Poland filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging the European Union’s (EU) plans to price carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
Poland’s environmental ministry argued the EU’s CO2 pricing scheme is not binding because it did not have the full backing of the bloc’s 28 member nations. Nine other nations also opposed the deal.
A member of the EU, Poland has been locked in an escalating series of legal challenges over Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). ETS is a major pillar of the EU’s efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, ostensibly to fight global warming. Europe wants to restructure its current CO2 pricing system to reduce emissions, but Poland fears the changes would be a heavy burden for the country’s industrial plants and coal-fired power stations. Poland thinks that its coal power stations are critical to the country’s energy and national security as well.
Poland threatened to sue the EU last month over ETS, according to documents seen by Reuters.
Law & Justice generally opposes wind and solar energy and favors an energy policy that emphasizes tariffs targeted at Russian natural gas. It has even advocated for a moratorium on the construction of new wind power turbines and supports dismantling of any wind plant within three kilometers of a residential area.
Environmental groups like Greenpeace have repeatedly criticized Law & Justice party’s energy policy ideas, claiming that the country’s CO2 emission reductions are insufficiently ambitious.
Climate “Science” on Trial; How Does Ice Melt In Sub-Zero Temperatures?
One of my biggest complaints about how the climate change battle for the truth is being fought is that the real scientists, the climate realists don’t seem to understand, or are unwilling to accept that this isn’t a scientific argument, this is a political campaign. The climate alarmists have virtually unlimited government funded resources to draw upon, the real scientists, the climate realists, the people actually seeking the truth have virtually none.
The government literally has a monopoly on the hiring of climate scientists and funding climate research. Only government or government funded entities collect and “adjust” the temperature data. The IPCC is the “Inter-GOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change.”
Anyone that decides to disagree with the “consensus,” can have serious consequences. The government didn’t hire these climate “scientists” to help define and understand the climate, they were hired to vilify CO2. Why? Because that is where the money is. Now that the tobacco settlement money is running out, the parasitic organizations that depend upon government funding and regulations need another source of revenues. It is that simple, the NGO hunter gathers (trial lawyers, watermelon environmental groups, anti-capitalists, and socialists) need to be fed.
Because this isn’t a real scientific debate, the old rules don’t apply. The scientific method doesn’t apply. Getting to the “truth” isn’t the goal of this “scientific” debate, getting income redistributed to your cause is the goal. The “truth” has absolutely nothing to do with it. The real climate battle isn’t being fought in our labs, free universities, debate/science clubs/organizations, the real battle is being fought in congress, elections and the courts, none of which require a model with a high R-Squared to win the debate.
Climate “science” is so far removed from real science that the entire “science” is based upon a series of untestable hypotheses, and relies on computer models instead of experimentation. Because this isn’t a real science, climate “scientists” are free to make endless nonsensical claims like coming ice age/global warming/climate change can cause more/less snow. more/less rain, more/less draught, and the list goes on and on and on, all based up taxpayer-funded research.
Because the poorly funded real scientists don’t have a chance at fighting against the well-funded climate alarmists, they must change their tactics. As it is right now, climate alarmist will make a nonsensical claim and the few real scientists and “denier” blogs will immediately run out to disprove the claim. Bill Nye and others climate alarmists can make an infinite number of nonsensical claims, the real scientists simply don’t have the resources to refute an endless number of intentionally distracting nonsensical claims. Even if they could, real scientists will never have the microphone the government funded climate alarmists do.
In this linked video Dr. Judith Curry refutes the countless false statements made by the then POTUS Barrack Obama. How many saw the stream of dis/misinformation spewed by POTUS Barrack Obama? Billions. How many people saw this video on the NBC/CBS/ABC Nightly News? Answer? 0.00. How many Youtube Views? 11,115. While I greatly admire the work of Dr. Curry and others, their approach of trying to answer every bit of disinformation/misinformation/deception/distortion/fake news/fake science/pseudo-science/junk science is simply ineffectual. The people fighting in this war for the climate change truth must adjust their tactics and POTUS Trump is giving us a great case study.
The tactics used by the climate alarmists are simply tried and true political tactics embraced by the political left. They are all well documented in books like “Das Kapital,” “Rules for Radicals,” and white-papers like “The Politics of Evasion,” “The Weight of the Poor,” and articles like “Democrats Forever Changed.” The symbol for the Fabian Socialist Society is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The strength of the Democratic Party is its ability or organize people, for good or ill, that is what they do. The scientific truth is meaningless to them, the political ends are all that matter.
The politicization or science isn’t an ill to be fought, it is the desired outcome. Even this much-vaunted “consensus” is a giant ruse. The scientific consensus is that the earned income tax credit is far superior to a minimum wage, the scientific consensus is that competition and school choice is far superior to a government-run educational monopoly, the scientific consensus is that life is a continuum and at no time does a fetus/baby cease to be alive, the scientific consensus is that there are countless differences between the races and sexes and that we are not all equal, in fact, we are all quite unequal in many ways. Democrats will only appeal to “consensus” when it favors their position. It is nothing but a political tool, nothing more.
POTUS Trump approaches the Russian issue in much the same way real scientists should address the climate change issue, simply assume everything being published by the climate alarmists is a lie. If in fact, climate change is the greatest scientific fraud in history, everything supporting it must be a lie. Once one accepts that, the way to fight the battle becomes much easier. Real scientists actually have the much easier task as this quote from Albert Einstein highlights:
No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.
Real scientists only need to find that one example that resonates with the public to win the battle. And as this quote from Albert Einstein highlights, not even the “consensus” can save one from defeat. Eventually, the truth will win out.
Einstein was shown a German newspaper that claimed “One hundred German physicists claim Einsteins theory of relativity is wrong.” Einsteins reply was, “If I were wrong, it would only take one.”
POTUS Trump’s response to the Russian charges is a great case study for real scientists addressing the political climate change issue. The Russians didn’t “hack” Hillary Clinton’s server, it was discovered during an FBI investigation into Anthony Weiner. The Russians didn’t “hack” John Podesta’s email password, he accidentally gave it to the hackers through phishing malware. Wikileaks’ founder denies the hacks were from the Russians.
POTUS Trump knows his involvement with the Russians, POTUS Trump alone knows the real truth, so he is in the unique position to know what is “fake news” and what is the actual truth. By knowing the real truth, he has a much easier way exposing the lies, because if he had no nefarious contacts with the Russians, everything that claims otherwise must be a lie/disinformation/misinformation/fake news/propaganda. He simply accepts the fact that they are lies and responds accordingly by putting his accusers on the defense. When Democrats attack him for meeting with the Russians, he publishes pictures of his attackers meeting with the Russians, when his attackers make false claims about him meeting the Russians he fires back with claims that Trump Tower was bugged.
Trump wants congressional probe of evidence-free claims about Obama
POTUS Trump doesn’t give his attackers the benefit of the doubt and tries to address every one of their manufactured claims as if they are sincere, he assumes they are disingenuous and politically motivated and responds accordingly. If there is no penalty for leveling unfounded baseless claims supported by nothing but a paranoid delusion or evil intent to unethically undermine an opponent, why not fight fire with fire? If this is the bed Democrats want, make them sleep in it. For every unfounded, unsourced, unsupported claim the Democrats make, POTUS Trump should simply respond with two of his own.
‘THIS IS WATERGATE’
Barack Obama denies ‘ever ordering surveillance on any US citizen’ following bombshell accusations he tapped Donald Trump’s phone during US presidential election
Real scientists fighting for the climate change truth can learn a lot from POTUS Trump. The real scientists fighting in this climate change war for the truth simply have to accept that this is politics, not science and that by trying to refute every single lie manufactured by the climate alarmists simply strengthens their position. The general public will never read the scientific research needed to win the scientific arguments, what matters is putting pressure on those that get elected and pass the laws. When POTUS Obama accuses POTUS Trump of colluding with the Russians, POTUS Trump accuses POTUS Obama of wiretapping the Trump Tower. POTUS Trump takes the offense, and make it real clear that there are serious consequences for lying and spreading misinformation/disinformation. Unlike the climate alarmists, POTUS Obama has learned that disingenuous actions have consequences. The climate scientists fighting in this war for climate change truth simply need to take the offense and put the climate alarmists on defense for a change.
The real scientists need to focus their very very very limited resources on the issues that have the biggest bang for the buck, the greatest energy density, the issues that will most resonate with the public.
Case Study: Here is an article claiming that 20 New Papers Affirm Modern Climate Is In Phase With Natural Variability. None of those papers will ever be read by a large number of people. None of those papers will ever be featured on the major networks. None of those papers will ever be mentioned in an IPCC Report. None, nada, zip. They are all fine scientific works, but will ultimately have zero impact on the climate change war. Once again, this a propaganda war, a battle for the hearts and minds of the public, the real science doesn’t mean diddly squat. Because of the highly technical nature of the “science” every arguing the truth in a congressional testimony doesn’t do much good. The topic is much too easily confused, and every claim is met with a disingenuous answer or counterclaim, and the opposition can alway appeal to the “consensus.” The problem is, most decision makers aren’t real scientists, some are high school dropouts and felons/ex-felons, and they wouldn’t know the scientific truth if it punched them in the face, and many if not all don’t want the truth, they want the votes.
This video highlights what happened when a scientifically illiterate politician skilled in the arts of deceit and deception went up against honest truth seeking real scientists. The truth doesn’t always win. The real scientists are forced to explain a Ph.D level education to people that are being paid not to understand the truth, and who will be politically punished by it.
For every scientific “fact” named by the real scientists, bully Senator Markey could easily counter with his set of “facts” and the people on his side get to make the “adjustments” to the facts. The real scientists were immediately put on the defensive trying to counter an endless stream of falsehood, all supported by the “consensus.”It simply isn’t a level playing field, the opposition gets to hire and pay the referees, run the scoreboard, write and edit the rule book real time, and determine what parts of the game the public gets to watch.
Now imagine if instead of being put on the defensive, the real scientists took the offense? Imagine if the bully Senator Markey had been asked this simple question: “how does ice melt in sub-zero temperatures? Anyone above the age of 6 knows ice doesn’t melt in sub-zero temperatures.
The bully Senator Markey would have either had to answer honestly, or be exposed as a climate alarmist fraud. The real scientists could have simply used the data used by the climate alarmists against them. One of the greatest symbols used by the climate alarmists is that the arctic sea ice is disappearing, presumably due to “melting. The problem is, rarely does the arctic ever have temperatures above freezing. This loss of sea ice is occurring in sub-zero temperatures.
The arctic ice follows a pattern of peaking in May and bottoming in August. It loses ice between May and August, and gains ice between August and May. The problem is, most of the time the Arctic is losing ice, the temperatures are sub-zero. Only between mid-late June and mid-late August, about 100 days, are the atmospheric temperatures warm enough to melt ice. Most of the year, the Arctic is gaining ice. The reason the Arctic is losing ice is due to warm water bringing the heat into the Arctic, and wind patterns blowing/moving the ice to warmer oceans.
Warmer Arctic Ocean temperatures delay sea ice formation
‘We are headed to a world in which we are going to have no sea ice in summer,’ says scientist
“The air seems to be cold, but the sea water must be warmer temperature,” he said.
“It’s causing it to delay the forming of the ice.”
CO2 doesn’t warm the oceans or determine the Arctic wind patterns. The other problem is that 90% of the Arctic sea ice is below the surface of the oceans, totally removed from the atmospheric warmth. Place a well-insulated thermos filled with ice and water in the freezer and then move it to the refrigerator and measure how long it will take for the ice to melt. I would love to have seen bully Senator Markey explain why the natural laws of physics cease to exist in the Arctic, and that CO2 and IR between 13 and 18 microns can warm water, and ice can melt below its freezing point.
A similar approach can be applied to the Mt. Kilimanjaro Glacier. The documentary “The Changing Climate of Global Warming” documented this tactic in action. The climate alarmists claim that the Mt. Kilimanjaro Glacier is “melting” due to global warming, or at least it is implied that CO2 is causing the glacier to disappear. The problem is, the Mt. Kilimanjaro Glacier is at 19,340 ft above sea level, and it NEVER gets above freezing. Imagined if bully Senator Markey would have been forced to explain this one.
From the video, even Al Gore’s friend, the climate “science” legend Dr. Lonnie Thompson, runs and hides from answering that question. The facts are, the climate alarming win when the real scientists allow themselves to be put on the defensive, they will win if they take the offense and force the alarmists to defend the indefensible. The best thing that can happen is that this issue ends up in court, and the climate alarmists are forced to defend this purely pseudo-science against a prosecution’s case like the one outlined in this linked article.
BTW, the MO of the Climate Alarmists is to deny, deflect, deceive, distort, and attack. One favorite tactic is to “appeal to authority,” who are often the “Fact Checkers.” These favorite attack dogs are a tainted jury at best.
Read More: How to Discuss Global Warming with a “Climate Alarmist.” Scientific Talking Points to Win the Debate.