Steven Crowder: destroy clean energy plan (video)
Comedian Steven Crowder has made an excellent little video advising Donald Trump that he doesn’t need to defend his executive order on coal and energy. If you haven’t already watched it, please do below – it’s worth it.
Its very funny. The very serious problem here with a lot of what Obama did is that it bypasses the people’s representatives, i.e., Congress. This clean power plan is no different.
More humour like that please! Exposing ne’er-do-wells like Bernie Sanders to such ridicule would presumably cause mass trauma across the States if it could be widely heard, but that modest suffering would be surely be beneficial for helping clear up more serious ailments and causes of distress. This Trump chap, to whose work Crowder alludes, is not just a breath of fresh air, he is also a dose of salts. In due course, he could become a popular hero.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An alternative, routinely unhinged view of Trump’s progress gets quoted here:
The author’s shot at explaining why is here: https://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2017/04/01/draft-n2307281
Germany’s Energiewende needs to be mocked! Here’s a classic video from Bjorn Lomborg:
LikeLiked by 3 people
Can we please have the Clowns clearly identify some demonstration to verify their fanciful claims, else STFU already.
In the meantime, Nicola Sturgeon has flown to Calfornia to do her bit for the planet.
“Nicola Sturgeon has signed an agreement with the Government of California pledging to work together on climate change. The First Minister and the Governor of California Edmund G Brown made the pledge in a document signed in Sacramento, US, on Monday.
The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) defines how the two administrations can work together and create a model for other governments to follow.
The leaders also discussed the importance of offshore wind in tackling climate change and considered how they could share knowledge and best practice in developing this technology.
The Scottish Government signalled its continued commitment to the agreement Under2 MoU, which makes commitments towards reducing emissions.
It also promised to press ahead with plans to deliver domestic measures to reduce carbon emissions and provide leadership and example in the spirit of the MoU and the historic Paris Agreement.
Ms Sturgeon said: “Scotland is making huge progress in delivering our climate change ambitions, but we are not complacent and there is still much to achieve.”
She should be careful of the second hand smoke in California, it can give rise to delusions of grandeur.
Like I said, Scotland is now twinned with California as regards climate change bovine excrement and the state sponsored beheading of birds of prey.
It is very funny, but draws on a rich pool of untapped material. It shows hows detached the planners are from the real world. For instance
– The problems are largely illusory. The alleged reduction in deaths appear to be without foundation in the real world.
– The benefits in terms of US emissions reductions are based on the total estimated difference in between a point in the past and a point in the future. The marginal difference that policy proposals will make, if implemented in full, is much smaller, especially when shale gas and other factors are reducing emissions anyway.
– You have to look to the small print to find the global impact of the plan.
– The estimated policy costs are huge, by far smaller than the likely impact. Conversely the likely impact on US emissions is likely to be smaller than the real marginal difference of the planned policy proposals.
– The planners forget that some of the emissions reductions will be replaced by increased emissions elsewhere. That is, by driving up energy costs, manufacturing will be driven overseas where emissions per unit of output is often higher.
– A major reason to push for the Clean Air Plan was to “Lead the World on Climate Change”. Yet the proponents think that mere proclamations of intent are sufficient for others to follow. In developing countries, the politicians will not follow. They will nod, smile, and congratulate the policy fools. Back home they have the photographs to show they are players at the top table of global politics. At home, they will know the policies of the US and the EU are giving them a competitive advantage.
It is interesting to hear Senator Bernie Sanders saying
So what does Sanders believe? This is a statement he made to Scott Pruitt at a Senate hearing in January.
It seems that Bernie Sanders bases his beliefs on a clear misinterpretations of Cook et al 2013. I went to a presentation that John Cook gave on the paper at Bristol in October 2014. In the Q&A John Cook admitted to two things. First, the paper only dealt with declared belief in the broadest, most banal, form of the global warming hypothesis. That is greenhouse gas levels are increasing and there is some warming as a consequence. Second is that the included papers that were outside the realm of climate science, and quite possibly written by people without a science degree. But in the presentation Cook showed a tweet from Barak Obama’s twitter account promoting the misinterpretation that Sanders has embellished. Sanders has willing fallen into the trap of believing the deliberate misinformation, orchestrated by a Professor of Cognitive Psychology and Cook’s then PhD supervisor.