Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
April 25, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

How Neocons Push for War by Cooking the Books

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Email this item Print this item

Obama on His Own

Posted on Dec 3, 2009
AP / Haraz N. Ghanbari

President Barack Obama speaks about climate change last July during the G8 summit in L’Aquila, Italy.

By Dan Becker and James Gerstenzang

In Copenhagen, a major binding agreement at the global warming summit is not to be. Not this year. In Washington, the Senate is so divided that it became clear months ago that climate legislation will be pushed off until 2010 at the earliest.

Still, the United States can meet the challenge of a world demanding that it take the lead on global warming. Here’s how: 

Using his executive authority, President Barack Obama can instruct power plants to slash emissions, order new efficiency standards to cut the energy used by consumer and commercial appliances, and help the world’s least developed nations use solar power—rather than heavily polluting wood fires—for cooking.

If he does so, he will send a strong signal that Washington is leading the world away from a dangerous warming of the climate. He will head to Copenhagen next week armed with powerful tools to challenge negotiators to produce an agreement with real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

He will step smartly toward meeting—and moving beyond—his pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by roughly 17 percent by 2020, compared with 2005 levels.
And these are just a few of the real and measurable reductions he can order with a stroke of a presidential pen.


Square, Site wide
Motor vehicles and power plants account for two-thirds of the nation’s emissions of carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas.

Tackling pollution from America’s ubiquitous motor vehicles, Obama has ordered that by 2016 the new cars and light trucks sold in the United States cut their tailpipe emissions by 30 percent. It is the biggest single step in U.S. history to reduce the nation’s global warming pollution, and a significant down payment demonstrating the president’s willingness to act.

Complementing that decision, Obama can order the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Air Act to issue new rules cutting the heat-trapping emissions from major power plants, oil refineries and other big industrial sources. These rules can require coal-fired power plants to switch to cleaner natural gas.

Converting the 100 dirtiest plants would cut pollution from coal-fired power facilities by 15 percent, according to David Bookbinder, the Sierra Club’s chief climate counsel. “It’s incredibly efficient as a step to save carbon dioxide emissions,” he says.
To be sure, polluters would seek to slow the changeover by challenging the rule in court. The administration would need to act vigorously, seeking quick court action and pressuring polluters to innovate, not litigate.

Obama can also act to cut energy use. He can reduce demand for electricity by speeding up new standards for household and commercial appliances—from window air conditioners and microwave ovens to walk-in freezers and commercial boilers. Less use of electricity means less coal is burned to produce it. As Energy Secretary Steven Chu put it: “Energy efficiency can be improved very quickly. … Appliance standards, ka-BOOM, can be had right away.”

By 2020, current standards will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6.5 percent. Obama can toughen new standards and accelerate their start date, for an additional reduction of 1.3 percent over the same period, the Appliance Standards Awareness Project determined in a report published in July.

The United Nations estimates that 2.5 billion people rely on wood, dung and other dirty fuels for cooking. The short-lived black carbon, or soot, from their fires causes a significant amount of global warming.

Reducing it would quickly scale back some heat-trapping emissions, giving us more time to deal with the long-range carbon dioxide problem.

Obama can expand projects in the developing world that have been funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the EPA, and send solar cookers to impoverished people from Haiti to Kenya to Nepal. 

It is not unusual, says Paul Munsen, president of Sun Ovens International Inc., which sells solar cookers, for a family to spend half its income on charcoal, or many of its waking hours scavenging for wood.
Trading some of the fires for solar stoves would save money, time, forests—and a significant amount of emissions.

Simple cardboard-and-aluminum stoves are manufactured for as little as $8 each, according to Solar Cookers International, a nonprofit organization that distributes solar stoves to impoverished communities abroad.

The world’s largest climate polluter until recently, the United States (now second to China) has an obligation to lead and the resources and technology to act.

With its clean-car order, the Obama administration has already taken the first powerful step to reduce America’s carbon footprint. Without waiting for Congress, the administration’s effort can expand beyond high-tech clean cars to include cleaner power plants, more-efficient freezers and even low-tech solar cookers.

Taking the initiative, Obama would challenge the major countries in the developed and developing world to step up the fight against global warming. Most important, he would improve the odds that the Copenhagen negotiations will set the world on the path toward a sound climate treaty.

Dan Becker is director of the Safe Climate Campaign, which advocates strong measures to curb global warming. James Gerstenzang, the Safe Climate Campaign’s editorial director, formerly covered the White House and the environment for the Los Angeles Times.

Lockerdome Below Article
Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Related Entries

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By JeremiahIII, December 7, 2009 at 3:33 pm Link to this comment

Gerard,  your questions weren’t answered because they are rhetorical.  You obviously have fallen for the gambit known as the “False Left/Right Paradigm”.

Report this

By Mary Ann McNeely, December 7, 2009 at 11:49 am Link to this comment

The United States couldn’t lead the world in making a grilled cheese sandwich, much less in the cause of the environment.  All an egg-sucking phony like Obama can do is posture in front of the camera with his chin lifted.

Report this

By gerard, December 6, 2009 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment

Sorry you are leaving in disgust, Jeremiah.  But you didn’t answer any of my questions.  Try this as one answer:  Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma.  Maybe you are on his mailing list? Or maybe Steve Milloy of Fox? Or one of those deep thinkers at Cato named Michaels? Or could it be our beloved Sarah, the thinking winker?  Wake up and smell the petroleum fumes.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 6, 2009 at 5:02 pm Link to this comment

Well, Gerard, I am solid in my belief that the UN has the agenda of a handful of people (the Central Banks) in their heart.  Through my research I have found solid footing which solidifies my stance.  Not only the “Un-Itis” you speak of, but also the actions of the UN and its henchmen solidify my understanding that the Agenda of these people has nothing to do with the welfare of the common man.

One thing I find funny is the fact that those still defending the False Left administrations are the ones supporting the Global Warming myth. I have also come to the conclusion that communication with such folks is a waste of time, for the most part.

Report this

By gerard, December 6, 2009 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

jeremiahIII et al:  “It will go to fuel the Public-Private Partnership known as the UN and their Fascist Agenda.”

Please go back in your memory and tell me when and where was the first time you heard of this “UN and their Fascist Agenda” idea.  Who first mentioned it to you?  Where were you at the time? How old were you? What brought the subject up?  What else was said at the same time? Who sponsored the meeting, if it was a meeting? Who else was talking, and in what context?  Were memberships solicited, contributions taken?  Was anyone given “equal time” as in a debate or discussion?  Did you do any research afterward?

This notion has been going around for decades now, and has become an “article of faith” for some people, even though it is false, and worn to the bone. Sad to say it undercuts work that really needs to get done in one of the few internatioinal agencies that represents, especially in the general assembly, a cross-section of the world’s people who have few chances to meet elsewhere.  It deserves the respect it earns, particularly in the agencies like UNICEF, UNESCO, WHO etc.  True, it is hamstrlung by the security council (so-called) but again, that is money-power talking as usual, and many people regret its veto powers and behind-the-scenes deals.  Yet most feel we are stuck with it till we summon up the interest and the people-power to equalize the influence between the two bodies.

As the UN has no power to enforce its resolutions, its effectiveness lies largely with the power of its “reputation” or “prestige.”  That is why its reputation and prestige are always under attack, of course, and that too was the fault not of the UN but of those who set it up but were unwilling to give it any real juridical power.That’s also why things like the Geneva Conventions ar so important—sort of the only wall standing between humanity and barbarism.

If UNitis were not still a social virus,  people would not automatically run to the barricades every time some need for worldwide action appears on the scene, such as climate change etc.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 6, 2009 at 4:22 pm Link to this comment

Didn’t Galileo end the Flat Earth Society?

Report this

By john crandell, December 6, 2009 at 4:05 pm Link to this comment

Dear members of the Flat Earth Society - one and all: please proceed directly to the edge and jump off.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 6, 2009 at 2:05 pm Link to this comment


Don’t confuse the re-allocation of production and a scam to steal more money from the middle class as environmental concern.  Al Gore and friends stand not only to make billions from the Cap and Trade/Carbon Credit Scam.  The estimated tax increase to an average Joe will be 1200 bucks.  This money will not be reinvested in the infrastructure of humanity…It will go to fuel the Public-Private Partnership known as the UN and their Fascist Agenda. 

Al Gore’s “carbon foot print, as well as the “Copenhagen Summit” is greater than 99% of human’s.  Don’t be shamed into compliance with this False Paradigm of “People are bad”.  Let’s focus on the Change that never happened…I hope to be able to drink from a river before I die.  Divided we Fall, United we Rule.  We The People, not Faceless Corporate Agendas!

Report this

By gerard, December 6, 2009 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

The idea, discovery, fact that global warming is man-made certainly arouses a lot of ire.  How could one harmless human being as inoffensive as Al Gore arouse such venom?

He disturbs the corporate peace, such as it is – or isn’t.  (problem of assigning or denying responsibility)
He raises the hackles of the religious fundamentalists.  (problem of having to change belief systems)
He disturbs our “way of life.” (makes changes in our wasteful personal behavior necessary)
Ergo:  Battle lines drawn up, pro versus con, because that’s what we have always done, whether it “works” or not.  It’s all we know how to do. Go on the defensive.  Ergo: Infuse the situation and contradict it with money, lies,  noise to create doubt, fear and confusion.
Result:  Intelligent action forestalled by fiddling while Rome burns.  (It was, and is the same with getting rid of nuclear weapons and power, getting rid of war as an acceptable method of solving international problems and a host of other social problems.) 
Why is it always tit versus tat, me versus you, them versus us?  Obviously, most human problems are not that simple! Obviously they require complex solutions based on reason and cooperation.

Report this

By PacificGatePost, December 6, 2009 at 11:52 am Link to this comment

@ Plainsman,

You’re quite right that a “tax” will create new source of wealth for
well positioned few.  The idiotic Cap and Trade for example would
enable the likes of Goldman Sachs to become a clearing house,
This would in turn enable it to produce derivatives that would start
a brand new scam from the stupidity.

That we are increasingly polluting our air and our oceans is not
deniable, and this disturbing trend needs to be curtailed. 

Extending this into a global warming cause, however, is
disingenuous use of fear to create pockets of wealth, .... cretins
like Gore for starters.  Should people have stopped listening to this
goof when he claimed he “invented” the Internet?  Sheeeshhhh.

Report this

By plainsman, December 6, 2009 at 11:08 am Link to this comment

No subject has been so well obfuscated as the subject of climate change. It is obvious to anyone with even the smallest of brains that denying the climate is changing is idiocy. The climate on this planet has always been changing. The inter-glacial period we are living in may end; planet Earth may return to what is apparently the climatic norm: ice age.

Those of us who are not scientists have to sift through what information we can find and decide for ourselves what to believe. The only real question in the cloudy debate over climate change is whether it is caused by humans. The status quo claims it is, that rising CO2 levels are causing the planet to heat up. Detractors, who are usually not so well-funded (and, according to recent information, have been actively suppressed) have indicated that increases in CO2 levels follow rises in temperature. That is: CO2 does not cause global warming; in some mysterious way increased levels of atmospheric CO2 are a result of global warming.

I can’t help but side with the detractors for a number of reasons:

1 - They have nothing to gain and some have risked their careers to state publicly what their research has indicated.
2 - Indoor gardeners around the Western world add CO2 to their greenhouses to enhance plant growth. CO2 is, after all, plant food.
3 - Those who argue so strenuously for increased levels of atmospheric CO2 being the cause of global warming have concocted a scheme to make money from apparently doing something about it. But the Cap and Trade plan doesn’t actually do anything to reduce the levels of CO2 in the air.
4 - I live rurally, so when I go into the nearby city, the changes that occur there are more noticeable. What I notice is more buildings using more electricity, more cars using more fossil fuels, more concrete displacing more plants and and and. That these same people argue they are going to do something to reduce CO2 emissions is patently absurd.
5 - Most of us learn during grade school that the loudest voice is not necessarily the one that is speaking the truth. Often times it is those who speak against conventional wisdom who are correct. History is full of examples of the truth being ridiculed and suppressed, of people having their lives or livelihoods threatened because they went against the grain of orthodoxy.

Those of you who have a background in science have an advantage over those of us who do not. But that doesn’t mean that you are openly considering all of the information. The scientific community ridiculed Einstein when his General Theory of Relativity was first published. Just two weeks before the Wright Brothers mastered powered flight the voice of orthodoxy—Samuel Pierpont Langley—had announced that man would never fly. There is no need to mention Galileo and a host of others.

Sorry, C.Curtis, but your dismissal does not give me hope that the current move to do “something” about climate change will accomplish anything more than add a tax on air which will make a small group of already financially well off people even more well off at the expense of citizens like myself.


The Clown

Report this

By liecatcher, December 6, 2009 at 6:39 am Link to this comment

TO:C.Curtis.Dillon, December 6 at 9:09 am

You are right, the toxic shill distracters are wrong.

To:Volma, December 6 at 8:27 am

Excellent presentation !!!!!!!!

You answered an unasked question. Why a crapulent,

opulent miscreant like Rush Limbaugh get paid thirty

million dollars a year to spew venom, lies and

misinformation, disinformation, red herrings.

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, December 6, 2009 at 5:09 am Link to this comment

Just curious JeremiahIII:  what is your scientific background?  I have found the most vocal among the deniers has the least amount of information or ability to determine the truth.  Your posts tell me you know little about the topic and are more into conspiracy than any valid discussion.  And I’m still waiting for the SCIENCE.  I doubt whether 31 thousand scientists NEGATED global warming but you want us to believe that.  I would suggest they may have issues with the science or methods but are not disputing anything else.  And who are these scientists?  Are they recognized experts in anything relevant?  Do they understand the theories or are they just offering a knee jerk reactions?  Who do they work for?  All these questions are relevant to determining the expertise of the “negators” and their vested interest in the outcome.  If you are at least interested in finding the truth, you need to answer these questions.  If you are not, you will just keep parroting the talking points of those who have a vested interest in keeping climate change from being addressed.

Report this
Volma's avatar

By Volma, December 6, 2009 at 4:27 am Link to this comment

Typical throw the baby out with the bath water, right wing propaganda…Who cares, about if it’s global warming or cooling…Any fool with any common sense would acknowledge that all the poisons that humans put in the air and soil, which in turns goes into the water affects earth and the people who live on it…Capitalism ran amok, has been behind this abomination to all the world and it’s people…I am old enough to remember when appliances were made in the USA, they were made to last, so were cars, people didn’t trash their stuff, because they didn’t need to..Now so much is nothing but toxic disposal, that further destroys and poisons all of us…Wake up we are all connected, the earth is our mother, we are part of this earth as much as the tree’s rocks plants and animals…There is so much propaganda, social engineering going on in the world, but especially in the US, where the right wingers and left wingers are pointing fingers, at each other blaming each other for something that was created by the real owners of the US, the real power behind the so called elected officials…And for the ones who scream conspiracy theory craziness, reality is what you (meaning what is fed to you, you don’t know how to think for yourself) declare it is…right…You’re the genuine crazies, invested so much in your version of reality, openly looking for info that goes against that is threatening to your sanity…The ignorant, manipulated, ones who are too lazy to really research matters, only going for information provided by the people who propagate it, historically just like the good German citizens/Nazi’s who participated in genocide, death torture of people all over the globe…  Guilty because they lacked having a conscience, and consciousness…There are people who go on all internet sites (for money,  US, DOD psyops,just like the hacks on the Fox News Network, and many many more) to incite, divide, provide disinformation, confuse, distract, redirect all Americans…Their biggest assets are the radical aspects of all citizen fringe groups, the squeaky wheel gets the grease…Radicals, who believe there way is the only way, they are right, the others are wrong, and the only way to deal with this is to make the others, do as, believe, think the way you do or else..The lackeys of the fringe groups have lost their humanity, they are no longer human individuals they are their cause, their philosophy, religion/political/intellectual beliefs…These are the people who have been part of creating all monarchies, religions, dictatorships, fascist govs, radical movements, who have jailed, murdered, tortured etc… the unyielding…Keeping people divided and confused, in the dark while all their constitutional rights, human rights and freedoms are being taken from them, murder for oil, the evil that is going on is deep, on so many levels it’s taken quite awhile to construct, but the web is huge…The point with global warming, cooling, pollution, this absolutely should not be used as a capitalistic scheme to make more money, a product, to control and further enslave humanity…We have become consumers gluttons of toxic junk, this will come to an end, when we no longer have the money to buy the toxic garbage…The mind set of opportunity without regard for anyone anything, the long term the big picture, the good of all, for power in the name of ownership/money needs to end…Eventually it will all end, because without love and respect for the earth and one another, and a huge change of values, people before profit, we humans will become extinct…I hope that this doesn’t happen, there are so many loving, humane, intelligent individuals out there, who should have the chance to create the beautiful world they envision for all ..A world with no hunger, sickness, poverty,homelessness, war or oppression, where people can live a free life in peace. It’s very possible.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 6, 2009 at 2:51 am Link to this comment

Over 31,000 scientists have signed a statement negating “global warming”.  When the Institute the UN and Al Gore use as back-up to their theory admittedly “Hides the decline” in ADMITTEDLY “valid” emails, how could the warming be validated?

Report this

By liecatcher, December 6, 2009 at 2:41 am Link to this comment

Obama on His Own
Posted on Dec 3, 2009
By Dan Becker and James Gerstenzang

Global warming is real & an unintended consequence of Oligarchy &

disaster capitalism, & not the vehicle for world

However debt created by the FED & multiplied by
wars is the web used to ensnare the world.

Which is how & why America is in a debtor’s abyss,

the interest on the ever increasing debt being $500
million a

year. Outsourcing jobs & manufacturing facilited the

collapse, still called a recession by MSM.

And yet so many readers snapped at the global

red herring, when the real story is Obama,

who is not for the people or by the people,and most certainly not on his own, but
owned &

operated by Government Sachs. Predators who have been

preying for a very long time.

“Goldman Sachs was founded in 1869 by German
immigrant Marcus Goldman.[2] In 1882, Goldman’s son-
in-law Samuel Sachs joined the firm which prompted
the name change to Goldman Sachs.[3] The company made
a name for itself pioneering the use of commercial
paper for entrepreneurs and was invited to join the
New York Stock Exchange in 1896.” Wikipedia

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, December 6, 2009 at 1:24 am Link to this comment

So, let me see if I get this: 10s of thousands of researchers all over the world are in league to create one world government!  Oh lord ... the crap just keeps getting deeper and deeper.  Where’s my bigger shovel?  I was part of this effort in the very beginning ... we were developing instruments in my research laboratory to perform remote monitoring of smokestack emissions back in the early 70s.  Our machine could be mounted in a small truck and driven to sites where our instrument would send light beams through the smoke to see what was there.  It was used by private and public agencies to show the dispersion patterns of these components and to show how pollution moved around.  It created the science behind the theory.

That said, I never heard of or talked with any handler who told me or my colleagues how to warp the science or that we were part of some huge conspiracy to take over the world.  We were performing science to help understand why the air around major cities was so bad and why people were getting sick as a result.  It was a worthwhile task and helped to remove pollutants and improve air quality for millions of people.

Now we are trying to understand why climate around the world is changing and what the impact of those changes will be.  Why the coral reefs are dying and why we see such tremendous melting in the ice caps?  Why the sea is rising and why there are increasing droughts and severe storms?  This is a worthwhile effort and has nothing to do with establishing one world government.  Pollution knows no boundary ... CO2 emitted in China arrives in the USA within days or weeks.  That is why this is a universal problem.  Our actions in Georgia have a direct impact on a farmer in Africa.  So a solution must include everyone.

As for the e-mails, they are an embarrassment to every scientist who is doing the right thing.  Distorting results in never a good thing as it creates just the kind of fog we see in this comment stream.  It overshadows good research and good conclusions.  That is wrong and should be properly investigated.  However, it reflects but a few bad apples in a huge community who are trying to do good science and perform a valuable service for all of us.  There was a blog from one of the leading climate scientists in Germany last week where he stated that he wished the science was incomplete or that he had overlooked something that would mitigate the problem ... I think this is the wish of all who do this research.  No one wants to see economic activity impacted ... the consequences are far-reaching for everyone, not just the industrialized nations.

This one-world government idea is just a smokescreen to scare people into not listening to the science.  It is bullcrap, pure and simple.  And I have yet to see any science in this stream that counteracts the real science indicating there is a major problem.  So, I repeat my challenge ... show me the science, not the smoke and mirrors.  If global warming is a fraud, there should be real science that shows this.  Please, for my peace of mind, show me where the science is wrong with valid, scientific arguments.  Then I will listen to you.  But smoke and mirrors!  Give me a break.

P.S. The clown who said look up to see the source of global warming just reinforces my comments above.  If there was no sun, this rock would be as cold as the superconducting magnets in the CERN supercollider (about absolute zero or -400 degrees fahrenheit).  The sun gives us our temperature and weather.  But the temperature of this planet is relative ... it can go up or down depending on how much of the sun’s energy is trapped in the atmosphere.  And CO2, along with a host of other gases (like methane), traps more heat than does oxygen and nitrogen, the two major components of the air we breath.  The more of these “greenhouse” gases, the more heat the atmosphere retains and the warmer it gets.  This is climate science 101 and yet so many of you don’t know the basics.

Report this

By john crandell, December 6, 2009 at 12:54 am Link to this comment

No small irony if Gerstenzang is related to the Gerstenzang which Halberstam so deplored once upon a war so long ago.

Report this

By liecatcher, December 5, 2009 at 11:20 pm Link to this comment

Obama on His Own
Posted on Dec 3, 2009
By Dan Becker and James Gerstenzang

Written by two hopeless naive romantics who can’t
accept or fathom that the POTUS is never alone,
instead, is , like the whores in Congress, owned &
opporated by THE MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE, whose message
is:  follow the script or be assassinated.

Report this

By gerard, December 5, 2009 at 9:43 pm Link to this comment

So far as I know, the forced sterilization issue had nothing to do with the U.N. or any attempt at world government. It was criminal, though adopted legally in the early part of the 1900s, by ten or fifteen countries in Asia, Europe, the U.S. and Canada during a period when “eugenics” became temporarily popular.  Under the guise of this new “science” some governments attempted to cut down on the number of children born who might inherit a variety of “defects” from leprosy to mental illness and other weaknesses either known or suspected to be inheritable.  It was a deplorable period of ham-handed “science” in concert with early fears of over-population, “inferior races” and fascistic “uber-menschen” etc. etc. ad nauseum. 

The world passed through it, more or less, but not without deep wounds.  Unfortunately, the same false notions of “superior” races and classes lie in a shallow grave in the minds of present-day discriminators. But forced sterilization is now widely codified as a crime against humanity. Morally, it ranks about as low as the infamous Tuskegee experiments, giving smallpox germs to native Americans, and conducting medical experiments on conscientious objectors and prisoners.
I don’t know for sure, but I would venture a guess that somewhere in the statutes of the United Nations there is a proscription against it.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 5, 2009 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

The United Nations…Hmmm.

Dos anyone know the relationships of prominent Nazis and Nazi sympathizers and the United Nations?  How about the assistance given to China and Albania in the FORCED sterilization of tens of thousands of women?  Forced!

Report this

By gerard, December 5, 2009 at 5:28 pm Link to this comment

You know what?  That line about “an attempt to create a new world power” is still breathing after sixty years of huff-and-puff.  I think I first heard it after World War II coming out of the John Birch Society—in case anybody but me remembers what that was all about.  Then, it was the United Nations—and for some people it’s still the United Nations, which is hamstrung by a minority of vocal fear-mongers. What do you think the “Security Council” is all about anyway?  To prevent the “lesser breeds” in the General Assembly from “taking over and ruling the world.” Of course the self-appointed super-nations themselves “took over” and now nobody can do anything—except pass resolutions that are more or less ignored because we dare not have “world government”, now can we? In fact, even the UN international talking-machine is considered dangerous by those who feel superior to others. Things might be taken out of the hands of the minority of rich (otherwise known as “advanced”) countries, and people from “backward” countries might get a word or two in edgewise!  Give me a break! Is the world—which, after all, is one world—supposed to go down the drain of time because we can’t get our act together due to fear of a bogey-man named “world government”?  PS—Don’t get me started!

Report this

By ardee, December 5, 2009 at 4:43 am Link to this comment

jackson, December 4 at 11:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Oh shut up.  Human caused global warming is a fraud, cooked up to force a one world dictatorship.  Actually, game’s over, you guys lost.

Well, now that this buffoon has solved our problems we can move on to more important topics…Sheeesh is he really,truly this dumb?

Report this

By PacificGatePost, December 5, 2009 at 12:05 am Link to this comment

From Norway to Gambia, dubious motives will use fear of
climate change, and Copenhagen in an attempt to create a new
world power.

American taxpayers can’t afford it.

Report this

By jon_e_7, December 4, 2009 at 11:54 pm Link to this comment

Obama COULD do many things to facilitate environmental healing. Sadly those ‘things’ aren’t in the best interest of Big Biz so they ain’t gonna happen. U heard it here 1st!

Report this

By prosefights, December 4, 2009 at 7:41 pm Link to this comment


The maximum possible insolation is therefore about 70 to 71 percent of the solar constant., or about 320 BTU per hour per square foot. No solar collector, regardless of shape or design can deliver more than this maximum possible value, without energy input from some other source.

SEDAC 200 btu per hour per square foot estimate.

On the clearest, sunniest day, around 340 Btu/hr or 100 watts of sunlight energy comes in each square foot of area.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 4, 2009 at 7:26 pm Link to this comment

Hi, Gerard. 

You miss the point.  I was speaking of the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX…THE HOAX THAT MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR GLOBAL WARMING. I agree with you the pollution is a travesty unto Nature.  No argument there.  I witnessed a river of dead fish back in 2000 when a factory unloaded it’s cr@p into the water in Indiana!  They got fined 50,000 bucks, but the disposal fee would have been 10 times that. 

Did you know in some business schools it is recommended that if the fine is less than the cost of proper action, take the fine?

Report this

By john crandell, December 4, 2009 at 6:46 pm Link to this comment

?: if it wattles like a duck, flies like a duck and QUAGS like a duck, it IS a duck!

And if Darth Vader doesn’t arrive soon, his goose is cooked.

Report this

By gerard, December 4, 2009 at 4:16 pm Link to this comment

Being “conned into the hoax” is a strange viewpoint, especially considering the evidence, plus the fact that yesterday was the forty-something do-nothing anniversary of Bhopal where people are still sick and dying and Monsanto/Dow are still denying their responsibility for the pollution.
  The people of Bhopal were “conned into the hoax” that Monsanto chemicals were “harmless.”  Probably people commenting in this string are being “conned into the hoax” that global warming either does not exist or is not largely man-made or cannot be stopped. 
  And they in their desire to avoid facing an enormous problem are trying to “con others into the hoax” that there is no such thing as “climate change” or whatever.
  Time for Mother Goose:
    Hoaxie, poaxie, puddin’ and pie
    Denied global warming and carbon-choaked sky.
    When the fumes became too strong
    Hoaxie, poaxie changed his song.
    (But it was forty years too late.)

Report this

By plainsman, December 4, 2009 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment


“If the deniers are serious about debating climate change, let them come up with real science to show there is another cause.”

Do you ever look up when you are outside? The most significant cause of climate change is the one thing never mentioned by the AGM crowd: THE SUN!

There is a lot of evidence that contradicts AGM. The real environmental problem is all of the toxins, et cetera, that we are dumping into the soil, water, and air.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 4, 2009 at 12:36 pm Link to this comment

I agree with you, M Johnson. 

People are waking to the fact that the man made global warming problem (and hoax) is a front for a grand money making scheme.

What we CANNOT let happen is more division between those who have been conned with the hoax and the rest who see through it. I firmly believe ALL people would like to drink from the river again. This division will exasperate and enable the problem we have of corporations running amok on this earth.

Report this

By M Johnson, December 4, 2009 at 12:00 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Global warming is the wrong argument.

Pollution is what should be considered.

One of the best things anyone could do is to contact their Congressman or
Senator regarding pollution from coal.

Meanwhile the coal companies will do whatever it takes to continue doing what
they do. What would you do if your $500million annual income was threatened?

Too may people complain about pollution, but don’t put their money where
their mouth is. Maybe they should consider installing solar panels at a loss,
instead of waiting for the break-even point.

Report this

By JeremiahIII, December 4, 2009 at 9:26 am Link to this comment

No mention of the fact that Phil Jones and other folks have resigned while their falsifying of data is investigated?  In light of what has taken place in the camp of the Global(ist) Warming camp, I think any RATIONAL human would see this hoax for what is:  A MYTH to centralize power over humanity under the guise of a Global Gov’t which is based on “Public-Private” relationships, and a handful of corporations gather wealth.

Report this

By Cain is Able, December 4, 2009 at 8:44 am Link to this comment

The Climate Change debate has become so polarized that people can no longer has a rational discussion.  Since Curtis brought up the e-mails, I have to bring up the largest problem I have with those that think it is irrelevant to the debate.

Silencing descent is never a worthy or justifiable act.  Science is founded on debate, questioning established dogma, and breaking away from “consensus.”  The biggest problem with the e-mails is that it show that those who were in charge sought ardently to silence debate.  That is not silence that is politics.

For centuries, the consensus view was that the world was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, that light was instantaneous, that sickness such as yellow fever and malaria were cause by “poisonous vapors,” etc.  Only by questioning these assertions was science and humanity pulled forward.

Regardless of which side of the fence you come down on, you cannot, or I should say should not,  want descent silenced.

Report this

By Bill Wolfe, December 4, 2009 at 7:58 am Link to this comment

Dan - you ignore the facts that

1. Obama - and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson - have repeatedly said that they will not use regulatory authority. Instead, they have said that they will use the threat of existing regulatory authority as leverage to pressure Congress to pass global warming legislation.

2. Obama is is bed with the politics of dirty coal.

3. Obama is is bed with the politics of failed US auto industry.

4. Obama is is bed with the highway lobby.

5. Obama will not take on the energy industry.

And of course, big national environmental groups have been silent in criticizing Obama and Jackson for any of this.

I wrote extensively about all this while monitoring Lisa Jackson in NJ as she led the Corzine administration’s Global Warming Response Act and RGGI cap /trade programs. Go to or do the Google for the details or shoot me an email.

Both programs are big on rhetoric and short on substance.

And Jackson refused to use existing regulatory authority to mandate emission reductions.

Just like the Obama/Jackson.

Hate to say I told you so, but….

Report this

By kanuear, December 4, 2009 at 7:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Doing nothing about global warming and the destruction of the planet will soon place man in a position of not being able to do anything. It dosen’t matter if one claims to be material rich or poor, the end of human life is the end. The EARTH, as it is called will continue to be the EARTH. All forms life that require no oxygen will continue to exist. After man has committed the final murder (suicide) EARTH will re-generate and man will be extinct. Death comes to all life but death without re-generation becomes extinction. If the powers that be refuse to act then they must not be allowed to control. The greedy, corrupt, and so-called powerfull wealthly make are a minority. They cannot write the destiny of others and not be consumed by their own pen. They must not be allowed to abuse balance. When the majority join to neutralize the actions of the minority, all things can balance end. This may sound ill-logical to some but….. think about it….. If the actions of a business after patronage are against YOUR best interest…. ELIMINATE THAT BUSINESS.

Report this

By jackson, December 4, 2009 at 7:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oh shut up.  Human caused global warming is a fraud, cooked up to force a one world dictatorship.  Actually, game’s over, you guys lost.

Report this

By Howie Bledsoe, December 4, 2009 at 5:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Until corporations can make a good profit off of the back of climate change, nothing will be done.

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, December 4, 2009 at 2:30 am Link to this comment

I was discussing this topic with my English students yesterday.  One if them, a fairly bright programmer, started spewing the standard denier verbiage which I have heard a million times and so ignored.  But he did say one thing that was interesting: that he would not make any effort to reduce his carbon footprint until the major polluters made a similar move.  Of course, he is absolutely right.  Why should he sacrifice when the big hitters are dancing around the issue, looking for leverage and advantage.  All the major political leaders pay lip service to the problem but really don’t want to take the concrete steps needed to force the issue.  Few actually understand the drastic steps needed to curtail emissions.  Even the steps talked about in this article are but baby steps towards what actually needs to happen.  I’ve been talking about CO2 emissions for 30 years and nothing of significance has happened ... emissions are up drastically.  The deniers have latched onto the stolen e-mails and morphed them into a conspiracy.  If the deniers are serious about debating climate change, let them come up with real science to show there is another cause.  Not just hand waving and obfuscation.  Not just “maybe it’s really this” statements which have no foundation.  Then we can have a real debate ... not this “yes there is ... no there isn’t” standoff.

Report this

By ChaoticGood, December 4, 2009 at 1:31 am Link to this comment

I recommend the following video for some of the latest information of the subject of global warming.

Until cleaning up the environment becomes a profit center or water from the rising ocean is above your waist, nothing will be done.  Hopefully we will have time to find “profit” in taking care of our collective home.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook