JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

House votes 244-179 to kill U.S. funding of UN IPCC

Breaking News, straight from Climate Depot.

Another victory for science! The House votes 244-179 to kill U.S. funding of UN IPCC!

‘[The US government] no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its comprehensive international climate science assessments’

Defund IPCC ‘amendment was sponsored by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), who read aloud on the floor from the 2009 U.S. Senate Report of more than 700 dissenting scientists!

(Written by Climate Depot’s Morano) — Luetkemeyer: Americans ‘should not have to continue to foot the bill for an (IPPC) organization to keep producing corrupt findings’

Note: U.S. Senate’s 700 Scientist report has been updated to more than a 1000 by Climate Depot. See: * SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.

This still has to get past the Senate.

The US contribution directly to the IPCC is only $2.3 million, and the loss of that would just shorten the two week annual junket by a few hours. But the turnaround in attitude is telling. This wouldn’t have happened two years ago. The Republicans are letting the nation know they are serious.

A majority of the research of the IPCC comes from US institutes and organizations. When this new attitude spreads to the direction of research grants, “PR” units, and to other nations, it could really start to bite. Imagine if the US congress started to fund independent audits, or solar-driven-climate research, or more satellite data collection?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 1.0/10 (1 vote cast)
House votes 244-179 to kill U.S. funding of UN IPCC, 1.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/4s8lb2a

73 comments to House votes 244-179 to kill U.S. funding of UN IPCC

  • #

    Good news. Let us hope that other countries will follow. I do not know how binding such a vote is in the States, but the spirit of it is clear. I imagine the IPCC will go down in history as an example of what can happen when politics and PR take precedence over science under the guise of conducting an objective review. I believe it has blotted the copybook of the UN, for what that is worth, and diminished many of our institutions, not least in science, education, and mass media.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Now will they stick to their guns when the Senate and Obama balk at this? If they do, it will be a monumental victory over global warming.

    The House has also voted to defund EPA regulation of stationary “carbon” emission sources.

    This amounts to a one finger salute to the United Nations and the President.

    Expect a fight! If these things stand, the U.S. will have officially repudiated the whole CO2 farce. A whole lot of money and potential loss of face are riding on this one. It should be interesting to watch. And so much more to do to finish it.

    00

  • #

    Maybe the worm has turned then again, maybe not.

    I have long held that, in a crunch, it is the nature of Republicans to default to the policies of the left (increased spending, aggrandized government, and more reductions of the liberty and increased confiscation of the lives of We the People). Their primary motivation has been that they want the Democrats to love them and to say nice things about them. Hence, they became better Democrats than the Democrats themselves whenever the Democrats call them ugly names.

    At long last, they said NO to the the UN thugs and wannabe global dictators. The self same NO that a growing number of We the People have been demanding they say since the inception of that center of political corruption known as the UN. Unfortunately, it is less than a flake of dust on a grain of sand in a mountain of sand compared to what needs to be done but it is a start.

    The real test will come when the Democrats start saying bad things about Republicans. Will the new Republican resolve hold? I hope so but won’t be surprised if they lose it as they have countless times since Republicans started being called Republicans.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Lionell,

    Republicans need to get up in front of the public and start explaining why they are doing what they’re doing. The truth about the budget, about the IPCC, whatever it is, will win the day if it’s put in front of the people. The great failure of the right is failure to communicate with the people.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Roy and Lionell, we all can help with the dissemination of the correct spin on these items. Roy your comment:

    The great failure of the right is failure to communicate with the people.

    I’d reword to say the great Republican failure is in not learning how to manipulate (to advantage) the press into telling the story correctly. It isn’t easy but I think they are catching on. The internet is helping by bypassing the Main Stream Media “filtration system”.

    Locally we have “serious” eruptions with the Wisconsin governor pressing the importance of a balanced budget over special interest groups (the teacher and state employee unions). What those union activists and rabble-rousers have missed is that the majority of Wisconsonites chose their governor and representatives to get the job done and balance the budget. I have spoken to many people about this and most do not like what the unions are doing (making Wisconsin look like Egypt). In other words this may likely backfire on the protesters.

    I think the effects of strong tea and a wide awake electorate are being felt across the land.

    Roy Spencer has more:http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/02/on-the-house-vote-to-defund-the-ipcc/

    00

  • #
    Jack Taylor

    Yet to clear the Senate, which probably won’t occur this time, however the writing’s on the wall in the USA. This is a flexing of the Republican muscle and a clear indication to the domestic, UN and EU proponents of AGW and global government that the US voter will not be a submissive puppy to scare propaganda and quasi-guilt trips on how the Third World runs its economic, social and political activities.

    Obama and the Democrats are looking at a single term in office because of timidity, indecisiveness and a lack of direction at odds with the pre-election campaign.

    Republicans at times, get hamstrung with their seemingly close association with the pro-gun and anti-abortionist lobby. The Democrats have now found themselves heavily associated with loud left wing zealots and extremists that have found a soapbox with the global warming cause and the Republicans are taking advantage of it in every way they can.

    00

  • #
    Athlete

    Friend$,
    The moral cri$i$ of our lifetime ha$ come under new attack. La$t night the Republican global warming climate change climate di$ruption denier$, led by evil corporation$$$$ and fo$$$$$il fuel Intere$t$, voted to $top funding to the IPCC. Thi$ i$ de$pite the fact that there i$ not one $ingle peer-reviewed paper that di$pute$ that global warming pollution will cau$e $ea levels to ri$e 20 metre$ by next $aturday or that the Oregon zipper-tailed $quirrel will be extinct by $eptember. To counter the global warming denier$ I have no choice but to immediately announce a new campaign. Effective tomorrow, I will hop on one of my private jet$ and tour the world in a $erie$ of $peaking engagement$ to counter their di$imformation. Since thi$ will be an expen$ive campaign I need lots and lot$ of $$$$$$$. Plea$e make you donation$ no smaller than 100 dollar$.

    $$$$incerely,

    Al Gore

    00

  • #

    Roy,

    I think the Republican’s failure in the past is way beyond mere failure to communicate. They have philosophically, intellectually, and morally defaulted on nearly every principle of good governance for a free people for well over 100 years. It takes a lot more than lip service reverence for the American Flag, Motherhood, Apple Pie, and The Fourth of July or its alternate God, Family, Count, and The American Way.

    As far as the professional politician is concerned, those things are simply emotional expressions used to control the electorate. In Washington, its about power, control, ego massage, and getting re-elected. An individual right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is not even on the map. At best, those things are considered a fantasy held by those who reside in fly-over-country.

    What we really need are one term politicians who understand what freedom really means and what it takes to make it happen. It is not more of the same with a slight decrease in the rate of increase. We need to pull the plug on almost all of the alphabet soup of agencies, repeal the quasi laws they have made, put their workers on the street, and cancel their bloated pensions.

    When any one of the newly unemployed government workers complains that they had a contract, we can reply that they and their brothers canceled the contract of contracts: The Constitution of the United States. That act alone cancels ALL contracts made by the Federal Government and all moneys paid in service of those contracts is due and payable to the US Taxpayers – with interest. The payment should come out of THEIR bank accounts not we the taxpayers.

    The alternative is hyper-inflation, collapse of the economy, and the destruction of our nation as a nation. Either way, the government workers will be out of a job. I say sooner rather than later! If done soon enough there might be enough left to be worth saving.

    00

  • #

    They always knew that global warming was just hysteria but were happy to ride to office on its coat tails. It’s an electoral liability now though.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRzs17rYuZg

    Pointman

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Jack Taylor @6,

    Yet to clear the Senate, which probably won’t occur this time, however the writing’s on the wall in the USA.

    If the House Republicans actually stick to this and never agree to take it out of the appropriations bill then the Senate and the President will end up with little choice but to go along.

    The government runs out of authorization to spend money on something like March 4th I believe. If there is no new appropriations bill by then the government of the United States stops operating. So we are going to see a very high stakes game of chicken played out.

    Republicans can win this if they can tell the country why what they’re doing is so important to get done. All the left can do is hiss, moan and point fingers blaming Republicans for the shutdown of government if it happens. There is evidence that this will not work. So I hold out hope for success. But it all depends on the resolve of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

    I hate to put it in these terms but it’s time to fight back, this time with boxing gloves on. We have to start winning battles now.

    PS:

    Republicans should put aside the abortion issue and stick to things they can win. I cannot imagine the Supreme Court — any Supreme Court — reversing Roe v Wade.

    The gun issue is another matter. The Constitution is rather insistent about it. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” No one I would trust in any public office wants to legalize personal ownership of fully automatic weapons or weapons with only military usefulness. We don’t permit convicted felons to possess firearms. We have never been overboard about gun ownership. Any government that wants to prohibit private ownership of firearms is a government to fear in my opinion.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Lionell @8,

    What we really need are one term politicians who understand what freedom really means and what it takes to make it happen.

    I think we have some of those politicians now. Whether they will be one term or not is unknown. But I now have some reason to hope for progress in the right direction. The present mess was not made in a day. And I think it certainly can’t be all undone at the wave of an arm over the Constitution.

    So let’s let it go on and see what we end up with.

    00

  • #
    incoherent rambler

    John Shade @ 1

    I believe it has blotted the copybook of the UN,

    The UN watching massacres like Rwanda and Timor whilst “discussions” took place not enough for a blot eh?

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    I like being right as much as everybody else. Considering how much is riding on defeating the CAGW scam, I am glad I was. As I have commented elsewhere on this site:

    1. It is always about the money.
    2. If the US does not go along with the CAGW scam then the scam would wither and die.
    3. The Republicans control the House where all money bills must originate.

    Even if the Senate goes along with the House to keep the government from defaulting on its financial obligations Obama could still veto any bill that defunded the IPCC in particular and global warming in general. The democrats and republicans are already posturing and finger pointing. As I have also said, politicians have an instinct for survival unequaled any where else in the animal kingdom. If Obama moves to the center to win reelection and if democrats in the Senate up for reelection do so as well, then the taxpayer funded gravy train will probably come to a screeching halt.

    Although I am an optimist I do live in the real world and I never underestimate the ability of politicians in my country to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I hope the Obama Administration has the sense to throw in the towel on CAGW but then again, I am an optimist!

    00

  • #
    Graham

    Roy Hogue @#4

    The great failure of the right is failure to communicate with the people.

    Yet wouldn’t it be fair to say that the mind of the classic politician is at work here? That is to say, it is the mood of the people that the Republicans have read on this issue and then acted accordingly. To the extent that is true, surely it bodes well for the long haul whatever happens at the level of the Senate or White House. In the end, it is public opinion that drives political will.

    Would that our conservative Coalition parties in Australia showed the same foresight. As Lionel Griffith @#3 says:

    in a crunch, it is the nature of Republicans to default to the policies of the left

    Despite strong indications of latent scepticism, the Coalition meekly goes along with CAGW to curry favour with the left.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Graham @14,

    Yet wouldn’t it be fair to say that the mind of the classic politician is at work here?

    Many of the freshman representatives have never been in federal elected office at all. Some served in state offices and a few had no prior political experience or were elected only to local city or county office. These are people who never would have run, much less been elected and who only decided to run because of the excesses of the current administration and the change in public attitude which you correctly note.

    So there is an old-guard and a new-guard in the House and they are going to have to come to terms with each other. Several bills and amendments to the appropriations bill that should have passed according to some conservative commentators did not pass because the old-guard Republicans were persuasive on the matter, not to mention that even the new-guard will not be of one mind about everything.

    But I think it’s a mistake to believe that every Republican is just bending in the direction the wind is blowing to preserve votes for the next election. At the same time, I’ll gladly accept the support of any who are doing that.

    Representatives are there for only two-year terms. So any who are not satisfying their constituents will be targets for defeat either this year or in 2012.

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    Graham

    Don’t be too disheartened. I have a strong feeling the political ride to the end of this year could well match or even surpass 1975.

    A minority government sucking up to the indi s & soon a watermellon controlled senate will have a difficult time doing anything.

    Further, the odds are that the NSW State government will bet swept by the winds of change. The first thing that will come from the new incumbents will be “the cupboard is bare!”. How much help will the Feds willingly throw to a NSW gov of the wrong colour?

    On top of the rebuilding after the natural disasters & the static which will come from the squeaky hinges as a result of funding changes we will, as the Chinese put it, be living in interesting times.

    The madia(deliberate), the spin-doctors & the advertisers will have a field day.

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    It is only $2.3 million and to have NASA dump Hansen and co saves only a Billion, small beans in a multi trillion dollar budget and that is why it has a real chance of succeeding. I can’t see the US public, who by and large don’t believe the AGW hype and who will not willingly pay to save the world, being too concerned about a few fat cat government employees losing their job. Will Obama really jeopardise the rest of the economy over a few million dollars? He has far bigger and far more urgent problems, 10% unemployment, the spectre of another GFC, Afganistan, to worry about a few scientists that even he must by now realise were fiddling the data or making it up.

    The most fervent AGW believing politician should be in doubt mode by now. AGW/CC doesn’t harness the same political fervour it once did and I suspect there is more than a modicum of lip service being paid these days just to keep a few green voters onside. You must be aware of the rapid increase in pro AGW websites of late and the strident and abusive calls against the deniers. This sort of rhetoric came from politicians a few years ago, now it’s left to the eco terrorists.

    The Australian experience follows much the same trajectory. Rudd abused the deniers before the Copenhagen fiasco and took a 114 strong contingent to it. A junior minister and a few bureaucrats went to Cancun. The flood rebuilding caused the cancellation of several green schemes although two were re-instated to keep the Greens sweet. NTL green projects were first cab off the rank for sacrifice when extra money was required. That would not have happened in 2009. Even a dullard like Gillard can see the failed predictions of the warmers world wide. I think Obama is just a bit brighter than Julia.

    00

  • #
    Percival Snodgrass

    Gillard gives Greens 20 per cent cut of flood levy – WTF ????????

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/greens_pinch_100_million_of_the_18_billion_meant_for_flood_victims/

    WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THIS COMMUNIST GILLARD !!!!!!

    SHE IS EVIL!

    00

  • #
    Ross

    So it looks like the begging letter to the Congress in the US press from Mann, Trenbath and the rest of the Team, recently did not work. Great news

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Here is a summary of the House bill just sent to the Senate.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    And an interesting perspective from one of the freshman representatives.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    Graeme: #14 et al & Roy Hogue: #17 et al

    Politicians operate on several level concurrently, and they have the ability to isolate individual facts as being a manageable “chunk”. It seems to be an innate ability that they all have.

    They will listen to single opinions, often from multiple sources, at different times, but they will never put these individual pieces together to form a jigsaw picture of a wider problem. They rely on their staff to do that for them.

    Once an encompassing story has been put together, that may or may not include all of the pieces, then the politician is able to process that, as a single manageable “chunk”. The bigger the problem, the bigger the single picture has to be, before they can act. And individual politicians get that bigger picture at different times, so it is rare to get a consensus on anything.

    Two points:

    1. The politicians are exposed to their staffs being infiltrated by special interest groups. This is why elections can cause a much greater change in policy than the numbers would suggest.

    2. It also explains why politicians will say one thing before they are elected, and then do something entirely different once they are in power.

    What this story says to me is that there has been a sea change within the bureaucracy surrounding the politicians. I have no opinion why that should have occurred now.

    Also, I have noticed the lack of trolls on this (and other sceptical sites) of late. Perhaps they are regrouping for the next campaign?

    Perhaps these two observations are linked in some way?

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    Lawrie: #17

    Nice analysis, thank you.

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    Even if this is a tokenistic exercise it is still sending a clear signal to the Democrats that the game is over, the gig is up, and it’s time for a bit of reckoning.

    As for the Greens putting the Rainbow Coalition to ransom, I say bring it on… the more Joolya gets wedged by the Greens the sooner the whole arrangement falls apart.

    00

  • #

    Ross @19, that is sooooo surprising! It was such a well-written document, and didn’t rely upon generalised statements without underlying evidence at all. AND…it was signed by 18 (EIGHTEEN!) climate change scientists. Pretty strong stuff.

    LOL! We all know that in the end, truth prevails. The only question is: How much damage is done in the mean time?

    The Queensland floods demonstrated very well that this idiocy has cost us much more than the pricetag we can see.
    1. The opportunity costs of the direct funding are huge.
    2. More importantly, the opportunity cost of so many great minds working on a non-problem is staggering.
    3. Most importantly of all, we now have a generation or two of kids who have been brainwashed in this idiocy. So what is their attitude toward science going to be in future? The damage done to the scientific community will take much time to repair.

    Algore and his anthropogenic global warming partners in crime caused decision makers and policy writers to cater to a 10% tail of a probability curve (by the alarmists’ admission….I believe the tail is smaller than that), leaving communities unprepared and unprotected in the other 90% of the curve (which, believe it or not, was more likely to occur).

    While all research dollars have gone into the idiocy of AGW, they have not gone into solving real problems. One of the biggest of these is how to feed the world in coming years. Our broad-acre agricultural productivity has fallen, which is not surprising, given that CO2 (a plant benefice) has been labelled the bad guy and our compulsory levy dollars have been diverted into decreasing CO2. In Australia, we now have the great Carbon Farming Initiative, which our incorruptible and fearless National Farmers Federation has pushed in a big way so as to ensure their seat at the table (which is important, mind you, so that they can continue to fight incorruptibly and fearlessly on behalf of their members — farmers!).

    The alarmist rhetoric and presence in the madia (thanks, pattoh!) has reached fever pitch. Tim Flannery and co. are going to go down with the ship. It just cannot happen soon enough. The cost of these clowns has become too much to bear.

    00

  • #

    Just to follow up on the Carbon Farming Initiative issue, our Coalition for Agricultural Productivity started to put a submission in, but decided in the end that it would do no good. Responding within their pre-determined path is a waste of time. Instead, we sent this letter to the press:

    Greg Combet and his Government, in promoting their Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), are doggedly disregarding reality: closing their eyes, plugging their ears and making unintelligible, off-tune noise while they waste resources and ignore observational evidence.

    CFI is a sure way to squander taxpayer money, divert research and development dollars, and distort market signals, which will lead to lower productivity and less food and fibre being produced. This will not help, but ravage, the farming community – and the consumers that depend upon it.

    CFI is a response to a non-problem. This Government insists on the formation of a false market to trade a fiat currency (carbon credits) in response to a non-problem (human emissions of carbon dioxide).

    Rather than standing up for farmers against the advancement of tyrannical control, groups like the National Farmers Federation have knocked the door down trying to get a piece of the virtual action.

    The sad thing is, it is REAL land, capital and labor that are being diverted away from productivity gain pursuits and into this pretend world.

    The last time a large population engaged to this extent in such perception and spin while ignoring real production, at least 30 million Chinese starved to death.

    No amount of public consultation or responding to detail within this flawed initiative will offset the fact that either 1) it is doomed, or 2) it will lead to doom.

    Cheers,
    Janet

    00

  • #

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ChasEnStorms, allen emmall. allen emmall said: "House votes 244-179 to kill US funding of UN IPCC" and related posts http://ht.ly/1bpEeF [...]

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Where oh where is John Brookes? I expected him to weigh in on this one for sure.

    C’mon John, you must have some erudite comment to make.

    00

  • #
    Mervyn Sullivan

    The cuts in the US budget are necessary. Obama can’t lecture the corporate world about implementing financial discipline, yet think his administration can be be exempt from similar financial discipline. But that’s what he believes.

    The US needs to learn the lesson of Japan where the Japanese Times recently announced the results of an official government audit into 214 biomass projects, motivated purely by the global warming hysteria, and funded in the recent six years that led to no result. The projects cost 6.55 trillion yen (about (US $80 billion)… money down the drain on projects that should never have been conceived, in the first place.

    http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/02/japan-we-wasted-655-trillion-for-214.html

    00

  • #
    janama

    Mervyn Sullivan: The biomass generators at The Broadwater and Condong sugar Mills have also closed down as they were losing money!!

    00

  • #
    Graham

    Lionell Griffith @#3

    (Republicans’) primary motivation has been that they want the Democrats to love them and to say nice things about them.

    Given 241-193 in Congress and a vote on this issue of 244-179, may there may be reason to hope that Republicans may not need to resort to their habit of cosying up to the left after all, Lionell?

    00

  • #
    William Gray

    Green is not a smart colour for politicians and bankers to have used to paint the economy with. Ow wait thats the colour of MONEY. Yes folks THATS IT!
    A new world economy is coming based on real stuff, like resource trade without PROFIT. Ow wait thats a GREENY IDEA.
    Hmm.

    00

  • #

    C’mon Roy, even trolls get a day off now and again. It’s in their Union contract.

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Roy @ 28

    Be careful what you ask for – you might just get it!

    You’re more in touch with the US politics so I guess you can comment on the probability that this gets past the other house?

    And I’m pretty sure that “only” $2 million per annum would free up some of the financial issues at chez Nova!

    Cheers,

    Speedy.

    00

  • #
    Percival Snodgrass

    I have a very important question……

    How much is Australia paying to fund The IPCC ?

    00

  • #

    Great news, but the US simply can’t afford cAGW.
    The Republicans have fought for weeks in congress to reduce budget by about $50 billion. Sounds impressive? It’s peanuts.

    A bit of layman research is astonishing (very approximate):
    · US federal government budget of $3.5 Billion will be funded from taxes of about $2 trillion and a borrowing of $1.5 trillion.
    · US Feds thus spends nearly double their income this year and realists expect each year for the foreseeable future.
    · 2011 annual budget deficit of $1.5 trillion is almost 4 times the recent deficits of 2006-2008.
    · There is no believable plan to lower annual deficits in the future on realistic projections.
    ·Deficits are now over 10% of the $15 trillion US GDP
    · US National government debt is now over $14 trillion.
    · This debt is around 90% of GDP
    · Nearly 30% of it is owned to foreigners (China & Japan)
    · By my reckoning, this debt is 8 years of total annual federal incomes.
    · Congress has spent more money than its income every year since 1969.
    · Interest paid on debt 2010 is already about $400 billion (5th largest budget item.
    · No one sees any way for these creditors to be repaid.

    I guess the only thing stopping collapse of $US is that the Euro and Yen are not much better.

    We will live in interesting times.

    00

  • #
    G/Machine

    Roy #28

    John is busy putting together a $2.5M package to save his church,
    the IPCC. These are difficult times. Ho, ho, ho…

    00

  • #
    janama

    Michael Cejnar: meanwhile the real world keeps going – Brazil, Russia, India, and China continue oblivious to the wreck that is the US and the EU.

    some comparison fugues for you via CIA Factbook.

    BRIC

    Brazil – $2.194 trillion (2010 est. pop – 201,103,330

    Russia – $2.229 trillion (2010 est.) – 139,390,205 (July 2010 est.)

    India – $4.046 trillion (2010 est.) – 1,173,108,018 (July 2010 est.)

    China – $9.872 trillion (2010 est.) – 1,330,141,295 (July 2010 est.)

    Total economy = $18.314 trillion.

    Population = 13,787,952,848

    EU – $14.89 trillion (2010 est.) – 492,387,344 (July 2010 est.)

    US – $14.72 trillion (2010 est.) – 310,232,863 (July 2010 est.)

    Total economy = $29.61 trillion

    Population = 802,620,207

    00

  • #
    incoherent rambler

    One side definitely lives by”live long and prosper” (bold the prosper)
    versus “live and try do some good”

    ecoloons vs physicists

    Do you bet by emotion or truth?

    I pray for the physicists.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Sorry Roy, doing other stuff.

    Only interesting stuff I saw in US politics was the demonstration in Wisconsin. You know it looked a lot like Egypt, Bahrein, etc. The ordinary people getting sick of the rich and powerful telling them that they will have to make sacrifices for the good of the nation.

    Of course, I have no personal experience of Wisconsin, and I rather imagine that the unions are out of control there. I imagine that teachers and nurses all drive cadillacs and work 3 hour days and 3 day weeks. No wonder the US is in such a parlous state with these undeserving sods getting a free ride from those poor struggling medical specialists, miners, lawyers, executives etc. Lets face it, some one has to suffer (or you could put up taxes, but everyone agrees that there exists special magic by which government revenue increases when you tax less, so you can’t put up taxes, or you’ll go broke).

    With the loony right in the ascendancy in the US, I expect nothing useful from that country. Maybe the only thing that will bring the US back to its senses is a long decline, which is what it seems to have coming.

    There, I hope you are happy now ;-)

    00

  • #
    hide the decline

    Eddy Aruda: @ February 20th, 2011 at 6:50 am

    “Even if the Senate goes along with the House to keep the government from defaulting on its financial obligations Obama could still veto any bill that defunded the IPCC in particular and global warming in general.”

    Eddy,

    From an ozzie – If Obama ‘Veto’s’ the bill from the Congress (and assuming it passes the Senate) to “Defund” the IPCC; How is it possible that Obama could still “Fund” the IPCC without a money bill ??

    If Obama did ‘veto’ the bill and in the absence of another supporting bill isn’t that the same as shutting down the funding in any event ??

    Please excuse the ignorance.

    00

  • #

    Graham @31,

    One can hope but experience shows that it is very rare for people to change their character. It can be done and has happened but not often enough to rely on. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. As a consequence, We the People will have to persist in keeping the fire to the feet of our elected representatives or they will revert to type. They will aggrandize power, seek control over others, compromise every principle, use other peoples money to buy votes, and focus almost exclusively on getting reelected so they can do more of the same.

    I am firmly convinced that, by seeking public office, a politician demonstrates he is psychologically, philosophically, and intellectually unfit to fill the position. If you can vote for them, they are unfit. If you can’t vote for them, they are worse than unfit.

    Government, if unchecked, grows to consume everything and everybody until the society collapses into anarchy. After which a different gang of thugs take over and do exactly the same thing. Call me cynical if you like but there are many thousands of years of human history that has very few exceptions to that rule. I suspect that many of the exceptions are more myth than reality.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Hide the decline @41: You ask a good question.

    What I suspect is that the IPCC IS partly funded (US) by a previous bill passed by the house, senate and president. This new bill would presumably undo that funding.

    00

  • #

    incoherent rambler @ 12
    You presume that a copybook can only have one blot. I don’t.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    John Brookes @ 40 You show your “true blue” colors here.

    The ordinary people getting sick of the rich and powerful telling them that they will have to make sacrifices for the good of the nation.

    NO! what has been happening is the the “rich” have been told that they must pay MORE than everybody else. Second to that, the “powerful” are now the school, municipal and state employees. Made more powerful by their unreasonable unions, than the entire government of the state of Wisconsin. It is the same in many other US states that are now functionally bankrupt. Unlike the Federal government, the states cannot print more money. They HAVE to balance their budgets. A typical high-school teacher earns 2 to 3 times the average annual wage in the state for only 9 months of work.

    With the loony right in the ascendancy in the US, I expect nothing useful from that country.

    The “looney right” right of today is the average person. Bright enough to see that a true use of the word “unsustainable” is present government spending levels. You can balance the books by taxing higher and higher (as state-ists try) but doing that has proven to not work in the long run. It is never how much you earn, it is always how much you spend. Almost all our levels of government have been spending too much for years.

    Maybe the only thing that will bring the US back to its senses is a long decline, which is what it seems to have coming.

    Well John, here you just sound “loony”. What HAS happened is that the average person is trying very hard to prevent government from forcing a “long decline” by outrageous fiscal irresponsibility. You may believe that it is smart to spend what you don’t have but as I said you sound loony.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Speedy @34,

    You’re more in touch with the US politics so I guess you can comment on the probability that this gets past the other house?

    I think there is some hope for passage of some major cuts in the Senate. There are some Democrats who were not very happy with some of the agenda they felt forced to go along with and some who will certainly be looking at which way the wind is blowing and then acting accordingly. There are 47 Republicans if I remember correctly, just 4 short of a majority. So if they hold together and just a few Democrats decide they’ve had enough of the spending spree, the political landscape could change dramatically.

    Republicans could also filibuster to stop passage of any change they don’t like. But I don’t see any benefit in doing it.

    In any case, the Senate really has little choice. They can’t simply refuse to pass the appropriations bill, as much as they might like to, because their constituents will not stand for it. But as I said, expect a fight.

    The bigger worry is what Obama will do. And I’ve no great insight into his present position. If he vetoes it…who knows?

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    John Brookes,

    Of course, I have no personal experience of Wisconsin, and I rather imagine that the unions are out of control there. [emphasis added, RH]

    Sometimes you do get things right. You have no experience of Wisconsin and you imagine many things. To sum it up — you have no knowledge of Wisconsin or any other place in the United States yet you are willing to make broad sweeping statements about what’s going on.

    You may think everyone has a right to all the goodies. But Margaret Thatcher nailed the problem with that so perfectly when she said

    Sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.

    And that’s exactly what’s happening.

    It’s good to see you participating in the debate. :-)

    00

  • #
    harrywr2

    The bottom line is that the US Government can not spend a single dime after March 4th without the consent of the House of Representatives.

    00

  • #
    BobC

    John Brookes: @40
    February 21st, 2011 at 1:08 am

    Of course, I have no personal experience of Wisconsin…

    But, of course, a little thing like complete ignorance doesn’t inhibit you in the least telling us just what is going on:

    You know it looked a lot like Egypt, Bahrein, etc.

    Perhaps you should visit Wisconsin, Egypt, Bahrain, etc. Maybe then you could see a difference. (Or am I hoping for too much rationality here?) Most people could spot several significant differences with about 30 seconds on Google (or just what they picked up in Grade School).

    What you think is really happening is:

    The ordinary people getting sick of the rich and powerful telling them that they will have to make sacrifices for the good of the nation.

    Well, of course! That has to be what’s happening because: 1) That’s what you want to be happening, and 2) Karl Marx said it had to happen, as a consequence of Capitalism. (Of course, that was 150 years ago, and it hasn’t happened yet — but surely he has to be right any time now.) Why, just this morning I was reading a letter in the Sunday paper that claimed that “true Progressives” were driven by data, not ideology. I’m still trying to square that with Progressives’ continuing belief in Karl Marx, Paul Ehrlich, and Al Gore — to name just a few examples.

    With the loony right in the ascendancy in the US, I expect nothing useful from that country.

    What you call the “loony right” is where all the Classic Liberals now reside (having been driven out of the Democratic Party by the Progressives, who now label them “neocons”). You know John, “Classic Liberals” are those people who believe in personal, economic, and political freedom — the philosophy that has, over the last 200 years, turned much of the world into a cornucopia and created the highest standard of living the Human race has ever known.

    (OK, maybe you don’t know that — you seem to get your “information” — like about Wisconsin — from some kind of “Progressive Revelation” that is unconnected to the everyday facts that the rest of us like to use.)

    Maybe the only thing that will bring the US back to its senses is a long decline…

    Just exactly what the Progressives have been trying to engineer for decades now. I’d say the prospects are looking worse for the Progressive agenda daily.

    …which is what it [the US] seems to have coming.

    Letting your true motivations show here John? The politics of envy is one of the main drivers of the Progressive movement.

    00

  • #
    Graham

    To all valued readers here (including John Brookes!), take time off from serious banter to enjoy these samples of people responsible for electing our guvamints.
    Born in the USA
    More US of A
    Home groan lads.

    00

  • #
    Percival Snodgrass

    “John Brookss” finally shows his TRUE COLOUR…….

    RED” !!

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    Janama @ 38

    You are normally so precise. I know the BRIC can breed but 13.7 million?

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    Now I’ve screwed up. 13.7 billion.

    00

  • #

    I noticed that this did not come up once on ABC Breakfast News.
    Funny that.
    They managed to spend quite a long time talking about the Tropfest winner though…

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Thanks Graham, for those very educational links. I see you don’t have any thumbs down, so people haven’t looked yet!

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    John, I looked, I have a sense of humor and recognize that the people that would give a thumbs down are the subjects in the videos. Trouble is they don’t think enough to be here JoNova and probably can’t read either.

    Scientifically speaking, the suggestion that 30% of interviewees didn’t know the correct answer, is a survey more robust than the infamous 97% of climate scientists “study”:
    http://www.climatedepot.com/r/9804/Study-claiming-97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-flawed-Survey-questions-crafted-so-that-practically-everyone-would-respond-yes-even-if-they-werent-concerned-about-AGW

    Chilling isn’t it?

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    By the way John, most of these “man in the street” interviews are done in the big cities on the east coast and west coast (USA). Those are the same places that vote largely Democrat. Kinda makes you twitchy doesn’t it? John?

    Frankly I’m in favor of a picture ID, IQ test above 100, proof of a full time job and citizenship before being allowed to vote or have children.

    00

  • #
    BobC

    Graham @ 50, John Brookes (@55) & Mark D @ 57:

    If you want to argue that a lot of uninformed people vote in US elections, you’ll get no argument from me. How else do you think we ended up with Barack Obama, the least-qualified president we’ve had in over 100 years?

    The answer is: a lot of Progressives voted for him because it made them feel morally superior to vote for a (half) black man. Qualifications? They haven’t a clue how to evaluate that.

    Sort of reminds me of the way John Brookes supports CAGW.

    The current Congress is defunding the IPCC because they do know how to do due diligence and evaluate conflicting arguments.

    If you think my analysis (of Obama’s election) is over-the-top, consider that there is a Caucasian man who has the same governmental philosophy as Obama, albeit much more relevant experience: Dennis Kucinich, Socialist Congressman from Ohio, regularly runs in the Presidential primaries and regularly gets 4% of the vote.

    Besides, I’ve experienced this attitude directly: In the summer of 1966 (pre-civil rights law) I worked with a black college kid from Louisiana as a two-person support team on the Buffalo Creek Ranger District in Colorado. Bobby (his real name) got the job by writing a letter to the Colorado division of the US Forest service. We spent 50% of our time cleaning campgrounds and 50% as first-responders to the 51 fires on the district that year. There were no other blacks living in this 700 square mile district (and not a lot of anyone, actually). For recreation, we used to go to a rural bar which would serve us beer, even though we were underage. We never had to buy beer, as some white guy would inevitably buy us rounds to show he wasn’t prejudiced — which he would also explain ad nauseam. I got pretty pissed off at the extreme condescending attitude being shown, but Bobby had a different take: “They’re trying to be polite,” he said, “and they’re buying us beer. It’s kind of cute. Besides, you should see what I have to put up with in Louisiana.”

    I’m sure all those people voted for Obama. Some of them, probably, now work for the IPCC.

    00

  • #
    Graham

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch!

    “Scientists” have not taken kindly to Congress’ threat to their honey pot. Laments NOAA head, Jane Lubchenco, “Science should not be partisan.” (!)

    Says a lead IPCC author, Chris Field, “It’s a real tragedy that the issue is so poorly understood…” (Nice try, Chris!)
    “About half (the funding) was spent on the IPCC Trust Fund, which supports the international coordinating team” (quoting the IPCC grant application verbatim?)
    “The other half is spent on supporting U.S. scientists’ travel to meetings to put the report together, as well as funding for a small team of staff that works for Field. Without the federal support, we’d have no ability to organize meetings, we’d have no ability to coordinate chapters. The meetings allow U.S. scientists, who volunteer their time, to combine their knowledge with the work of colleagues around the world. A small amount of funding goes a long way.” (Honest, if nothing else!)

    Finally, the old chestnut. Field says “Climate scientists need to do a better job of explaining the value of their work. The IPCC didn’t understand that part of its mandate was explaining to people why its information is useful. I hope it can do a better job in the future”.

    Congress may yet succeed in saving the planet from any more “explaining”.

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    hide the decline:
    February 21st, 2011 at 1:55 am

    Eddy,
    From an ozzie – If Obama ‘Veto’s’ the bill from the Congress (and assuming it passes the Senate) to “Defund” the IPCC; How is it possible that Obama could still “Fund” the IPCC without a money bill ??
    If Obama did ‘veto’ the bill and in the absence of another supporting bill isn’t that the same as shutting down the funding in any event ??

    Unfortunately, the Republicans cannot, at this point, muster enough support from their democrat colleagues to garner the 2/3 vote necessary to override a presidential veto. Most US politicians (democrat and republican) have the backbone of a jellyfish! If a continuing resolution or budget is not passed the U.S. will default on its debt obligations. If that were to occur we could become the world’s most powerful banana republic!

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Mark D. @57,

    Proof of citizenship would be good, if the government would ever allow it. Beyond that, instead of lowering the voting age to 18 as we so foolishly did, I would raise it to about 35 instead. That would give people a chance to start a career and build a position in life that they might then think it worthwhile to protect from destruction by the power hungry and the freeloaders they use like pawns. It would no doubt prevent the election of questionable leaders like Obama and make it a bit harder for the power hungry to find someone to manipulate. You would be amazed at what a change in attitude can happen when someone has a personal stake in the outcome of an election.

    We can get rid of welfare too; except for those who are really disabled enough that they can’t take care of themselves. Before anyone complains about this, Bill Clinton proved once and for all time that people always act on the incentive that’s really in front of them.

    If we pay unwed women to get pregnant and have children, that’s what they’ll do. Oh! More money if I have more than one child? Well I’ll just do it all over again. Getting pregnant again is no harder than it was the first time. Or we can say, if you need help we’ll help you but only for a limited time. When your time is up, your taxpayer support is up. We’ll help you learn what you need to know to get a job but you better take advantage of it because we’re willing to let you starve if you don’t make the effort. When Bill Clinton did this a great hue and cry went all the way up to heaven as if to implore God Himself to come down and stop the horrible cruelty. But when the time came, lo and behold, those people on the dole just went out and got jobs. Looming hunger can move mountains. It all depends on providing people with the right incentive.

    Now just imagine what can be done by a better informed and awake people who are really paying attention to what their government is doing. What a different incentive our elected officials would find facing them every morning as they start their day.

    And if those same people were watching their schools just as carefully…I’d think I’d died and gone to heaven.

    By now you all think I’m smoking the wrong stuff. But who would say that a wiser voter would be a bad idea? Who would say that I’m wrong if I’m convinced that people follow the real incentive that society puts in front of them? Does it not follow then that we should start changing things so there’s a better incentive? We the people should be in charge. But we have to wake up, educate ourselves and communicate with each other. The tea party movement has been the best thing to happen politically in this country in my lifetime. And it’s not because they have the perfect political philosophy but because they’ve shown us how much power the ordinary guy on the street really has when he’s multiplied by 10s of thousands of other ordinary guys on the street.

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    John Brookes:
    February 21st, 2011 at 1:08 am
    Sorry Roy, doing other stuff.
    Only interesting stuff I saw in US politics was the demonstration in Wisconsin.

    Translation: limited knowledge of current event in the U.S. The current approximate population of Wisconsin is 5.7 million. The state debt is over 43.8 billion dollars. Thats $7,684 for every man, woman and child. In other words, the state is broke!

    What solution do you propose for the problem, John?

    BTW, Here is a link you may find helpful, John. You need help. http://helpguide.org/mental/depression_signs_types_diagnosis_treatment.htm

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    @ Roy Hogue #61

    Remember, my friend, love is always the answer! ;)

    00

  • #
    Eddy Aruda

    John Brookes:
    February 21st, 2011 at 9:52 am
    Thanks Graham, for those very educational links. I see you don’t have any thumbs down, so people haven’t looked yet!

    This is yet another fallacious statement by you, John. The fallacy is known as non sequitur. You have implied that if someone reads Graham’s comments or views his links will give it a thumbs down. You have given no reason why anyone who reads his comments will give him a thumbs down. Thus, your conclusion is based on an unsubstantiated premise and therefore it “does not follow” (non sequitur).

    You know, John, there are websites that have a wealth of information on logic and debate.
    See http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Cum%20hoc%20ergo%20propter%20hoc

    00

  • #
    hide the decline

    Eddy Aruda @ 60

    Eddy,

    Thanks for that. That clears it up for me. I had forgotten about the US system of 2/3 majority.

    The US ort to try the Ozzie system which is based on the ‘Balance of Probabilities’ !!! No worries mate. =sarc/

    00

  • #

    Roy@61
    I knew there was something I liked about you. You nailed that one. What I can’t understand is why it is so difficult a concept for most to understand.

    BobC@58
    It is Obama’s lack of real experience that got him elected, just as it is Dennis Kucinich’s wealth of experience that keeps him from being elected. No one could say that Barack had ever completely destroyed an economy…

    00

  • #
    wes george

    May I present John Brookes as exhibit A:

    Only interesting stuff I saw in US politics was the demonstration in Wisconsin. You know it looked a lot like Egypt, Bahrein, etc. The ordinary people getting sick of the rich and powerful telling them that they will have to make sacrifices for the good of the nation.

    In the billion year history of life upon planet Earth no species has shown such an affinity for self-deception as humankind. It is difficult for Darwinian evolutionary theory to accommodate this counter-intuitive phenomena.

    Deception among predators and prey alike is a well understood survival technique. But self-deception is unique to humankind. Perhaps, due to our complex mental functions in order to fully animate a lie, we have to fully integrate the deception into our own model of reality or else a twitching eye, a smirking smile or some other body language will communicate to the other apes we have hidden the the stolen fruit behind the banyan tree.

    Self-deception was what the Enlightenment revolution tried to subvert.

    We must establish a logical method to separate fact from fiction, reason from fantasy in order to navigate a universe fraught with complexity while respecting everyone’s right to a personal opinion. It’s what allows airplanes to fly and surgeons to perform their “miracles.” One is entitled to a personal opinion, but not one’s own personal facts. Yet the two principles, freedom of expression and the responsibility to rationally grasp evidence have proven irreconcilable even in our modern age.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVMPlIQAz5E&feature=fvsr

    00

  • #
    srobi

    It’s scary how many of you seem to believe that de-funding the IPCC will somehow alter the facts. The GOP will just be seen as the party with it’s hands over its eyes. It’s embarrassing to the country.

    00

  • #
    West Houston

    It should be pointed out that a few democrat Senators have a vested interest in seeing the IPCC put down like the dog it is.
    One is Mary Landrieu, D Louisiana, a state hit hard by the defacto Gulf of Mexico drilling ban and the “oil be bad” attitude of bho, et al. Second is Jay Rockefeller, D West Virginia, a coal state through and through.
    There may be others and it is not a “lead-pipe cinch” that this bill fails in the Senate. If it sees bhos’s desk, he will have to veto and shut down government spending altogether. He, alone doing what he has said would be catastrophic.
    That’s why he will have his clones in the Senate filibuster to kill it.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    srobi @69

    How did you get in here? THE FACTS?

    I’m sure you have buried all your carbon converting machines. You eat soybeans and wear recycled plastic bags. If you are “scared” then good. I’ve been scared for many years now watching idiots try to take away my rights and freedoms. You are the embarrassment to the country. Letting a third world/one world “government” tell you what to do. Treasonous I say……..

    00

  • #
    wes george

    srobi and West Houston,

    Ah, welcome to our American friends. ;-)

    West Houston?…is that as in River Oaks out to Memorial along the Spanish moss draped Buffalo Bayou? I had the best bbq pork ribs and margharitas in my life out there somewhere in the swamp on an August afternoon thick with humidity and deafening cicadas. Only an ice-laced swimming pool saved me from a stroke. Texans certainly know how to live.

    The House of Reps defunding of the IPCC is the legislative equivalent to the demonstrations in Tahrir Square. It’s a revolution, a shot which will be heard around the world. Well, maybe not here in Oz. Our state-controlled media, the ABC, has failed to find it significant enough to bother to inform to us mere citizens. As if informing us was their job. Pfffft.

    Nevertheless, it’s a watershed moment in the political history of the climate debate, perhaps second only to Climategate!

    Leave it to the Yanks to kick off the yoke of submission, while our pathetic leaders eagerly extended our thin neck anxious to take up the burden.

    Such is life!

    00

  • #

    [...] The US House of Representatives has voted with the figures 244 for and 179 votes against to stop funding the monumentally corrupt and thoroughly evil organization IPCC! The US has been paying the enormous sum of $2.3 million millions, or $2.3 trillions, every year [...]

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    srobi @68,

    Ah! The facts you say! Like no hotspot? Or maybe like not a single person who has come here claiming that 2010 was the hottest year on record being able to tell me where those hottest temperatures were measured, how they were measured or who measured them? And just for fun, how much hotter were they than the previous record(s) for those places?

    Can you?

    Either you’re a noisy self-righteous nobody or you know something after all. Which is it?

    Oh! And do you have the nerve to appear again and answer me?

    00