In a stunning rebuke of the Obama administration, NASA's James Hansen, one of the world's foremost climate alarmists, called the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the anti-global warming bill that recently passed the House, "less than worthless."
Not only that, he referred to it as a "counterfeit climate bill" that employs a "Ponzi-like 'cap-and-trade' scheme" setting the nation on a "disaster course" as a result of the 219 members of Congress he accused of voting for it without reading it.
As you might have already deduced, Hansen's complaint is that the bill doesn't go far enough to solve what he believes is a looming cataclysm.
But, who cares? It's fun watching the alarmists eat their own, especially as it seems quite unlikely his critique published at the Huffington Post Thursday will get much media coverage (h/t Climate Depot):
It didn't take long for the counterfeit climate bill known as Waxman-Markey to push back against President Obama's agenda. As the president was arriving in Italy for his first Group of Eight summit, the New York Times was reporting that efforts to close ranks on global warming between the G-8 and the emerging economies had already tanked... [...]
With a workable climate bill in his pocket, President Obama might have been able to begin building that global consensus in Italy. Instead, it looks as if the delegates from other nations may have done what 219 U.S. House members who voted up Waxman-Markey last month did not: critically read the 1,400-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 and deduce that it's no more fit to rescue our climate than a V-2 rocket was to land a man on the moon. [...]
For all its "green" aura, Waxman-Markey locks in fossil fuel business-as-usual and garlands it with a Ponzi-like "cap-and-trade" scheme. [...]
The fact is that the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. Their bill is an astoundingly inefficient way to get a tiny reduction of emissions. It's less than worthless, because it will delay by at least a decade starting on a path that is fundamentally sound from the standpoints of both economics and climate preservation.
Wow!
Think you'll be hearing much about his views on this bill now that it's moved to the Senate?
No...I don't either.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Circular Firing Squad
July 9, 2009 - 18:25 ET by BlondeAh yes, it is a joy to see these greenies go after each other.
I am not pleased with the Bamster's latest apology, however.
Every time I think he can't possibly do anything dumber, he does. Exceeds my expectations every, single, cotton-pickin' time.
I hope he fails, too.
b - I believe 'the one' is beginning his descent into the black
July 9, 2009 - 18:45 ET by Cape Conservativehole of 'FAILURE' - it's getting hotter and hotter for him every day. You know what they say, give someone an inch and they'll take a mile...well, he's so busy doing as he darn well pleases, all the time rubbing it in that 'we won' that he doesn't have a clue as to how many people are being turned off by his arrogance!
May we be strong enough to outlast his 'audacious' programs of hope and change! I read that many of those who voted for him are NOW having second thoughts. Thanks a lot!
This comment comes from a proud Tea Party attendee, otherwise designated by Homeland Security as a Right Wing Radical Extremist! It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue ~ Sam Adams
Oh yes...."big oops"
July 9, 2009 - 18:52 ET by BlondeI read an article last week sometime....the comments were absolutely hillarious. All of the Obama voters who were posting said basically the same thing "I'm sorry".
Buyers' remorse has set in, I only hope we can head off the stupidity at the pass....Cap & Tax might work to wake the rest of the sheeple up....I'm "hoping" anyway.
It's nice to see them eat their own with this stupid stuff, however.
I hope he fails, too.
The scary thing is that if
July 9, 2009 - 18:56 ET by HermanoThe scary thing is that if he had taken control when the economy was doing well, there might be enough support for something like this in the general public. However, 0bama and crew are so busy trying to push stuff through that the average American is starting to take notice. I am beginning to see things turn as far as the attitude of the people. Unless the economy starts to turn significantly, Cap and Trade and the abominable health care program will both die. Americans are noticing that he is not the One.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
The Ward Churchill of the Environmental Movement
July 9, 2009 - 19:07 ET by allanfThe environmental groups cannot support this bill. They make their money off contributions to the struggle. If the problem is solved their reason d'etre is gone.
As for Hanson, he is rapidly moving into crack pot territory. He attends protests at coal power plants. Hanson routinely makes outlandish statement not supported by any reasonable research. He acts now not as a scientist but as an environmental extemist.
A group of us had a little
July 9, 2009 - 19:39 ET by HermanoA group of us had a little fun with Hanson about this time last year. Noel put up an article about Hanson to which he replied on his own blog. The little fued showed us that Hanson is indeed political. The science no longer matters to him, if it ever did. I see the same thing every day. In order to get a grant, you need to publish work that is viewed as having the correct result. In this case, proving global warming is manmade in spite of all the evidence.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
Political Science
July 10, 2009 - 07:28 ET by allanfThere always is an orthodoxy in science -- and older established scientists will reject disquieting theories of younger scientists.
What's different today is the politicalization of this process.
LOL
July 9, 2009 - 18:52 ET by KC MulvilleThe left doesn't like it. The right doesn't like it. A textbook example of bad legislation.
So, despite the odds, Congress managed to pass a bill that allows constituents to use as much energy as before ... they just have to pay more for it. First they claimed it was saving the planet, but that was too hilarious to continue claiming. Then it was a jobs, jobs, jobs bill ... yeah, yeah, that's a good name.
The only people dumb enough to fall for this nonsense are the people who voted for the Democrat Congressional clowns in the first place.
KC - it is a little known
July 9, 2009 - 18:59 ET by HermanoKC - it is a little known fact that energy producers OVERproduce by as much as 15% beyond what is actually consumed. We can significantly reduce our production by developing technology that will efficiently store electricity. However, like alternative energy, it will take some advances that are developed by the private sector in order to achieve this.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
Store Electricity
July 9, 2009 - 19:12 ET by allanfMassive storage cells are easier said than done. Saying "Yes we can" and thowing money at it won't reduce the time it takes to make a baby.
The same may be true of storage cells. If it were easy, utilties would gobble them up and shut down their peak load plants. I can think of no one I trust less than President Obama to determine the difference between scientific folly and practicality.
allanf - you hit the nail
July 9, 2009 - 19:34 ET by Hermanoallanf - you hit the nail on the head. You cannot dictate innovation, and the government is trying to do that. If energy prices go through the roof, the alternatives will become viable. Pickens has just discovered that he has a $2B scrap heap. I bet he is hot for this bill to pass.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
You forgot the transport of
July 10, 2009 - 02:45 ET by Dan The Man 2You forgot the transport of energy is inefficient. A while back when room temperature superconductors were being bandied about one of teh immediate applications was power transmission lines. I forget the amount of power lost but it was substantial.
Great Superconductors
July 10, 2009 - 07:34 ET by allanfI can get you a great superconductor near abolute zero. Now all we need is global cooling.
Quite so
July 9, 2009 - 19:18 ET by BlondeBeck's sub had on a gentleman who ran a bakery, tonight. He had one of those "streaming signs"....after his Rep. voted for the Cap & Tax fiasco, he had his sign display something like "Rep. Hanrahan voted to close this bakery" (employs like 85 people).
Well, the Rep. got off his butt PDQ, but the story ended there. No movement from his congresscritter.
We need to hit these idiots where it hurts....in THEIR pocketbooks.
I hope he fails, too.
So what does this mean then , Noel?
July 9, 2009 - 19:19 ET by nwahsYour article has no conclusion for me. What exactly does it mean, that global warming is secondary to Obama politics? What is the hierarchy in the media? This is the same media NewsBusters contends is spouting doom and gloom over environment and now, this same media ignores this NASA representative's cry that Obama is not doing enough. I take your amusement is the fact the media will ignore him. Is that correct? Is that because of a hierarchy of causes or agenda in the media and if so what is the hierarchy, Noel? It just kind of ends with nanananabooboo and no conclusion that I see. What does it mean? Serious question, whats your point here?
Why not Jeb Bush?
shawn
July 9, 2009 - 20:42 ET by larry on LIyou be hittin the sauce too much tonight,me thinks.you be rambling like the dog howling at the moon.
I was asking a few questions
July 9, 2009 - 21:45 ET by nwahsI know a transvestite like yourself can't appreciate honest questions, but that all it was. Your liberal leaning and perversions don't allow you to ask to simple questions . I'm just a regular guy trying to understand what Noel meant. But thanks for your input you little fruit (cake).
Why not Jeb Bush?
Pathetic.
July 9, 2009 - 21:50 ET by BlondeWe need a better class of troll, here. ©
I hope he fails, too.
Why don't you go edit someone's post
July 9, 2009 - 21:53 ET by nwahsLet me tell you what Blonde. I might disagree with people, and I might arue with them. But I don't forge their posts. YOU DO. You can't call anyone a troll. You FORGE posts.
Why not Jeb Bush?
Oh really?
July 9, 2009 - 21:56 ET by BlondeTruth hurts, eh, trollboy?
You just called another poster here a transvestite. For no reason.
You are a joke, a sham, and an arrogant, um, twit.
You whine and moan and holler "Noel"....like he'd even deign to answer your pathetic little questions. Fool.
I can't wait for the day that you are gone from this site forever.
I hope he fails, too.
Listen PoP Tart
July 9, 2009 - 22:27 ET by nwahsI made it clear days ago if the people throw baseless accusations at me, I'll throw them right back in their lap. I asked Noel a question, a honest question and this little scab is going to accuse me of being drunk? Sorry, picked the wrong day for that. And you, you little forging megalomaniac, are going to call me a troll? You have only two words you should say to me for forging my post - "I'm sorry." Instead you pm to call me a whiny bitch? You hypocrite. I can imagine if a Daily KOS moderator had forged a users post.
I don't give a rats butt what you think PopTart. You take your feux outrage to someone else.
Why not Jeb Bush?
Aren't you clever?
July 9, 2009 - 22:33 ET by BlondeCarry on with your pathetic whining.
I find it hillarious that you attempt to "challenge" Noel with your stupid questions. He gives you all of the consideration you so obviously deserve....none. <crickets chirp, eh?>
Don't even start with the pm thing, there Buckwheat. You started it.....and yeah, you are a whiny bitch. As evidenced by your continued moaning and groaning, here.
Carry on though. It's sooooo clever.
We need a better class of troll, here. ©
<edit> And WTH is "feux" outrage? And your use of "PopTart"....that is soooooo bloody clever. Sheesh.
I hope he fails, too.
And you a ridiculous forger
July 9, 2009 - 22:51 ET by nwahsWhy would you use your position as moderator to forge a users post?
Simple question. Would you accept a Huffington post or Daily Kos moderator using their position to forge a users post? Would you? Hell if came out a Huffington post moderator had forged a users post, I'm willing to bet it would make a blog here with 40 comments. Yet you think I'm "whiny" for objecting that YOU FORGED MY POST. You have a way to spin that as OK? What part of your brain told you it was ok to forge someone's post?
Why not Jeb Bush?
If I knew nothing else,
July 9, 2009 - 22:52 ET by Free StinkerIf I knew nothing else, having seen you other posts, Bizarro Shawn, I would know that no one could make up or "forgea" your kind of crazy.
Just sayin'
Well here's a clue
July 9, 2009 - 23:04 ET by nwahsI don't have the power to forge anyone else's post. If I did I wouldn't. Blonde does or did, and thats what they did. Tell me if you would take kindly to someone forging your post? Its ok to forge my post because you don't agree with me? Is that how it works? So your position is forgery is ok sometimes?
I didn't forge a post. Blond did. So all your innuendo is just garbage. As crazy as you think I am, I am not the one who forged a post. Blond is. Got it?
Why not Jeb Bush?
Or maybe you shouldn't
July 9, 2009 - 23:06 ET by Free StinkerOr maybe you shouldn't drink before you come to NB to comment.
Just sayin'
I'n not drunk
July 9, 2009 - 23:12 ET by nwahsMaybe you should lay off the crack or internet porn before posting. You've registered as an offender right? Don't screw with me dufus.
Why not Jeb Bush?
I didn't say you were
July 9, 2009 - 23:18 ET by Free StinkerI didn't say you were drunk. I suggested you not drink before coming here, but I have no idea how much you drink before you come here to post.
And thanks for letting me know I scored a direct hit.
You and I nwahs
July 9, 2009 - 22:53 ET by general companyHave got to have that dinner real soon!!
My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
"Your article has no
July 9, 2009 - 20:45 ET by ckc1227"Your article has no conclusion for me."
Not surprising.
"What exactly does it mean, that global warming is secondary to Obama politics?"
I'm guessing it means global warming is secondary to Obama politics.
"This is the same media NewsBusters contends is spouting doom and gloom
over environment and now, this same media ignores this NASA
representative's cry that Obama is not doing enough."
NB isn't "contending" anything. Pick up a newspaper, or watch the news, and see for yourself.
"Is that because of a hierarchy of causes or agenda in the media and if so what is the hierarchy, Noel?'
The hierarchy is Obama first, everything else secondary. It's not complicated.
I'm asking what it meant
July 9, 2009 - 21:39 ET by nwahsIt didn't say. I'm asking if Noel suspects there is a hierarchy and what that is. Its an honest question. I'm not going to take crap for asking an honest question.
Why not Jeb Bush?
Scorecard
July 9, 2009 - 22:47 ET by Free StinkerReality: 1
Bizarro Shawn: 0
Head Scratcher
July 9, 2009 - 20:59 ET by dboGee,
you think Hansen's ramblings would receive total media coverage if the Republicans controlled congress and George W was still in office?
I DUNNO
July 9, 2009 - 21:44 ET by nwahsThats why I'm asking. Hansen doesn't think the legistaltion goes far enough. So would it? Hell I dunno. What is the hierarchy of agendas. Thats why I asked "what is the hierarchy of agendas?"
And I get grief for asking that. This is a heads up. If anyone throws out the box crap at me, I'm throwing it back in spades. I'm tired of being nice to foo foos.
Why not Jeb Bush?
Note to "Hope and Change" Crowd
July 9, 2009 - 19:25 ET by Paragrouper"If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is."
I tried to read this bill and all I got was a migrane and the impression that I, and other taxpayers, will be paying for a huge, convoluted infrastructure that will create a new mechanism for fleecing the sheeple. I have serious doubts of the validity of the global warming crowd and I cettainly have my own opinion on why this bill should die. But the one thing that we all should be able to agree on--this bill sucks.
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." - General George Patton Jr
Hansen...?
July 9, 2009 - 20:07 ET by superconIsn't he the guy who has been busted manipulating temperature data by acreditting warmer months data to colder months?
How many times has this guy have to get busted lying before he becomes recognized for the fraud he is?
Hey Janet Napolitano...I'm proud to be a Right-winger.
Yes. He's also the guy who
July 9, 2009 - 20:54 ET by ckc1227Yes. He's also the guy who said we were all going to die from global cooling about 30 years ago....because of evil fossil fuels, naturally.
Knucklehead Hansen
July 10, 2009 - 08:07 ET by Seabeach4348If I recall he admitted that he fudged the data back in the 1980s just to get our attention to the "problem".
Some of the other hysteria predictions I remember were:
We (the world) were also supposed to run out of fossil fuel by 1990.
The world was supposed to run out of food (the United States included) by 2000 because of global cooling. This would lead to a massive world war fought over food.
Then, somewhere in the 1980s, global cooling transformed itself into global warming, and you know the rest of the hysteria.
James Hansen is a flaming idiot, and I can't understand why NASA keeps him on board.
What does it mean?
July 9, 2009 - 20:22 ET by memcI get: while trying to make his point of the bill not doing enough to save the planet, he trashed the bill using givining the same reasons as the global warmer deniers.
Whether you believe or not, you are about to get robbed.
Hansen: "Waxman-Markey bill, a monstrous absurdity"...
July 9, 2009 - 20:34 ET by ThalpyHansen: "Waxman-Markey bill, a monstrous absurdity "--Anthony Watts. Hansen, of course is mad because the bill didn't go far enough. How would he know? Was he one of the few who read the bill?
We must take back our country from these idiots!
I'll bet
July 9, 2009 - 20:38 ET by RukusI'll bet the libs are thinking he'll go good with arugula. Heehee. : )
Gary
I want my country back!
Fire This Man
July 9, 2009 - 20:46 ET by slickwillie2001This loon is a loose cannon and he should have been fired years ago. This is an illustration of the liberal double standard. Because his message is politically correct, he can get away with insubordination and corruption, neglecting his real job to run around the world giving lectures, and getting money on the side from Uncle George.
This "liberal double standard" was also owed by Bush
August 1, 2009 - 05:23 ET by BlindSightYou appear to have forgotten.
Pres. Bush: Our guiding principle is clear. We must lead the world to produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions and we must do it in a way that does not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people.
Ouch. That's really a blow
August 1, 2009 - 05:30 ET by Jack BauerOuch. That's really a blow to Bush's chances in 2012.
Wouldn't it be 'delicious'
July 9, 2009 - 21:09 ET by acumenif the Won took offence to Hanson's latest whining and prevailed upon some eager administrative underling at NASA to fire Hanson?
Hanson has time and again tarnished the reputation of NASA with his psuedo-science and it is way past time for him to move on. And it doesn't help to know that in an economic crisis when many are looking for employment just to put bread on their table, my tax dollars are paying Hanson's salary to get arrested at extremist led protests. All the while, the Feds are strongly discouraging US companies from rewarding their successful employees with a company paid convention in Vegas.
If you don't like big oil, big electricity or any other big energy, then boycott their products and quit spending my money trying to put them out of business.
I believe in climate change. I believe that in spite of increasing levels of CO2 released into our atmosphere, the climate has changed to cooling over the last eight years. Enough with the retro use of "global warming" to explicate the current climate of the earth. Unless you believe progressive means living in the past.
This quack has immersed
July 9, 2009 - 21:34 ET by fitzfongThis quack has immersed himself in NASA, claims to be an authority, yet is scientifically illiterate. On the other hand, he has not immersed himself in economics, yet he still claims to be an authority but is illiterate.
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
Will he be taken to the woodshed?
July 9, 2009 - 21:34 ET by ghblogI have spent time in government as we had rules about what we could do as an employee. Bush was too chicken to silence him, and Obama agrees with his position, but one does not tell the emperor that he has no clothes. This might be good.
http://www.framingthedialogue.com/
Hope Hansen Replies
July 9, 2009 - 22:41 ET by dboIt's fun watching the alarmists eat their own
You mean like ex Clinton lackey and whack job Joe Romm munching on data fabricator and head NASA loon James Hansen?
Well, OK, I'll bite.
July 10, 2009 - 16:31 ET by jdhawkWell, OK, I'll bite. Let's just say that looney tunes, Hansen, is right.
If, according to Hansen, we are in such dire straights, why isn't he shouting to all that will listen to shut down all NASA rocket and missile firings? I mean, how many tens of thousands of cars driving for years does one Shuttle launch burn in fossile fuel?
Oh, wait a minute, if we stopped all NASA rocket and missile firings, we wouldn't need NASA and Hansen would be out of job! That may actually be worth getting rid of this nut.
jdhawk, in all fairness,
July 10, 2009 - 16:36 ET by bassndudejdhawk, in all fairness, the shuttles do not use carbon fuels. They use liquid hydrogen.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
But the solid rocket
July 10, 2009 - 20:58 ET by HermanoBut the solid rocket boosters are ammonium perchlorate.
Only two forms of government? Find out why... http://www.flixxy.co...
A looming catalysm? Who cares - Waxman-Markey here we come!
August 1, 2009 - 05:37 ET by BlindSightNoel, I didn`t expect youto give Hansen credit for sticking with his views on science, but I`m a little bit surprised you aren`t taking advantage of the opportunity to agree with Hansen - the way Exxon`s CEO Rex Tillerson has - and called for a slimmer and much less damaging policy of rebated carbon taxes.
You seem much more interested in fun than in limiting the slew of back-room pork and opaque cap and trade hooey.
Oh, one other thing: far from criticising Obama, it`s pretty obvious that Hansen thought he was criticising Congress. Did you fail to notice the distinction, or did you simply think that all Congresscritters bow to Obama?
Former Pres. Bush: Our guiding principle is clear. We must lead the world to produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions and we must do it in a way that does not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people.