The EPA apparently doesn’t care about any negative comment of their GHG Endangerment findings, even internally, so the exercise in Democracy we did yesterday apparently was for naught.

“The time for such discussion of fundamental issues has passed for this round. The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision… I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office.” – Internal EPA email, March 17th, 2009

The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has caught EPA administration red-handed in concealment of internal dissent as well as apparently proceeding with plans in advance. From this PDF circulated today by CEI, here are the points:

EI is submitting a set of four EPA emails, dated March 12-17, 2009, which indicate that a significant internal critique of EPA’s position on Endangerment was essentially put under wraps and concealed. The study was barred from being circulated within EPA, it was never disclosed to the public, and it was not placed in the docket of this proceeding. The emails further show that the study was treated in this manner not because of any problem with its quality, but for political reasons. CEI hereby requests that EPA make this study public, place it into the docket, and either extend or reopen the comment period to allow public response to this new study. We also request that EPA publicly declare that it will engage in no reprisals against the author of the study, who has worked at EPA for over 35 years. The emails, attached hereto, consist of the following: 1) a March 12 email from Al McGartland, Office Director of EPA’s National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE), to Alan Carlin, Senior Operations Research Analyst at NCEE, forbidding him from speaking to anyone outside NCEE on endangerment issues; 2) a March 16 email from Mr. Carlin to another NCEE economist, with a cc to Mr. McGartland and two other NCEE staffers, requesting that his study be forwarded to EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, which directs EPA’s climate change program. The email notes the quantity of peer-reviewed references in the study, and defends its inclusion of new research as well. It states Mr. Carlin’s view that “the critical attribute of good science is its correspondence to observable data rather than where it appears in
the technical literature.” It goes on to point out that the new studies “explain much of the observational data that have been collected which cannot be explained by the IPCC models.” (Emphases added); 3) a March 17 email from Mr. McGartland to Mr. Carlin, stating that he will not forward Mr. Carlin’s study. “The time for such discussion of fundamental issues has passed for this round. The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision… I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office.” (Emphasis added); 4) a second March 17 email from Mr. McGartland to Mr. Carlin, dated eight minutes later, stating “ I don’t want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change.” Mr. McGartland’s emails demonstrate that he was rejecting Mr. Carlin’s study because its conclusions ran counter to EPA’s proposed position. This raises several major issues. A. Incompleteness of the Rulemaking Record: The end result of withholding Mr. Carlin’s study was to taint the Endangerment Proceeding by denying the public access to important agency information. Court rulings have made it abundantly clear that a rulemaking record should include both “the evidence relied upon [by the agency] and the evidence discarded.” Ethyl Corp. v. EPA, 541 F.2d 1, 36 (D.C. Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 941 (1976). B. Prejudgment of the Outcome of the Endangerment Proceeding: The emails also suggest that EPA has prejudged the outcome of this proceeding, to the point where it arguably cannot be trusted to fairly evaluate the record before it. Courts have recognized “the danger that an agency, having reached a particular result, may become so committed to that result as to resist engaging in any genuine reconsideration of the issues.” Food Marketing Institute v. ICC, 587 F.2d 1285, 1290 (D.C. Cir. 1978). C. Violations of EPA’s Commitment to Transparency and Scientific Honesty: Finally, the emails suggest that EPA’s extensive pronouncements about transparency and scientific honesty may just be rhetoric. Shortly before assuming office, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson declared: “As Administrator, I will ensure EPA’s efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and programs, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency.” Jan. 23, 2009, link. See also Administrator Jackson’s April 23 Memo to EPA Employees, “Transparency in EPA’s Operations”. These follow the President’s own January 21 memo to agency heads on “Transparency and Open Government”. And in an April 27 speech to the National Academy of Sciences, the President declared that, “under my administration, the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over.” Because of ideology, however, it was this back seat to which Mr. Carlin’s study was relegated; more precisely, it was booted out of the car entirely. For these reasons, we submit that EPA should immediately make Mr. Carlin’s study public by entering it into the Endangerment docket, and that it should either extend or reopen the comment period in this proceeding to allow public responses to that study. It should do so, moreover, while publicly pledging that Mr. Carlin will suffer no adverse repercussions from agency personnel. Mr. Carlin is guilty of no wrongdoing, but the tenor of the emails described above suggests he may well have reason to fear reprisals.

Read the EPA internal emails, including photographs of the originals here. Call your congressional representative. This is legally wrong and makes a mockery of the public comment process. Tell them here: 202-224-3121.Source

By SBVOR

Click here for the article in our local paper alleging that the Yampa Valley Sustainability Council has described itself as “the green police”. That scary title is probably prophetic.

You see, these are members of the single most dangerous religious cult ever known to mankind. And, as we well know, these cult members never limit their “green police” activities to encouraging voluntary compliance with their religious creed.

After the Green cult got DDT banned, tens of millions of Africans died needlessly from Malaria as a direct result and there was essentially zero benefit to the environment. With that one example alone, one could argue that this Green cult is far more evil than The Third Reich.

The following quote (from the first link) is instructive:

“Especially as we’re introducing that zero impact initiative, it’s a great reminder to be friendly to the environment”

That quote is telling because the Green religion is all about the fantasy of homo sapiens having zero impact on the planet and its ecology. But, all living things always have an impact on the planet and its ecology. In fact, all inanimate things always have an impact on the planet and its ecology. The planet and its ecology are always evolving and always changing.

The Green cultists would like to see all eco-systems restored to — as they imagine it — some Garden of Eden perfect moment prior to the arrival of homo sapiens. They would then like to freeze that moment in time for all of eternity. They are pursuing an utterly unachievable pipedream. You see, change is the only constant in the entire (ever changing) universe.

About 2.4 billion years ago, this planet experienced something often described as the “Oxygen Catastrophe” (aka “The Great Oxidation”). This so-called “catastrophe” was created when “evolving lifeforms [sic] developed oxyphotosynthesis”. That new oxygen producing capability initially produced limited quantities of oxygen. But with time “this oxygen accumulated and eventually caused an ecological crisis to the biodiversity of the time, as oxygen was toxic to the microscopic anaerobic organisms dominant then.”.

Oxygen — previously a mere trace element — now makes up about 21% of our atmosphere (and, CO2 accounts for less than 0.04%). I suppose we are fortunate in that those organisms which caused such “catastrophic” changes to our atmosphere did not possess the “intelligence” (or lack thereof) to create a movement hell bent on eliminating their impact on the environment.

The current concentration of CO2 is near an all time record low for the last 600 million years. Present CO2 concentrations have been accurately described as a CO2 famine. The public is coming to understand that man made CO2 does not represent any credible threat of creating any meaningful — much less catastrophic — climate change. And, that is precisely why the so-called “Green” cultists are turning their attention to Methane.

Of course, science will probably determine that man made Methane hysteria is also unwarranted. But, only after riding another $50 billion gravy train (or more) to that station. At that point, the so-called “Green” cultists will — no doubt — identify some new boogie man to scare everybody with.

Isn’t it ironic that the very people who voted for “Change” are the same people who — with a religious fanaticism — fear any and all environmental change (even beneficial change) as though it were the devil itself?

Source

From Piers Corbyn, astrophysicist of WeatherAction.com long range weather and climate forecasters

“Unless the climate circus is stopped we will see another round of hand-wringing in 5 years time against ‘irresponsible risk taking’ in the promotion of the green bubble of false value which has already burst in Spain in 2008” warned Piers

“World cooling is hear to stay and the new round of climate alarmism just announced by UK Government ministers and the Met Office of more extreme weather and warming in coming decades driven by mankind has no merit and is defied by the facts and front-line science”, said Piers as his forecast from three weeks ahead was confirmed for the formation of the first East Pacific typhoon of the season* off Mexico (*details see WA36a at end of this news release)

The Climate forecast breakthrough and Climate Change will be discussed further at the WeatherAction’s monthly Press Conference Friday 26 June 12 Noon at WeatherAction Office

“Ministers have been saying a lot about accountability recently so now let’s apply that to climate change policy and scrutinize what they are up to in the light of the facts and the application of sound science.

“Will Minister Benn – and his opposite numbers in other parties – place before Parliament the evidence on which they base their climate change policies? Or are we to be led into more climate alarm taxes and charges’ and a new war against nothing based on bogus compter models? “

“Climate alarmism is not based on sound science but on a political agenda which has become a new religion to justify any policy or scheme which politicians and self-serving green ideologues, deluded researchers, businesses, oil magnates and the nuclear industry want to adopt. All their long-range models have failed so far so why should anyone believe them? On the other hand our solar based long range weather and climate forecasts have proven power, so why dont politicians listen?”

“Gordon Brown is holding a very welcome inquiry into the war on Iraq. This is excellent but it would have been better for the world to have had the facts rather than a war in the name of bogus ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’.

“We need an independent public inquiry now into climate alarmism and conflicts of interest involving funding bodies which must be based on testable science; or” – he asked – “Will we have to wait for an enquiry when its too late where we in 5 years time will belatedly ask politicians:

– Why did so many children starve to death from food and fuel price rises caused by biofuels and costly energy projects?

– Why was the development of Africa held back in the name of green ideology?

– Why did they repeatedly fail to act on extreme weather event warnings which killed thousands but were ignored because the science used in those forecasts didn’t accord with the new green religion?

– Why did the UK Government continue to rely on failed forecasting systems which cost the UK economy £3billion in the winter of 2008/9 when road salt ran out because the Met Office had forecasted a mild winter.

The facts are:

1. Contrary to the projections of the UN and Governments the world has been cooling since 2002/3 while CO2 has been rising rapidly.

(see http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=2331 and WeatherAction end year report 2008 http://www.lowefo.com/pdf/News081229Word.pdf )

2. Global warming is over and it never was anything to do with mankind. There is no evidence that CO2 fluctuations in the last 200, 2,000 or 20,000 years have caused warming or climate change, in fact the evidence is the other way around.

( See Challenge to IME http://www.lowefo.com/pdf/MIE090213_Where_Evidence.pdf )

3. There is no evidence of more extreme weather events or increases in the rate of sea level rise or changes in glaciers corresponding to CO2 increases since the industrial revolution.

( See Effects of CO2 Nicholson & Soon http://www.heartland.org/custom/semod_policybot/pdf/22434.pdf )

4. All changes in the Arctic and Antarctic follow natural and highly variable patterns which are not new or special and have been recorded for over a thousand years and have been very well known to the British navy** for a long time and available in the Met Office library The Antarctic has been cooling for decades and the Arctic has started to cool in the last year or two. Break-up of ice is a natural process – like the falling down of old trees – and has been happening for millions of years before news media noticed it.

(**HMSO 1963 Weather In the Home Fleet waters Vol 1 Northern Seas part 1 table XV page 246 shows the very high variability of ice off Iceland (eg) since 1900 and the long periods of change of two decades or more. Figures 124 & 125 (page 256) show that historical records indicate there was no pack ice off Iceland for about 180 years from 1020AD to 1200AD yet there was plenty of pack ice through the rapid expansion of industry since 1900 (Fig 126 page 257). This 120 year late medieval warm period is many times longer than the supposedly alarming present experience of the Arctic.

5. All the UN & Govt forecasts of ongoing warming this century have failed and the UN has still refused to produce evidence of their claims despite reasonable requests by an international group of science experts.

( See Letter to UN Sec General 14 July 2008 http://www.tech-know.eu/uploads/Letter_UN_Sec_Gen_Ban_Ki-moon.pdf )

6. Extreme weather and climate change events can be predicted months or years ahead using solar activity whereas standard meteorology and CO2 dogma cannot do this.

(PowerPoint & Audio of Piers Corbyn’s & Other Presentations at International Climate Change Conference New York 8-10 March 2009 www.heartland.org/events/NewYork09/proceedings.html – section V track 1 see slide 28 for world Temperature forecast to 2030. Scroll for speeches by Prof Bob Carter, Prof Richard Lindzen, Lord Monckton and others)

A Layman’s Explanation of Why Global Warming Predictions by Climate Models are Wrong by Dr Roy Spencer – http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3513

7. The Met office long range forecasts for summer 2007, summer 2008 and winter 2008/09 were the opposite of what occurred while solar-based (Solar Weather Technique) forecasts correctly foresaw the floods, more floods and heavy snow in each of those seasons.

( Met Office barbecue summer forecast seriously misleading: http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=31&c=1 )

“Met office season ahead forecasts have consistently failed as they are failing again this summer. For how long will the public have to wait before this circus is called to account. Will the BBC do its duty and expose failed science or will they continue their cover-up?” asked Piers

See World cooling has set-in warns astrophysicist – BBC & ‘Global Warming apologists’ challenged to end ‘cover-up’

(http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3307&linkbox=true

“The climate alarm modelers live by hype and government hand-outs and use weasel words to explain away their failures while in fact they know not what they are doing. The current deluge of climate fantasy serves to convince the public to worry about things which will never happen. They say they are using the best forecast systems they have but let us be clear the best of failures have little merit. Frankly the best computer models they use are just more rubbish in to get more rubbish out.

“Why will they not engage in real forecast competitions with the new meteorology of Solar based forecasting and let funding go to the proven best forecasting system? Standard meteorology has reached its limits and no amount of increase in computer power can advance it or make it applicable beyond a few days ahead. Just as a bicycle is superb for short range travel it is no use for a trip to the Moon. Why do global warming alarmists refuse public debate on the issue? “

Our WeatherAction climate forecasts based on a new advances in the Solar Weather Technique which includes lunar effects predict the present world cooling will continue in general terms at least to 2030 and that the world is very likely to remain significantly colder than its recent peak (of around 2002/3) for more than 100 years”

said Piers Corbyn (Pic at Climate Realist – Heartland – conference March 2009 http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=2984 )

By The Daily Bayonet

Find out what the left’s new segregation is all about, and why the future crimes department of corrections might want to lock you up for harboring naughty global warming thoughts. Still dare to be skeptical? Step right on up, it’s linkage you can believe in, with 10% added snark. But wait, read it now and I’ll include the global hottie for FREE. Part One: Al Gore & Friends Profiteer prophet Al Gore, blessed eco-blogger, is taking his talking points from newspaper ads. Only died-in-the-wool green zealots or hopeless lefties could fail to see the irony of demanding cap and bend-over laws while making this argument:

“But when it comes to preparing our country to compete in the clean energy economy, the U.S. is losing and we lag far behind our global competitors. Even as our inventors create new technologies, we often lose them to overseas markets that have supportive government policies and incentives.”

Wasn’t BJ Clinton, Al’s ex-boss, that coined the phrase “It’s the Economy, Stupid” ? He might have a couple of employees languishing in a NorK prison, but that can’t stop Al from moving Current TV into Canada. Gore supporters take note, you too may be under bussed and forgotten this quickly. Repower America has a new commercial in which a grizzled old farmhand tells us to ‘get real’. See, farmers can talk hippie too. Big Tom call the funding for the ads ‘mysterious’. He ain’t kidding.

hey Mr. Ed, why the long face?

The patron saint of global warming will not be celebrated with a statue in Tennessee after all. Good decision, since one of the two founded the infinitely corrupt United Nations and the other is Al Gore, it was only a matter of time before the effigies were given the full Saddam anyhow. Newsbusters asks whether the weather will crack Al’s credibility, to which I snort and ask ‘what credibility?’ The Goreacle has 1 million acolytes on Twitter. I’m not the sharpest hammer in the toolbag, but a million sounds like a lot. Al was moved so deeply by reaching the milestone that he blessed the masses with this statement: “Wow”. People swooned. Really. Meanwhile, Al has found time in his busy schedule to follow 8 people. Seven of them he has direct ownership in, and the eighth, some Obama fella, could be described as a wholly-owned subsidiary (see Part Two). Meanwhile, let’s check in with Canada’s own lovable raving moonbat hippie communist, David ‘jail ‘em’ Suzuki. DS had a busy week. First he persuaded a food store to stop selling unsustainable fish, then he pondered what to do with GM now that ‘we’ own it. Let’s peek into the hippie mind and see what’s going on in there:

…even private automobiles may eventually be a thing of the past; the idea of using of a tonne of metal and many litres of fossil fuel to get one person to the grocery store or work is more than a bit absurd.

Bingo! That’s the kind of thinking that will save GM!

I don’t know what ‘onfoods’ are, but save them anyway

Doc Suzuki was given a great honor this week when construction started on Canada’s First Eco-Indoctrination Camp for moppets. It’s being named after him, the eco-totalitarian in chief. It brings a tear to the eye. Sniff. Part Two: AGW Scaremongers The UK Met Office dropped any pretense at scientific impartiality and offered local forecasts for flood, fire and pestilence created by global warming. But they still can’t tell you what the weekend will be like.
Click on over to the DB to read the rest!

By Ann McElhinney & Phelim McAleerNowadays blacklists are a silent way of trying to destroy people and their careers. And that suits those doing the blacklisting particularly if they call themselves liberal and claim to care about censorship and human rights. But some liberals forget to keep quiet and make public what is really going on. Richard Lindzen is an MIT physicist whose scientific investigations make him sceptical about Global Warming. But his significant scientific pedigree does not matter to those less qualified who believe otherwise. He recently told the GreenHellBlog that after a house fire he approached a Boston art appraiser to value an antique rug. Professor Lindzen received the following response by email: “I am sorry to inform you that after some consideration, I’ve decided not to perform the appraisal service that you’ve requested. Your writing on the subject of global warming is offensive to me personally, and I feel that I would have difficulty being an impartial appraiser of value given my view on the subject.” We smiled when the email was revealed and thought that Professor Lindzen and Boston could do with a new art appraiser. However it was amusing only until we asked a number of US companies to work for us. We needed companies to make DVDs and provide translated subtitles for our new documentary Not Evil Just Wrong. Just like Professor Lindzen it challenges liberal orthodoxy – taking a critical look at environmentalism and Global Warming hysteria. And just like Professor Lindzen we felt the chill hand of discrimination. One of the companies, in the midst of the biggest recessions in living memory, said “our order was too big” and declined to bid for the contract. However, the Atlanta based International Services translation company really gave the game away when in an email they explained why they were refusing to provide us with their services. CEO Sue Ellen Reager stated: “I have researched your film on the web, and do not see scientific reviews or major press reviews in support (may be too early), and needed that support to assure cooperation from our translators. Because we translate with highly educated people around the world, located in countries like Germany and France, who take Global Warming very seriously, I am fairly sure that several countries will refuse to participate in this project.” In a follow up telephone conversation Ms Reager explained to “you guys in Europe” how the system really worked. Ms Reager and her company have “worked in Hollywood for years” she explained. Their client list includes CNN, Turner Broadcasting, Google and Microsoft. At first she blamed her European translators. “Your content looks like it is refuting many assertions made by Al Gore and Europe is pro Al Gore… and I am pretty sure they will refuse to participate…we deal with really classy people in Germany and anything attacking Al Gore they will refuse.” Speaking on the phone Ms Reager said that in the email she was “just being nice” to us because we were Europeans and that she was worried that the film might be like some of the “Republican shit” that gets released in the US. The real problem is with those pesky Republicans in the US who insist on making films that she and Hollywood don’t agree with. “I didn’t know whether your documentary is fact based or part of the rubbish that Republicans make. You wouldn’t believe the crap they put out. It is unbelievable shit, incredible lies,” she said. Many Republicans put out films that are just “faith based imaginings,” she added. We are European but isn’t Altlanta the home of one of your famous civil rights leaders who in a “faith based imagining” dreamed that people one day would be judged by the content of their character and nothing else. This dream does not seem to have reached Hollywood – just yet. It is a one party town where character, hard work and talent count for nothing. No dissent form the leftist orthodoxy seems to be tolerated and those who disagree experience quiet discrimination that slowly strangles their ability to work in the industry.

By Alan Schram, The Huffington Post
Energy prices have been going higher again. With the price of crude oil closing Friday at $72 a barrel, roughly double its level in January, talk of energy independence is again prevalent. But energy independence is not a desirable goal for the country (and it may not be doable, either). Lower energy prices raise real wages for all Americans. Paying more for energy in order to get it from wind or solar sources lowers productivity and destroys wealth, and will actually be adversarial for long term economic growth. When you buy any product or service, both sides benefit or they would not engage in the transaction. If Wellcap Partners is forced to pay a higher price for a product or service it needs, the firm is not better off for it. In the same vein, if instead of buying the energy you need at a price that’s acceptable to you, you must turn to a more expensive energy source in the name of achieving “independence”, it will be to your detriment. Closing America to trade of any kind has always been a bad idea. And it should be intuitive: the U.S. economy depends on openness, and the consequences of that openness have a large role in creating jobs and reducing prices for all consumers across the board. After all, in a global economy, we don’t try to grow our own vegetables, and we don’t insist on buying shoes made in the US. Why would energy be any different? One argument for independence holds that we should pay more for energy in order to diminish our reliance on the Middle East and its treacherous ways. While that sounds nice in theory, we must remember that we do business with the Middle East in the open market. Voluntary exchanges are not zero sum, rather they are positive sum. This is an important lesson in economics. That’s the advantage of capitalism: it allows both sides to prosper while pursuing their self interest. So cutting off our current energy suppliers comes at a high price and does not coalesce with our economic best interests.

The other argument for energy independence, the ecological desire to “save the planet”, is equally dubious. Someone has to take the unpopular stand and say it: We had record cold temperatures in many American cities last winter, and many well-respected scientists doubt the thesis behind global warming. Even if global warming is happening, there is no clear evidence mankind is the cause. And even if mankind was causing the globe’s temperatures to rise, it isn’t clear that would be calamitous for us and what’s more, the solutions offered by the proponents of global warming may be worse than the problem itself. Take cap and trade for example. In the midst of a deep recession, cap and trade would substantially raise the cost of energy and shut down U.S. factories, shipping jobs to China. The only beneficiaries will be government bureaucrats who, in running the oversight and enforcement of the new environmental rules, will see their power soar and authority expand at the expense of ordinary Americans. Lyndon Johnson once said “being president is like being a jackass in a hailstorm. There’s nothing to do but stand there and take it.” Sometimes a President has to internalize that lesson. Source

By Christian Kerr, The Australian

ANTARCTIC ice shelves are showing no sign of climate change, six years of unique research have shown.

Scientists from Western Australia’s Curtin University of Technology are using acoustic sensors developed to support the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty to listen for the sound of icebergs breaking away from the giant ice sheets of the south pole.

“More than six years of observation has not revealed any significant climatic trends,” CUT associate professor Alexander Gavrilov said yesterday.

Professor Gavrilov and PhD student Binghui Li are investigating whether it is possible to detect and monitor significant changes in the disintegration rate of the Antarctic ice shelf by monitoring the noise of ice breaking.

The pair are using two acoustic stations, one 150km off Cape Leeuwin, the southwest tip of WA, and another off the gigantic US military base on Diego Garcia in the Chagos Archipelago, in the Indian Ocean.

“They are part of a network of underwater acoustic receivers, or hydrophones,” Dr Gavrilov told The Australian yesterday.

The stations have been used to locate nuclear explosions detonated by India.

More than 100 signals from Antarctica are detected weekly by the Cape Leeuwin station. They are then transmitted to Geoscience Australia in Canberra.

“Six years of results is not long in the scheme of things, so we will keep watching,” Dr Gavrilov said.

The pair will present their research at a conference in Europe later this month.

Source

The Obama administration is poised for its most forceful confrontation with the American public on the sweeping and life-altering consequences of a failure to act on global warming with the release today of a long-awaited scientific report on climate change.The report, produced by more than 30 scientists at 13 government agencies [DING!] dealing with climate change, provides the most detailed picture to date of the worst case scenarios of rising sea levels and extreme weather events: floods in lower Manhattan; a quadrupling of heat waves deaths in Chicago; withering on the vineyards of California; the disappearance of wildflowers from the slopes of the Rockies; and the extinction of Alaska’s wild polar bears in the next 75 years.As part of the PR surrounding the release of the report, the administration approached the San Francisco consulting firm, Resource Media, which specialises in environmental campaigning, to oversee the release, and produce a shorter and more digestible brochure of today’s report for wider public distribution. Source

[DING DING!!]
WHAT A LOAD OF BULL. With global temperatures falling for over ten years, extreme weather events decreasing, and polar bear populations over 500% higher than 40 years ago, and with a huge scientific backlash against the climate change myth, we urge all Americans to stand up against this blatantly false campaign and tell the Obama administration to throw their marketing campaign for new “climate taxes” in the trash where it belongs! Clearly the administration is getting desperate since those who still believe in man-made global warming are now in the minority and Obama must be getting worried his carbon tax plans won’t get passed!