Filed under: Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Politics | Tags: Climate Change, James Delingpole, New York Times Environment Desk
The president declares that it’s not about spending. But over at the New York Times, when the revenues are down, they immediately tackle — the spending. Of course the lack of actual global warming means the New York Times environmental desk is being closed. No more environment editor, no more deputy environment editor, no seven reporters and two editors. They are being assigned to other departments.
Over at Ricochet, Britain’s James Delingpole, who is always right, piles on. “New York Times Closes its Environment Desk, Please, Nobody Laugh” That desk has been the launching pad for “some of the most compelling and moving news stories of the last four years.” Among them:
Every time you take an unnecessary shower a baby polar bear dies.
No, it’s getting hotter. Really, it’s getting hotter. Dr James Hansen says so and he works at NASA.
Just because global warming stopped in 1997 doesn’t mean it’s not going to start again, no sirree – and when it does it will be worse, much, much worse.
Al Gore: why selling my environmental channel Current TV to oil-funded Jew-haters for $100 million was the morally right thing to do.
We shall miss you, New York Times environment desk. You saved us from ManBearPig!
So why did Al Gore accept $100 million for a cable channel that clearly wasn’t worth that? It’s revenue came entirely from the fees that cable companies paid to have it on the air, a number which was going down as they cancelled it. There’s more to it than hypocrisy. This is a channel that had very low value, and had a very low audience. So they were buying some other product. They now have the former Vice President of the United States on their board, and is a consultant for them. But this is a state for which oil revenue is important.
Even Pravda has given up on global warming. Officially.
Filed under: Economy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Science/Technology | Tags: At Enormous Cost, Investigating the Obvious, James Delingpole
High up in my list of favorite writers is James Delingpole, who blogs at The Telegraph. Acerbic, grumpy, takes-no-prisoners, tolerates no nonsense and great fun, always, to read. He posted the above video with this commentary:
The harmless trace gas carbon dioxide, as any halfway literate scientist knows, is plant food – not a pollutant. That’s why in agricultural greenhouses commercial growers often raise CO2 levels to between 700 ppm (parts per million) and 1,000 ppm – which is more than twice current atmospheric CO2 levels of (approx) 392 ppm. They do this because they know CO2 increases plants’ growth rate while simultaneously reducing the amount of water they require. (H/T Bufo)
So really, you might not unreasonably think, any large-scale experiment to discover what kind of effect increased levels of CO2 has on eucalyptus trees would fall into roughly the same category as:
A large-scale experiment in the sea to discover whether or not water is wet.
A large-scale experiment in the Vatican to discover whether or not the Pope has Catholic tendencies.
A large-scale experiment in the woods of Canada and Alaska to discover whether or not bears defecate in arborial environments.
A large-scale experiment at Christmas to discover whether or not Father Christmas is a big, fat, jolly man with a white beard and a red outfit trimmed with white fur.
A large scale experiment conducted in the evening to ascertain as to whether night follows day.
A large scale experiment with ice-cream left outside on a very hot day to discover….
It seems though that in Julia Gillard’s Australia the thirst for spending large sums of taxpayers money in order to research the blindingly obvious is still strong.