Here is an article from the Washington Examiner that should be copied
and sent to each and every AB32 knucklehead in the California
Legislature. Don't forget to mail copies to Mary Nichols and her band
of economy killing, self serving thieves as well.
Ice age threat should freeze EPA global warming regs
|Ice age threat should freeze EPA global warming regs
By: Shannon Goessling | OpEd Contributor | 07/26/11 8:05 PM
Rather than spiraling into a global warming meltdown, we may be heading into the next ice age.
The U.S. National Solar Observatory, the U.S. Air Force Research
Laboratory and astrophysicists across the planet report that the nearly
all-time low sunspot activity may result in a sustained cooling period
The news has sent global warming theory advocates scrambling to
discount and explain away the impact on global temperatures. However,
the "news" is not really that new.
reputable scientists have been warning for decades that we are nearing
the end of the 11,500-year average period between ice ages. And the
last similar crash in sunspot activity coincided with the so-called
"Little Ice Age" in the 1600s that lasted nearly a century.
Despite increasing evidence that "global warming" climate change is not
the unified scientific theory it has been promoted to be, vested
interests continue to push for stringent limits on carbon dioxide
investment banks and trading houses that stand to make billions on
so-called "carbon credits," and the environmental sociologists who have
as a stated purpose to change our way of life, are a powerful bloc.
In the Obama administration, this cabal has a willing "big stick" in
the form the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which has enacted
draconian measures that will, by President Obama's admission, make
energy costs "skyrocket."
The subject of intense litigation, the EPA regulations were enacted
this year without congressional approval as required by the Clean Air
Act and other laws. Estimates
put the economic damage of these regulations at $1 trillion over the
next 20 years, with a loss of between four and 10 million jobs.
Ironically, the current rush by global warming advocates to uncouple
mounting evidence of global cooling from the global warming regime is
not the first time they've backpedaled.
As referenced in ongoing litigation, the EPA admitted that generally
applicable regulations would lead to "absurd" results, leading the
agency to create a so-called "Tailoring Rule."
For example, global
warming alarmists admit by their own calculations that reducing carbon
emissions among a sample of large U.S. "emitters" to EPA-required
levels might reduce the surface temperature by .00071 degree Celsius --
or 70 times lower than what is detectable.
Annual emission reductions sought would be replaced in 13 days by
industrial growth in China. "Absurd" is understatement. So how do we
handle "global cooling?"
In the 1970s and '80s, climatologists and astrophysicists were setting
off alarms about pending global cooling and "the new ice age."
Headlines in major weekly news magazines warned of a cooling
catastrophe, with experts like famed astronomer Carl Sagan calling on industrialized countries to produce more carbon dioxide to offset the pending disaster.
High-level scientific proposals were advanced to redirect Arctic
rivers, clear out swaths of high-density forests to release carbon
dioxide, and even salt the Greenland ice caps with black carbon to
attract sun melting in a global effort to stave off the impending ice
What happens during a "Little Ice Age?" Food-producing land becomes
scarcer, food-growing seasons become shorter, and the world becomes a
much more arid and less hospitable place. Think food shortages and the
social unrest that follows.
forces at work behind the global warming regulatory regime have, at
worst, covered up, ignored and manipulated climate evidence to make the
case that humans cause global warming and therefore humans should be
At best, the mainstream scientific community is continuing to weigh the
climate data as it becomes available. Caught in the flux are millions
of Americans suffering under an economic tsunami that is anything but a
The textbook definition of moving forward with global warming regulations is truly "absurd."
Shannon Goessling is executive director and chief legal counsel for the Southeastern Legal Foundation.