The Wooden Stake

Senator Inhofe says that Copenhagen and cap’n’tax are deader than doornails:

Following the worldwide attention on the leaked CRU e-mails, Inhofe says that he still plans to go to the Copenhagen conference on climate change next month. He also says that cap-and-trade legislation is “dead in the Senate.”

“I’ll be going to Copenhagen to expose the truth,” says Inhofe. “I’ve been ridiculed for the past six years, yet we were right all along.” (The Oklahoman led a similar “truth squad” in 2003, during the U.N.’s climate-change negotiations in Milan, Italy.) Supporters of cap-and-trade who also plan on attending, such as Sen. John Kerry (D., Mass.), “are in denial,” he adds.

“My message will easier to deliver, that’s for sure,” says Inhofe. “When I was in Milan, it was kind of humorous. I had put out a statement calling anthropogenic global warming a hoax and they put up my picture on ‘Wanted’ posters around the city. I tore them down, brought them home, and auctioned them at fundraisers.”

“It’s different this time,” says Inhofe. “We went to Milan with little credibility, saying that this thing is rigged, that the science is cooked. We didn’t have much to back us up in 2003. I know that Boxer and Kerry would try to misrepresent the state of cap-and-trade in the Senate. I can hear their speech now saying it’s not dead — that’s it’s passed out of a committee. But look, it’s dead. It’s not going to pass. It’s dead because regardless of what you think of the science, which these e-mails certainly don’t help, you know that the costs are simply too much. Jobs would go elsewhere if we introduced harsh carbon regulations.”

I think this could end up killing health care too. As I said earlier, people are going to start asking, with good cause, “What else are they lying to us about?”

11 thoughts on “The Wooden Stake”

  1. God, I hope so!

    If they coal to go (a worthy goal for non-CO2 reasons) they ought to pass an “All Nuclear, Like France” bill. The word ‘France’ ought to get even Kerry’s vote.

  2. Nuclear is still considered politically incorrect to support. Even in France the greens managed to stop fast breeder reactor research and are making a fuss over the construction of EPR. In Germany the government stopped ithat mindless program to shut down nuclear reactors from the previous administration, but still no program to build new reactors there yet. There has been a large investment into windmills and, worse, solar photovoltaic.
    Carbon taxing is stupid. There is no way to replace carbon based fuels using present technology, be it in electricity production, heating, or transport. I seriously doubt airlines would use anything but hydrocarbon fuels even if they were forced to buy expensive biofuels to do it.

  3. I think this could end up killing health care too.

    Hope springs eternal. Wasn’t it just a few weeks ago that you posted that the VA and NJ gubenatorial election results were a “death blow” to health care reform in the House? And yet it passed the House, and reached the Senate floor, where 98% of bills are passed into law.

    As for cap-and-trade, it may not pass Congress, but the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions directly, so we may end up with a less market-oriented approach than Waxman-Markey.

  4. Not after the inevitable lawsuit claiming that their authority is based on bogus science…

    Good luck with that. I haven’t seen anything from the CRU emails that undercuts a single important scientific result, and CRU is hardly the only source of climate science.

  5. I haven’t seen anything from the CRU emails that undercuts a single important scientific result, and CRU is hardly the only source of climate science.

    It’s not the emails that undercut it — it’s the codes and the data. Their “science” is non replicable. And much of the “climate science” literature cites it. It’s a house built on quicksand, and it’s sinking now.

  6. “Good luck with that. I haven’t seen anything from the CRU emails that undercuts a single important scientific result, and CRU is hardly the only source of climate science.”

    Ignoring the elephant in the room (if AGW is true- if the evidence really does support it- then why do these ‘researchers’ need to manufacture false evidence, hide real data, and shout down anyone who questions them?) :
    In jurisprudence, if evidence and testimony used to prosecute a criminal is proved false, the accused is granted a mistrial and released; and the impeached witnesses and providers of faked evidence are forevermore known as perjurers nto to be trusted in a court of law. The Global Warmists want to imprison, not an individual, but the economy and freedoms of the whole world. Shouldn’t all of those free people get a fair trial?

  7. When I worked as a volunteer on an open space near my home we were given the task of making steps through a wooded area. There was a steady incline and we made about 37 steps. The board to each step was held into place by wooden stakes driven into the ground. We made the hole for the stake by using the method that you have described and we did the work over a weekend. We had to screw the board to the stake to prevent the boards being removed. The steps are still there and the job was completely over ten years ago.

Comments are closed.