backtop


Print 122 comment(s) - last by DominionSeraph.. on Feb 19 at 8:34 PM


  (Source: EL Civics)
Measure passes broadly passes with 56-17 vote, but lacks legal power

Many politicians across the U.S. have already made their mind up about climate change and refuse to consider recent allegations of academic misconduct among prominent climate researchers, or other plausible explanations for climate change, such as sun cycles.  Across the country, there are many folks that haven't blindly accepted the theory, though.

Utah's heavily Republican state legislature has passed a new resolution which condemns climate change alarmism.  The resolution lacks any legal authority, but vocally criticizes the anthropogenic global warming community for ignoring recent developments.

The legislation, which resoundingly passed by a vote of 56-17, originally referred to global warming theory as a "conspiracy", but that term was stricken from the measure in favor of "climate data".  

A small excerpt from the measure is:

WHEREAS, there has been a concerted effort by climate change alarmists to marginalize those in the scientific community who are skeptical of global warming by manipulating or pressuring peer-reviewed publications to keep contrary or competing scientific viewpoints and findings on global warming from being reviewed and published; 

WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a blend of government officials and scientists, does no independent climate research but relies on global climate researchers;

WHEREAS, Earth's climate is constantly changing with recent warming potentially an indication of a return to more normal temperatures following a prolonged cooling period from 1250 to 1860 called the "Little Ice Age"; 

The bill points out that pending warming legislation will earn its proponents "more than $7 billion annually in federal government grants".  Originally those grants were referred to as the "the climate change 'gravy train'", but that language was removed from the measure.

The bill is critical of the U.S. Environmental Agency and President Barack Obama's calls to regulate greenhouse gases nationally.  Representative Mike Noel says the warming scare is an example of profiteers posing as environmentalists and exploiting the public for their own gain.  He states, "Sometimes ... we need to have the courage to do nothing."

Arizona is considering similar legislation.

The only potential downside of the measures, is that they could give local environmentalists means to challenge future nuclear plant construction in the states.  President Obama has championed nuclear plant construction, but says that he's doing it to "combat climate change."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Great
By MungaIT on 2/18/2010 1:04:39 AM , Rating: 2
I am still not convinced that anthropogenic global warming isn't real, however in absence of proof focusing on the reduction of CO2 still makes sense.
While CO2 specifically MAY not be a pollutant many of the other substances that are created in processes that generate large quantities of CO2(fossil fuel combustion, iron and steel production ect...) ARE pollutants and also cause stratospheric ozone depletion(and as an Australian I am sick of sunburn, damned ozone hole...). These technologies cause water, soil and air pollution which will continue to reduce the quality of life for people all around the world for thousands of years after we stop producing them. Take the long view, taking steps to reduce the use of these dirty technologies now is better for us in the long run regardless of global warming.

Even if Global Warming doesn't exist CO2 is a great measure of overall pollution emissions.

"Societies with large amounts of energy at their fingertips tend to be very clean. They can afford to be."

I spent some time looking up statistics on greenhouse gas emissions and municipal waste per capita and I hate to tell you but small rich, middle eastern countries(with abundant energy) come out as the worst closely followed by countries like Australia, USA and Luxembourg. All of these are rich countries with plenty of energy that are dirty as hell. I am not proud of my country's waste and doing nothing about it is has no long term benefits, especially when there are so many new clean technologies just waiting to become economical forces to take the place of the old dirty ways.

Radically reducing carbon emissions would ultimately mean a dirtier, less healthy lifestyle for all of us.
How do you qualify this? Just curious.....


RE: Great
By porkpie on 2/18/2010 9:42:30 AM , Rating: 2
"While CO2 specifically MAY not be a pollutant ..."

It's not only not a pollutant, its an essential plant nutrient, and absolutely required for all life on earth. You also exhale a large amount of it each day.

"other substances that are created in processes ARE pollutants and also cause straotospheric ozone depletion..."

Lol, what? Burning coal and oil doesn't generate CFCs. I suggest you find whatever clown told you this little gem, and spank them thoroughly.

"and as an Australian I am sick of sunburn, damned ozone hole..."

News flash for you kid. The amount of additional UVB Austrialia is getting from the 'ozone hole' is too small to even measure...and UVA (which ozone doesn't even absorb) is actually the more damaging component.

In short, if you're getting sunburnt, stay out the sun. Don't blame carbon emissions, idiot.

"All of these are rich countries with plenty of energy that are dirty as hell"

Wrong. Go look at (or even better, live in) a poor nation and see how "clean and healthy" their lifestyle is. Burning cow dung to cook your food and drinking the same untreated river water you excrement in may not generate any carbon emissions, but neither is very good for your health.


"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki