« | »

Sen Dems Demand More Climate Fear Mongering

From Breitbart:

Senate Democrats Pressure Networks to Increase Coverage of Climate Change

By Robert Wilde | February 17, 2014

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) are gathering colleagues’ signatures on a letter to networks ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox expressing their disapproval at the lack of global warming discussion on the channels’ Sunday shows.

According to Sanders, "It is beyond my comprehension… that their shows have discussed climate change in 2012, collectively, for all of eight minutes.” Sanders is using liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America as his source. MMfA’s data indicates that, in 2009, the Sunday shows covered climate change topics for over an hour, and in 2012, Sunday show coverage dropped to less than eight minutes on climate change…

What could be a more reliable source than Media Matters? Besides, why does this need to be discussed on the Sunday talk shows, when we are subjected to endless news reports?

Sanders mentioned the letter at a press conference with Senate Democrats’ new, 19-member Climate Action Task Force, which includes Barbara Boxer of California. Boxer described the task force, saying, "The purpose is to use the bully pulpit of our Senate offices to achieve that wake-up call.”

We thought she was against bullying.

She added that, "We believe that climate change is a catastrophe that is unfolding before our eyes, and we want Congress to take off the blindfolds." …

Our country is circling the drain, and ‘Don’t call me Madam’ Boxer thinks climate change is a catastrophe.

Meanwhile, speaking of how the networks are informing the public, we have this from our old friend, Marc Morano at Climate Depot:

Bill Nye confuses South Pole with North Pole in ‘Meet the Press’ Climate Debate

By Marc Morano | February 16, 2014

Nye Flubs: Nye [help up a picture] of the Arctic while discussing Antarctica. At 8 min. 30 seconds in, Nye hold up picture of the Arctic and asks: ‘Would you say that the Antarctic has less ice than it used to?’

Climate Depot’s Answer: NO! See: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent is on track to have highest minimum in modern satellite era! – ‘Sea Ice Extent is 27.4% above normal as of Feb 7 2014′

Antarctic Sea Ice Sets New Record For Jan 31st: ‘Meanwhile, global sea ice area is normal’

The National Snow and Ice Data Center: 2013 Antarctic sea ice was at record highs for the satellite era, record high winter extent & summer minimum…

Nit picker. Bill Nye means well. He is just doing his best to roll back the industrial revolution and make untold billions starve.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, February 18th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “Sen Dems Demand More Climate Fear Mongering”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    Can’t run a proper Democrat Party with Mo Fear™

  2. Right of the People says:

    These clowns need to lead by example, I’ll give up my Cadillac and 60″ LCD when they all stop using electricity and start riding bikes to the Capital Building.

  3. Petronius says:

    If this doomsday theory were really true, the first logical political response would be to stop all immigration to the US.

    Because that step would immediately stabilize, and then reduce, population growth and the demand for fossil fuels.

    Until the regime has taken that sensible first step, I am unable to take their warnings seriously.

  4. canary says:


    GREGORY: Bill Nye and Marsha Blackburn, welcome both of you to MEET THE PRESS.

    REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R-TN/Vice Chair, Energy and Commerce Committee): Good to be with you. Thanks, David.

    MR. BILL NYE (The Science Guy/Science Educator/CEO, The Planetary Society): Thank you.

    GREGORY: … My question to begin with both of you is in this moment of– this kind of extreme weather moment– is it creating new urgency to act? Bill Nye, I’ll start with you.

    MR. NYE: Well, I would say yeah. And what I’ve always said we need to do everything all at once…

    GREGORY: Congresswoman, is there new urgency to act? You’ve heard the president in drought-stricken California saying that these weather emergencies in effect are creating the conditions. The government has to act.

    (* In reality Obama was in California over the weekend to play 3 days of golf knowing government offices were closed on the weekend)

    REP. BLACKBURN: David, I think that what it brings to mind is how we utilize the information that we have.

    And we all know– and I think that Bill would probably agree with this, neither he nor I are a climate scientist. He is an engineer and actor. I am a member of Congress.

    Even the president’s own Science and Technology Office head Mister Holdren says no one single weather event is due specifically to climate change. So it drives the policy to look at cost/benefit analysis, what we do about it, and the impact that U.S. policy would have in a global environment.

    GREGORY: (jumping in to aid Nye) … Nevertheless, within the scientific community, there is consensus, Bill Nye, and you know, among the scientists themselves on both of those questions?

    MR. NYE: Everybody– you don’t– this is not– you don’t need a Ph.D. in climate science to understand what’s going on.

    ( Bill Nye is blistering from the Congresswoman pointing out he is not an expert)

    GREGORY: The catch: Conservatives believe many of the policies put forward to address the problem will lead to unacceptable levels of economic hardship.” The fix can be very expensive in the short term for long-term gain.

    REP. BLACKBURN: … And when you look at the fact that we have gone from 320 parts per million 0.032, to 0.040 four hundred parts per million, what you do is realize it’s very slight. Now, there is not consensus and you can look at the latest IPCC Report and look at Doctor Lindzen from MIT. His rejection of that or Judith Curry who recently…

    GREGORY: Right.

    REP. BLACKBURN: …from Georgia Tech. There is not consensus there. I think what we have to do is–

    (Gregory stops the Republican’s plan to support the Democrats who say Republicans have no answers)

    GREGORY: Well, hold on! . I just have to interrupt you!. I’m sorry, congresswoman.! Let me just interrupt you because it’s not…(huff.. sweat…gasp…)


    GREGORY: …you can pick out particular skeptics, but you can’t really say, can you, that the hundreds of scientists around the world who have looked at this have gotten together and conspired to manipulate data, …” So the issue is what actions are taken and will they really work?

    REP. BLACKBURN: That’s exactly right.

    GREGORY: …and then let me have Bill Nye respond.

    REP. BLACKBURN: You’re exactly right. And what you have to do. Let’s say everything that Bill says is wrong is wrong. Let’s just say that. Then you say what are you going to do about it?… Now, even Director McCarthy from the EPA in answering questions from Congressman Pompeo before our committee, said reaching all of the 26 U.S. goals is not going to have an impact globally.

    And, David, what we have to look at is the fact that you don’t make good laws, sustainable laws when you’re making them on hypotheses or theories or unproven sciences.

    GREGORY: Bill Nye?


    MR. NYE: Once again, the congresswoman is trying to introduce doubt, and doubt in the whole idea of climate change.

    So what I would encourage everybody to do is back up and let’s agree on the facts.

    Would you say that the Antarctic has less ice than it used to? When you said you asserted, congresswoman, that a change from 320 to 400 parts per million is insignificant?

    My goodness, that’s– that’s 30 percent. (Bill Nye manipulates the math numbers)

    And I can encourage the congresswoman to really look at the facts. You are a leader. We need you to change things, not deny what’s happening.

    GREGORY: Let me get– let me…

    MR. NYE: So this– this weather event.

    GREGORY: …inject this point. I want to inject this point.

    MR. NYE: I just want to say this weather event is important.

    GREGORY: I want to stick to the point about what’s going to happen in the future with policy.


    GREGORY: The reality is that something is happening.

    REP. BLACKBURN: You’re right.

    GREGORY: You’re very concerned about the future of our debt.

    REP. BLACKBURN: That’s exactly right. And it is expensive when you look at the clean-up. And David, one of the things that we have to remember is cost/benefit analysis has to take place. And that is something– that goes back to a Clinton executive order. And it is required and it is unfortunate that some of the federal agencies are not conducting that cost/benefit analysis.

    …. Lot of good study out there about that, lot of good scientists and biologists who have done that study.

    GREGORY: One of the things, Bill Nye, if you look at the polling on this, this is this issue of what do you do about something that to many people is very important, but for a lot of voters may not feel urgent? Just look at the Pew Research Center Poll from last month, global warming ranking 19th on that list.
    And yet, environmentalists seem buoyed by the fact that the president– as I’ve talked to experts in Syria say– … Is that an acceptable solution without political consensus?

    MR. NYE: Well, that’s up to politicians. But certainly the longest journey starts with but a single step.

    I was born in the U.S., you know, I’m a patriot and so on. …
    And so we all get into this thing that big governments are bad. I know that’s a– that’s a very strong claim that for me, as a voter and taxpayer, is somehow tied to climate change. But what we want to do is not just less. We want to do more with less, and for me, as a guy who grew up in the U.S., I want the U.S. to lead the world in this rather than wait– while you made reference to the United Kingdom, what China is doing with energy production…

    GREGORY: Okay.

    MR. NYE: …solar energy production…


    MR. NYE: …and so on, this is a huge opportunity…

    GREGORY: Congresswoman, just…

    MR. NYE: …and the more we mess around with this denial, the less we’re going to get done.

    GREGORY: I want to be specific though, Congresswoman, thirty seconds on this point.

    (once again the Republican voice is cut off)

    As you know, as I just outlined, the president is proposing regulations.
    This is executive action.

    REP. BLACKBURN: Well, I think the president should realize Congress has taken action whether it was cap and trade or Boiler MACT or any of these regulations. We have said no to that…

    GREGORY: All right.

    (tries to cut her off)

    REP. BLACKBURN: We need to look at the cost benefit analysis and make certain these technologies are affordable for the American people.

    GREGORY: All right. We are going to leave it there….

    …Coming up next here…, Plus, fighting words from Joe Biden about the Republicans.

    MR. JOE BIDEN: I wish there was a Republican Party. I wish there was one person you could sit across the table from, make a deal, make a compromise, and know when you got up from the table, it was done.

  5. captstubby says:

    “change from 320 to 400 parts per million is insignificant?…that’s 30 percent.”

    Parts-per notation .

    In science and engineering, the parts-per notation is a set of pseudo units to describe small values of miscellaneous dimensionless quantities, e.g. mole fraction or mass fraction. Since these fractions are quantity-per-quantity measures, they are pure numbers with no associated units of measurement. Commonly used are ppm (parts-per-million, 10–6), ppb (parts-per-billion, 10–9), ppt (parts-per-trillion, 10–12) and ppq (parts-per-quadrillion, 10-15).
    Parts-per notations are all dimensionless quantities: in mathematical expressions, the units of measurement always cancel. In fractions like “2 nanometers per meter” (2 nm/m = 2 nano = 2 × 10−9 = 2 ppb = 2 × 0.000000001) so the quotients are pure-number coefficients with positive values less than 1. When parts-per notations, including the percent symbol (%), are used in regular prose (as opposed to mathematical expressions), they are still pure-number dimensionless quantities. However, they generally take the literal “parts per” meaning of a comparative ratio (e.g., “2 ppb” would generally be interpreted as “two parts in a billion parts”).
    Although the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (an international standards organization known also by its French-language initials BIPM) recognizes the use of parts-per notation, it is not formally part of the International System of Units
    Because the named numbers starting with a “billion” have different values in different countries, the BIPM suggests avoiding the use of “ppb” and “ppt” to prevent misunderstanding. In the English language, named numbers have a consistent meaning only up to “million”. Starting with “billion”, there are two numbering conventions: the “long” and “short” scales, and “billion” can mean either 109 or 1012. The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) takes the stringent position, stating that “the language-dependent terms [ . . . ] are not acceptable for use with the SI to express the values of quantities.”[7]

    From Wikipedia,

    • canary says:

      GREGORY (Meet the Press) “…And yet, environmentalists seem buoyed by the fact that the president– as I’ve talked to experts in Syria say–…(he didn’t finish)

      I can’t make since of this. He does not say who the experts are he talked to in Syria and doesn’t finish telling us what those experts in Syria he talked to said, yet a lone in regards to the climate changes.

      How did he talk to experts in Syria? Are these so called experts in Syria talking to the Meet the Press about things that could jeopardize the worlds security from WMD before we can get them on ships and destroy them with Bleach?

      What is scary is the environmentalists and US wants us to believe Bleach is bad for the environment when it is good for killing house hold germs to bio-chemicals such as anthrax and saves water and time for women who are overstressed in house hold chores.
      Bleach is also used to treat diseases in trees and plants that treat sewage plants.

  6. Mithrandir says:


    1. Make a wedge issue to cobble together the stupid people, make Republicans look like they only oppose things, even at the cost of destroying humanity.

    2. Use global warming as a “catch-all” excuse for the government to do whatever it wants, suspend the Constitution for this quasi-crisis / boogyman, that needs to be halted.

    3. Make democrats look like they are riding in on their white horse to save humanity from evil industrialists / capitalists. –makes socialism look cool!

    4. SELL SELL SELL! The snake-oil salesmen constantly need a new product to sell in order to look fresh, current, and hip.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »