and given the greater consequences involved in a global cooling, shouldn't we be allocating more resources and energy to preparing for it?

How might we accomplish this? Well, with the economy in a serious recession, and Congress considering a stimulus package, how about one that offers tax credits to individuals and businesses that upgrade their heating systems, improve insulation, and install double-pane windows?

Such purchases would not only prepare the nation for a possible cooling, but also fuel the economy and create jobs.

While we're at it, as we're going to need more heating oil, maybe we should fast-track the licensing of new refinery construction so that the inventory of such will be on the upswing thereby reducing the likelihood of price spikes from future supply constraints. Such construction would also create jobs.

Of course, if we are going to need more heating oil, we should remove the current impediments to exploration and drilling both offshore and in the nation's oil shale-rich interior.

Without question, if Pravda and the hundreds of climate realists predicting a cooling are right, America needs to prepare for it. Given the current state of our economy, proactive solutions should be looked at as sound investments in our nation's future with the ancillary benefit of much-needed job creation.

Or is this too logical for global warming-obsessed politicians and media?

*****Update: NBer robertinseattle accurately pointed out in the comments section that the author of this Pravda piece has some interesting views about 9/11 that would make Rosie O'Donnell proud. In fact, Gregory F. Fegel, although being an American, doesn't care for his homeland much as depicted in his blogs here and here.

How delicious that an America-hating Truther who contributes to Pravda has a firmer grasp of climatology than Nobel Laureate Al Gore, James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, and most of the folks at the IPCC.

Now THAT'S entertainment!!!

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.

You can twitter him all you want. But he is a liar on accounts not knowing any scientific truth or merit; he is just a bobble-head.

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16   17:45:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

        There are no replies to Comment # 17.

End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]