McCain’s Assault on Reason - Another Al Gore for president.

National Review Online ^ | May 13, 2008 | Roy Spencer

[neverdem]

---

---

May 13, 2008, 0:30 a.m.

McCain’s Assault on Reason
Another Al Gore for president.

By Roy Spencer

John McCain’s global-warming speech on Monday made it clear that there will be no presidential candidate this year willing to question the assertion that global warming (a.k.a. “climate change”) is manmade, or the assertion that we can fix global warming by passing a few laws.

Along with Clinton and Obama, McCain’s proposal to attack global warming now gives voters three choices for a car color — as long as it is black. Like Clinton and Obama, McCain’s proposal involves a “cap and trade” mechanism to legislatively limit CO2 emissions in the coming years, with the free market minimizing the economic damage by allowing a trading of emission credits between companies. He also includes an allowance for carbon offsets, although everyone (except Al Gore) believes this to be more smoke-and-mirrors than a real-world strategy for reducing carbon emissions.

What worries me is the widespread misperception that we can do anything substantial about carbon emissions without seriously compromising economic growth. To be sure, forcing a reduction in CO2 emissions will help spur investment in new energy technologies. But so does a price tag of $126 for a barrel of oil. Finding a replacement for carbon-based energy will require a huge investment of wealth, and destroying wealth is not a very good first step toward that goal.

When the public finds out how much any legislation that punishes energy use is going to cost them, with no guarantee that anything we do will have a measurable impact on future climate, there will be a revolt just like the one now materializing in the U.K. and the EU. At some point, as they are faced with the stark reality that mankind’s requirement for an abundant source of energy cannot simply be legislated out of existence, the public will begin asking, “Just how sure are we that humans are causing global warming?”

And this is where the science establishment has, in my view, betrayed the public’s trust.

Even though there has never been a single scientific paper published that has ruled out natural variability for most of the warming we’ve seen since 1850, Big Science has managed to convince politicians and much of the public that the science is settled. Apparently, our addition of nine molecules of carbon dioxide to each 100,000 molecules of air over the last 150 years can now be blamed for anything and everything we choose. Hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, floods, glaciers flowing toward the sea…. all of these used to happen naturally, but no more.

The warming that allowed the Vikings to farm in Greenland 1,000 years ago was surely natural. But we are now told that warming in Greenland today is surely manmade. Glaciers retreating in western Canada have revealed evidence of previous forests, showing that warming and cooling cycles do indeed occur, even without SUVs. Yet the SUV is now the scapegoat for retreating glaciers.

McCain pointed to shrinking Arctic sea ice and collapsing Antarctic ice shelves as obvious evidence that humans are to blame, even though the sea ice did the same thing in the 1920s and 1930s, and those ice shelves must break off eventually, as new glacial ice flows toward the sea to take their place.

But McCain has made it clear that the science really does not matter anyway because, even if humans are not to blame for global warming, stopping carbon-dioxide emissions is the right thing to do. And if we had another choice for most of our energy needs, I might be willing to accept such a claim as harmless enough.

But carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth, and I have a difficult time calling something so fundamentally important a “pollutant.” Maybe the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is higher now than it has been in hundreds of thousands of years. So what? I am increasingly convinced that its influence on climate pales in comparison to the influence that natural climate events like El Niño and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation have on regional climate. Indeed, most of the warming we’ve seen in the last century might well be due to these natural modes of climate variability alone.

The trouble is that no one has been funded by the government to investigate such a possibility, and the mandate for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is to address manmade climate change — not natural climate change.

So, here we are with bad science ready to support bad policy decisions that will lead to bad economic times ahead, and no presidential candidate who is willing to ask the hard questions. While we hate to be pandered to by politicians, in this case I can only hope that they really are pandering — that this is hot air and not prospective policy.

— Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He is author of the new book, Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians, and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor.
— Roy W. Spencer is principal research scientist at the Global Hydrology and Climate Center of the National Space Science and Technology Center in Huntsville, Ala.

[neverdem]

Ignore McCain's rant. He's just a place holder. Stop the Reds!

[Eric in the Ozarks]

What the hell is wrong with this guy ?

[R_Kangel]

Too bad there are no leaders running for president, just politicians.

[steve-b]

Finding a replacement for carbon-based energy will require a huge investment of wealth

Actually, a large chunk of the problem merely requires political and business leadership that refuses to pander to peasant superstions about all things "nucular".

[Crim]

“What the hell is wrong with this guy ?”

Pssst...he’s a RINO...shhh...dont tell anyone

[paguch]

I believe we have spent billions on researching ( creating) the global warming myth. What would have happened had all of that money been spent on a solution to energy independence?

The global warming joke makes you lose faith in government. By endorsing it he is endorsing indoctrination of the people, a very scary scenario.

[kellynla]

“climate change?”

yeaaaaaaaaaaaa...it's gonna get hotter than Hades this summer and colder than a witch’s tit in a brass bra next winter...
all these "climate change/global warming experts" need to do is ask the “Big Weatherman in the Sky” what's the cause of “climate change”!

And He'll tell them “ ‘cause I feel like it!” LOL

[bronxboy]

Just what we need another tax on business. I was not going to vote for McShamesty anyway, but if I had any doubts, this would seal it. I, in my almost 50 years have never seen such a pathetic Republican candidate that is wrong on so many issues. The USA is heading to be another France if this is the best the party of freedom has as a candidate.

[edcoil]

Global Warming is gov speak for TAX INCREASE.

[Jagdgewehr]

What the hell is wrong with this guy ?

Nothing. He is being the same John McCain he has always been.

[gitmogrunt]

I voted in every election since 1968. I voted straight Republican, since 1980. I will NOT vote for this S.O.B. Come what may including...Obamma or Hillary.

[TomGuy]

A consensus of scientists say global warming is real.

Until the middle of the Seventeenth Century, a consensus of scientists said that the sun and planets revolved around Earth.

Until Columbus sailed to America, a consensus of scientists said the world was flat.

==

A consensus does not make a hoax any less of a hoax. A consensus does not make a lie into a truth.

[ZX12R]

What the hell is wrong with this guy ?

He knows that the GW koolaide drinkers are many, and just wants to get as many of their votes as possible. At least, that's what I'm hoping.

[Anticommie]

“What the hell is wrong with this guy ?” Pssst...he’s a RINO...shhh...dont tell anyone

We have three clowns running for Pres, the only reason for me to go to the ballot box this November is to vote Libertarian.

Bob Barr perhaps?

[facedown]

BTW, what is the global warming mafia going to say if next winter is as horrendous as the past one? "Global warming on hold for now?"

No, it's "Climate Change" now. That way, any variation from "normal" can be claimed to be anthropogenic.

[Rummyfan]

Our choices for President in this election are truly sickening..... Nut-job McCain versus two avowed lefties, whichever one gets the Dem nomination.

[Obadiah]

I remember when the climate never changed, then Bush stole the election.

-Freeper "kb2614"

[Cincinatus]

What the hell is wrong with this guy ?

Like a lot of non-technical types, he's intimidated by "experts." Moreover, he sees a large fraction of the public who have bought into this crap, browbeat by the endless media propaganda. Rather than fight a battle about which he knows nothing, it's easier to "go with the flow" and argue a "just a little bit slower"-type approach.

[stockpirate]

What is wrong with him is he’s a socialist idiot.