Monday, August 31, 2015
Sea Level Rise Alarm Turned Off? NOAA: “Absolute Global Sea Level Rise Is Believed To Be 1.7 – Algore And Obama stop their lies?
- See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2015/08/30/sea-level-rise-alarm-turned-off-noaa-absolute-global-sea-level-rise-is-believed-to-be-1-7-1-8-millimetersyear/#sthash.OJkyNWF7.giFlSccZ.dpuf
Sunday, August 30, 2015
Obama Global Warming Fear Mongering threatens US 'right now' Yes Obama, Your Right Your Global Warming Fear Mongering Dose Threatens US 'Right Now
In fact, Alaska’s governor recently told me that four villages are in ‘imminent danger’ and have to be relocated,” he said, citing Gov. Bill Walker (I). “Already, rising sea levels are beginning to swallow one island community.”
“Think about that,” Obama added. “If another country threatened to wipe out an American town, we’d do everything in our power to protect ourselves. Climate change poses the same threat, right now.”
Obama’s remarks come as he gears up for a three-day tour of Alaska starting Monday.
He argued Saturday that the state is already beset by natural disasters and economic paid associated with harmful climate change.
“Alaskans are already living with its effects,” Obama said. “More frequent and extensive wildfires. Bigger storm surges as sea ice melts faster. Some of the swiftest shoreline erosion in the world – in some places, more than three feet a year.”
“Alaska’s glaciers are melting faster too, threatening tourism and adding to rising seas,” he added. “And if we do nothing, Alaskan temperatures are projected to rise between six and twelve degrees by the end of the century, changing all sorts of industries forever.”
Obama touted multiple policies his administration had implemented for halting the negative effects associated with rampant climate change.
He listed international cooperation with Arctic nations, clean energy programs and increased safety standards in America’s oil industry as some of his counters to the natural phenomenon.
Obama added that repairing climate change damage is essential for America’s future prosperity.
“What’s happening in Alaska is happening to us,” he said. “It’s our wakeup call. And as long as I’m president, America will lead the world to meet the threat of climate change before it’s too late.”
Saturday, August 29, 2015
Barack Obama has been forced to defend his decision to allow the hunt for oil in the last great wilderness of the Arctic, on the eve of an historic visit to Alaska intended to spur the fight against climate change.
The three-day tour – which will include a hike across a shrinking glacier and visits to coastal communities buffeted by sea-level rise and erosion – was intended to showcase the real-time effects of climate change.
But a defensive White House was forced to push back against campaigners who accuse Obama of undermining his environmental agenda by giving the go-ahead to Shell to drill for oil in the Chukchi Sea, only weeks after rolling out his signature climate change plan.
Obama, in his weekly address on Saturday, insisted there was no clash between his climate change agenda and Arctic drilling.
America was beginning to get off fossil fuels, he said. But Obama went on: “Our economy still has to rely on oil and gas. As long as that’s the case, I believe we should rely more on domestic production than on foreign imports.”
The challenges of protecting the Arctic from climate change as well as the risks of offshore drilling were both on full display on the eve of Obama’s visit.
Disappearing sea ice cover forced an estimated 6,000 walruses, mainly females and their young, to come to shore on a remote barrier island off the Chukchi Sea, US government officials said on Friday.
Meanwhile, Shell was forced to pause its drilling in the Chukchi and evacuate workers “because of extreme weather conditions”, a company spokesman said in an email.
Obama defended the drilling operation, saying: “We don’t rubber-stamp permits.”
The president had hoped to use his visit to showcase the changes unfolding in the Arctic, which is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world, the White House said.
“This is an issue that is very here and now,” Brian Deese, a senior White House advisor told a conference call with reporters on Friday. “Near and above the Arctic circle the impacts of climate change are particular pronounced and Americans are living with those impacts in real time.”
He said Obama would use the visit to draw public attention to those consequences: the retreat of sea ice, land loss due to melting permafrost and coastal erosion, increasingly severe storms and growing risk of wildfires.
The president will also highlight the risks to Alaska’s tiny coastal communities, some of which could be forced to relocate because of climate change. A number have already chosen to move but have no funds to do so.
Monday, August 24, 2015
What is the link between hurricanes and global warming? Calling Al Gore? NOAA: Hurricane Drought Hits Record 118 Months
| According to the study,
hurricanes in the southeast Atlantic have been increasing over the past
90 years, and there seems to be more hurricanes in "warm years," where
water surface temperatures are higher than normal.|
As of today, it has been a record 118 months since the last major hurricane struck the continental United States, according to records kept by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Hurricane Research Division, which list all hurricanes to strike the U.S. mainland going back to 1851
A major hurricane is Category 3 or higher hurrucine. The last one to strike the continental U.S. was Hurricane Wilma, which made landfall in North Carolina on Oct. 24, 2005.
President Obama is the first president in 122 years, since Benjamin Harrison was in office, who has not seen a major hurricane strike the U.S. during his time in office. In a statement on its website, NOAA expressed concern that Americans might suffer from “hurricane amnesia.”
The second longest stretch between major hurricanes hitting the continenatla U.S. was the eight years between 1860 and 1869, NOAA records show.
“It has been 10 years since Hurricanes Katrina (Aug. 29), Rita (Sept. 23/24) and Wilma (Oct. 24) made landfall along the Gulf Coast during one of the most active hurricane seasons in recorded history,” NOAA said in a statement marking the 10-year anniversary of the 2005 hurricane season.
“Wilma is also the last major hurricane to strike the U.S.--an unprecedented stretch that could unfortunately lead to ‘hurricane amnesia’ for the destruction such a hurricane can cause.”
Such a “drought” in major hurricane activity is “a rare event,” occurring every 177 years, according to a study published in May by researchers at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies entitled The Frequency and duration of U.S. hurricane droughts, who concluded that “the admittedly unusual 9-year U.S. Cat3+ landfall drought is a matter of luck.”
Dr. Gerry Bell, NOAA's lead seasonal hurricane forecaster, told CNSNews.com that the agency's seasonal outlooks are "not a hurricane landfall predictor. Where hurricanes strike and how strong they are depends on weather patterns, and there's no way to predict those patterns months in advance," he told CNSNews.com.
"What we do know is that we have a cycle in which there are more hurricanes and fewer hurricanes. In 2003, '04 and '05, we had one storm after another," he continued. "Beginning with 2006, we started getting a break, as weather patterns in the Eastern United States steered a lot more storms out to sea. Right now, that is expected to be the overall pattern this year" during hurricane season, which runs from June 1 to November 30.
But Bell warned that storms that are not classified as major hurricanes can still do a tremendous amount of damage.
"We tell coastal residents to prepare every hurricane season, because it only takes one storm to make it a bad year," he said. Hurricane strength is "only one factor," he added. The size of the storm surge, whether it spins off tornadoes, and the amount of rainfall created by a slow-moving storm can create as much damage as a major hurricane, he said.
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
Hillary Clinton’s absolutely authoritarian environmental policy scheme makes Barack Obama’s audacious clean energy pitch seem timid
MILLENNIAL VOTERS WANT RESULTS, NOT REGULATIONS
On the campaign trail in Ames, Iowa recently, the former Secretary of State said she wanted renewable energy to account for 33 percent of America’s electric power by 2027, 13 percent more than the president proposed last week.
“I want more wind, more solar, more advanced biofuels, more energy efficiency,” said Clinton. “And, I’ve got to tell you, people who argue against this are just not paying attention.”
Her cry of more, more, more, is a bit disconcerting, considering that Obama’s plan would“wash away” the coal industry, even though the U.S. accounts for only 15 percent of the world’s CO2 output, and even now is a global leader in renewable power, according to analysts.
The 2016 GOP presidential debaters last week barely touched on the environment as an issue. But if they are looking to distinguish themselves from the Democrats’ draconian, government-centered policies, they may want to give free-market environmentalism a try. This could, suggests a new book, be popular with millennials, the young voters who handed first term Senator Obama the American presidency in 2008 on hollow promises of hope and change.
Spurned by Obama’s embrace of big government, at the expense of job creation, these young voters are looking for new solutions.
“The 2016 presidential campaign gives Republicans a chance to speak to these millennials, and the Republican environmental policy message could be a starting point,” writes Terry L. Anderson, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, and the co-author, with Donald Leal, of Free Market Environmentalism for the Next Generation. “Command and control regulations, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act, to name a few, from Nixon-era Republicans, may have played with boomers. But millennials want results, not regulations.”
Obama and Clinton don’t seem to be in tune with these voters on environmental issues, analysts indicate.
A recent survey by Michigan State University reported that “gen Y does have concern for the environment when making purchases, but without an economic benefit in making eco-friendly choices, they likely would not make these purchases.”
Gov. Scott Walker has made some moves on the environment in this campaign, embracing a plan to disassemble the Environmental Protection Agency, and return regulation over ecological issues to the states.
But there is even more running room for other candidates here. The American Action Forum reported that federal environmental regulations accounted for $216 billion in costs for the U.S. economy in 2012, double its previous record-setting total.
Coming out against the carbon tax in this campaign might be a persuasive play for Sen. Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, or even Donald Trump, who has been rather circumspect on his policy positions, save for curtailing illegal aliens, thus far.
“A 2014 poll showed that half the voters between the ages of 18 and 29 are unwedded to either party,” writes Anderson. “Environmental policies based on markets, incentives, and entrepreneurship, offer Republicans a chance to win them over.”
Another important book, Millennial Momentum: How a New Generation Is Remaking America, by Morley Winograd and Michael Hais, shows that millennials are very active entrepreneurs, as they have found new job creation at established companies close to nil during the Obama years.
The authors argue that a millennial environmental policy would be, for example, to reduce barriers to leasing water to farmers from federal irrigation projects in California’s Central Valley.
Another millennial-friendly environmental policy would be developing individual, but transferable, fishing quotas, which could preserve the livelihoods of fishermen, as well as the size of fish stocks.
Obama’s environmental policies are unpopular and are creating an opportunity for the conservative candidate who is willing to seize it. According to Rasmussen Research, 56 percent of likely U.S. voters believe Obama’s plan will “increase energy costs.” Just 17 percent think it will decrease costs. No one is buying what the Obama green team is selling. (Later this month, Obama, who has the biggest carbon footprint in the world when he travels on Air Force One, will venture to Las Vegas to tout the eco-regulation plan at Sen. Harry Reid’s National Clean Energy Summit. The Heartland Institute, and other libertarian think tanks, will be there to greet him at the Mandalay Bay resort with realistic analyses of his statist solutions for pollution.)
“To win the younger vote, conservatives in Washington will have to stop protecting status quo subsidies,” writes Anderson, in this summer’s edition of the Hoover Digest, in an article entitled, “Green Allies: What Would Bring Conservationists and Conservatives together? Environmental solutions that really work.”
Friday, August 7, 2015
alarmists must be shaking their heads in disbelief. Just when they felt they had the stars aligned to push their anti-capitalism/free enterprise agenda on the international stage and claim the power that they crave, the climate and scientists have begun to turn against them.
Sydney, Australia, has snow for the first time since 1836. To put this in perspective: in 1836, Andrew Jackson was president of the United States, Victoria was a year away from being crowned Queen of England upon her 18th birthday, and Davy Crockett met his heroic end at the Alamo.
Needless to say, it has been a long time since Sydney has seen snow.
In other news, the Big Island of Hawaii had snowfall in July. Not to be outdone, the Sierra Nevada mountain range in California also had snowfall this July. Antarctica set a new record for ice extent in 2014 and continues to set records for how much ice covers the oceans surrounding this southern hemisphere continent as 2015 progresses.
And to confuse the science-is-settled-on-global-warming crowd even further, some solar scientists are now projecting that due to changes in the sun's cycles, the earth is likely to suffer from what is known as a "Little Ice Age" starting in 2030, as the heat-giving star settles into a very rare pattern of inactivity. Imagine their consternation at learning that the sun actually plays a role in the earth's temperature.
Alarmists are battling the climate record's showing an 18-year hiatus from warming by changing and erasing temperature data collection to create the results needed to justify their continued funding.
The church of global warming is also struggling to explain why the much more reliable satellite temperature data also continue to embarrass them by showing no new warming for almost two decades.
Yet the Obama administration pushes on with their attempts to destroy coal-fired electric generation, as well as the misguided taxpayer funding of bird- and bat-destroying wind farms and regulatory schemes intended to hamstring oil-based domestic energy production.
The reason is simple. The global warming agenda is not about the planet. Otherwise, world environmental do-gooders would be focused upon the world's worst polluting nation, China, rather than giving them a pass.
The head of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, Christiana Figueres, readily admits that the real climate change agenda has nothing to do with the environment, but instead is about redistribution of wealth. "This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves," she says, "which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-viewpoint/080315-764799-real-agenda-is-destroying-capitalism-not-climate.htm#ixzz3i9qzVWjG
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook