CHICAGOLAND PING
while there was warming over the last century, much of it occurred before 1940—before industrialization led to increased uses of fossil fuels. Moreover, more recent satellite data on global climate suggest that since 1979 there has been a slight cooling trend in stratosphere temperatures. Indeed, much of the “scientific consensus” purported to global warming theory, especially of the world disaster flavor, comes from distinctly non-scientific sources. Beyond agreement over basic facts such as a slight warming over the last century and increased carbon dioxide levels as well, there continues to be a great deal of uncertainty about global warming and little scientific support for drastic policy measures, according to atmospheric scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen.
That the Kyoto Protocol will be costly, on the other hand, is well known; private and government estimates of the required greenhouse gas reductions place the cost to the U.S. economy alone at $130 billion to $400 billion annually. However, the benefits of a Kyoto-style policy should definitely be questioned. The protocol does not include developing nations such as China and India, which will clearly increase their levels of carbon dioxide emissions as they develop. Energy restrictions that raise costs in the developed world will only accelerate the shift of emissions (and jobs) to the developing world.
If the Kyoto Protocol is simply an exercise in international wealth redistribution, it is wise that the EPA’s recent report focused on real pollutants rather than carbon dioxide. The uncertainty surrounding carbon dioxide’s effect on climate must be resolved before imposing costly and poorly designed policies. As research scientist Dr. Sallie Baliunas, concludes, “Scientific facts gathered in the last 10 years do not support the notion of catastrophic human-made warming as a basis for drastic carbon dioxide emission cuts.”
http://tinyurl.com/mlayx
FreedomWorks : Making Good Policy Good Politics