Of course, not one of them is known to be engaged in current research in climatology.

oakland on December 9, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Liar. Many, many of them are engaged in current research in climatology.

But keep pretending that the number of believers that you like to tout are all climatologists.

And, hey, are you ready to admit that The Hockey Stick as been debunked?

As usual, the rent seekers will make out like bandits and the consumer will get fleeced.

FORWARD.

Conservatives need to start taking the attitude that not all government spending is bad, and get involved in the process and start bending government to their will-becuase those of us in government who are involved in these issues have seen this type of nonsense coming for a long time-and this is only the beginning!

Dreadnought on December 9, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Exactly the opposite.

Government spending is by definition “bad”, because the only way in which the government can get money to spend is to take it out of the private sector.

Government action is by definition “bad”, because the government is a legal monopoly; it has no competition and no pressure to do things better or more efficiently.

Government itself in a democracy is by definition “bad” because it will reflect the lowest common denominator of agreement. Obamaphone Lady’s opinion, ignorant and stupid as it is, counts the same as an Albert Einstein’s.

Hence, you cannot “bend” government. You can only reduce it and contain it.

northdallasthirty on December 9, 2012 at 5:35 PM

You can’t reduce it and contain it from the outside only-you have to get involved in its workings.

I work in government in the Northeast-every time there is a policy discussion or public meeting on transportation or energy issues the left turns out in droves, conservatives are nowhere to be seen. Guess what message the elected officials and bureaucrats take away from that?

Having been a co-chair of the NYS Business Council Environment Committee and sitting on several groups like the Niagara River Remedial Action Planning group, I can tell you that what you call for is a difficult thing to do. First you have a real job and going to all these things is not your primary function. The opportunity to speak with enough time to educate people up to the point where they even understand your point of view is seldom. I got the entire period in an environmental law class to make my point on the Great Lakes Water Quality initiative and won most of the initially hostile class to my side but such situations where you get to speak very long are few. One Environmental Organization Head who invited me to speak on the issue got overruled by his membership who disinvited me. They did not want to hear the other side. Frankly the enviro left can be rather obnoxious.

Another problem is that the activists stated agendas are often not their real agenda so you are at a disadvantage in making an argument that would both appeal to the public and the activists. In some cases they just are interested in keeping donations coming in and have no interest in a real solution. One pair told me they did not want regulations that were feasible because they wanted industry to “go away”. Sadly, you do better to speak to regulators and legislators directly as public forums get hijacked and government officials do not feel free to speak frankly.

KW64 on December 9, 2012 at 4:36 PM

KW64:

I agree with you it can be a pain for conservatives to show up as they are, quite frankly, more likely to be productive citizens (i.e. they have a job). But not every lefty activist is unemployed and yet they still go out of their way to show up for meetings-also there are plenty of conservative retirees who could take an interest-maybe they are volunteering to help people, etc, but taking an interest in what the govt. does helps people too.

For example-Every metro area above 50,000 people in New York, Pa., and the rest of the country has a transportaion planning organization (MPO) that oversees the spending of millions of Federal transportation dollars every year-I go to some of their meetings around NYS as part of my job and I can tell you, that the amount of input they get from conservatives is almost nil. People could comment on their activites without even going to meetings-the left does-conservatives never do….conservative activists cede the playing field.

Kudos by the way, on your own activism and going into the “arena” to make a presentation to an environmental law class….we need more like you!

And if Big Oil supports it, most likely it’s to help increase the cost of natural gas to keep it from being fully developed.

oakland on December 9, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Axe on December 9, 2012 at 9:09 PM

PS: Isn’t it a little silly to suggest you’ve vetted a list of 31,500 people for their credentials’ applicability to climate sciences?

. . . Edward Teller, spent his professional career in fusion physics, which has nothing to do with climatology.

oakland on December 9, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Yet. Give it a few months. :/

Chris needs to pull his head out of his Marxist a$$…

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

SWalker on December 9, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Of course, not one of them is known to be engaged in current research in climatology.

And the name on the example, Edward Teller, spent his professional career in fusion physics, which has nothing to do with climatology.

They would probably be willing to not only pay the tax, but use it as a promotional campaign, talking about how they’re pitching in for a renewable energy future. Do you find that annoying?

A deal breaker, actually. If they solicit green, I try to go somewhere else. Only exception is anyone begging me to “go paperless” to save the trees — that’s a business trying to manipulate me so it can shift printing costs to me and save mailing costs. That I can respect.

Businesses usually support anything that eliminates competition, by the way. Huge meat packers support heavy meat-handling regulations because it shuts the door on the little guys — only they, the big guys, can afford it, and the little guys go away. We have to try to get past our blind spot to big business, as conservatives; they are the other half of the perverted relationship that’s crony capitalism. We want capitalism to remain intact; we want a free marketplace; we want a limited government — we are trying to protect our own liberty. But as often as not, large businesses will sell us down the river exactly as quickly as the nearest progressive politician.

Another way to put that: Stop asking and caring about what Bill Gates thinks about macroeconomics — or at least limit the care to the same level we’d have for Charlie Rangel’s thoughts about macroeconomics. I mean, they’re dating.

Well sure, because in these awesome economic times what needs to be done is crush the last few citizens who are still able to stay above water.

Bishop on December 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM

All in the plan to pi$$ off the downtrodden who will turn to the Democrats who promise them redistribution of wealth.
I believe the last time this happened in a major way, people were shouting slogans like “Worker’s Unite!”.
Meanwhile, the politicians maneuver to stay the privileged class that keeps ruling over everyone.
I believe Bill Ayers is quite proud.
ALong with all other communists.

When you pay for it at the pump or with your natural gas bills who gets that money first? The government or the company? Does the company pay the government? When?

Basically companies are looking for a good reason to soak YOU for a few more bucks that they then hold on to, with interest, until the time comes to pay the government… see how that works?

You get soaked, the nasty carbon companies get extra cash and the government gets revenue!

Isn’t life in crony-capitalist land fun?

Last but not least, the idea of a carbon tax has been embraced by the unlikeliest suspects: ExxonMobil, BP and Shell.

It’s all about rent-seeking and protecting returns.

Bingo.

Conservatives need to start taking the attitude that not all government spending is bad, and get involved in the process and start bending government to their will-becuase those of us in government who are involved in these issues have seen this type of nonsense coming for a long time-and this is only the beginning!

Dreadnought on December 9, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Exactly the opposite.

Government spending is by definition “bad”, because the only way in which the government can get money to spend is to take it out of the private sector.

Government action is by definition “bad”, because the government is a legal monopoly; it has no competition and no pressure to do things better or more efficiently.

Government itself in a democracy is by definition “bad” because it will reflect the lowest common denominator of agreement. Obamaphone Lady’s opinion, ignorant and stupid as it is, counts the same as an Albert Einstein’s.

Hence, you cannot “bend” government. You can only reduce it and contain it.

There is no viable alternative to carbon based fuels. So, why does big oil care? They will just pass the costs along to the consumers. It isn’t as though windmills and algae are going to take market share from them, even if the price of their product sky rockets.

MJBrutus on December 9, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Bingo.

Besides, it’s not as if these companies aren’t already heavily invested in biofuels and alternate energy sources. From their perspective, it’s just a license to raise the price of petroleum and petroleum byproducts to the point where their other operations become profitable as well.

They’re playing the Obama administration because they know Obama is an idiot who hires idiots.

The Obamanation Administration consists of ideologiotical Marxist pseud-non-intellectuals,
SWalker on December 9, 2012 at 2:07 PM

fify

I work in government in the Northeast-every time there is a policy discussion or public meeting on transportation or energy issues the left turns out in droves, conservatives are nowhere to be seen. Guess what message the elected officials and bureaucrats take away from that?

Having been a co-chair of the NYS Business Council Environment Committee and sitting on several groups like the Niagara River Remedial Action Planning group, I can tell you that what you call for is a difficult thing to do. First you have a real job and going to all these things is not your primary function. The opportunity to speak with enough time to educate people up to the point where they even understand your point of view is seldom. I got the entire period in an environmental law class to make my point on the Great Lakes Water Quality initiative and won most of the initially hostile class to my side but such situations where you get to speak very long are few. One Environmental Organization Head who invited me to speak on the issue got overruled by his membership who disinvited me. They did not want to hear the other side. Frankly the enviro left can be rather obnoxious.

Another problem is that the activists stated agendas are often not their real agenda so you are at a disadvantage in making an argument that would both appeal to the public and the activists. In some cases they just are interested in keeping donations coming in and have no interest in a real solution. One pair told me they did not want regulations that were feasible because they wanted industry to “go away”. Sadly, you do better to speak to regulators and legislators directly as public forums get hijacked and government officials do not feel free to speak frankly.

IOW the Democrats have crushed their souls. And it continues and spreads through every demographic.

The left throws Halliburton at the GOP, and the right throws all the rest at the left.

Crony capitalists=shadow government. Bigger and better than ever.

Things like this are why it was so important to win this election-and why it was so foolish to pick an objectivist hill to die on.

Romney-Ryan was an epic fail, in what should have been a very winnable election.

Welcome to the Hippie States of America.

What a nightmare.

I suppose, simplistically speaking, that the 51% of the voters want higher taxes, so why not a carbon tax to go along with every other evil that’s being planned for America.

The crazy thing is, when their utility bills, gas prices, food, goes up even further, they’ll still love the tax & spend President.

Agree, SWalker, Obama uses executive power these days, the Senate will have new & improved filibuster rules, caving Boehner won’t be a threat, & in 2014 all will be under Democratic rule.

Belle on December 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Most of that “51%” did not want higher taxes. In fact it was Romney’s tax reform proposals that had them thinking they were going to be paying higher taxes, and have their entitlements cut, along with the stubborn and silly refusal to raise tax rates on the rich, that caused this electoral defeat.

Another problem is that conservatives, (and moderates, for that matter) have ceded involvment in the energy and transportation government bureaucracies to the left.

I work in government in the Northeast-every time there is a policy discussion or public meeting on transportation or energy issues the left turns out in droves, conservatives are nowhere to be seen. Guess what message the elected officials and bureaucrats take away from that?

The only time conservatives show up is if there is a discussion on making fracking legal in New York State, and then only because they are landowners who stand to make a buck.

Conservatives need to start taking the attitude that not all government spending is bad, and get involved in the process and start bending government to their will-becuase those of us in government who are involved in these issues have seen this type of nonsense coming for a long time-and this is only the beginning!