Video: You wanted a jobs plan?

A story just as dramatic, or maybe more so, is occurring in North Dakota. The oil boom there will have them moving past California into second place on the list of states with the biggest share of national oil production in less than a year. Unemployment is about 3%. Fast food places are offering $15/hr just to get applicants. Real estate is booming to such an extent that some of the more hysterical politicians are suggesting rent control legislation be enacted. Strippers at the local clubs are bringing in 2-3 grand a nite.
Clearly “green” is not the path to recovery and jobs, but black definitely is. There is another potential boom in the Gulf, if the Obamites ever decide to obey court orders and start issuing permits again, although all their dithering has chased enough drilling platforms off to greener pastures that getting the area back up to speed will be too slow paced to look like a boom.
On a related note, a piece on the excuses offered by members of CAGW climate establishment for why there has been a more than decade long pause in rising global temps, indicates that at least a plurality, if not an out right majority, want to blame it on aerosols i.e. Chinese air pollution.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/27/climate-scientists-and-their-excuses/

Obviously the EPA is on the wrong track in trying to shut down a significant portion of our electrical generating capacity because they think the plants are too dirty. What’s really required to save the planet from fiery doom is to turn off all those foolish scrubbers we’ve installed and build a bunch more “dirty” coal fired plants. That was sort of a joke, but there are actually “geoengineers” out there working on plans to deliberately inject sulfate aerosols into the upper atmosphere to counter our profligate CO2 emissions.

djaces on October 27, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Steve Z on October 27, 2011 at 3:03 PM

I did indicate that I was joking. I was merely trying to point out the irony that the CAGW crowd’s hyping of the threat of the non-pollutant CO2 relies in large part on the continued presence of the real pollutant SO2. In fact if you look closely at all the GCMs that provide most of their “evidence” for CO2′s supposedly catastrophic effects, you’ll find that they all tune their backcasts of climate history, which are meant to prove their reliability, by using different estimates of aerosols. The implication that real pollution is better for the planet than imaginary pollution is logically obvious, even if incredibly stupid. The fact that they can’t recognize this obvious flaw in their argument is proof that their single minded obsession with carbon demonization has left most of them with almost no capacity for critical thought.

djaces on October 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM