The number of anti-science decisions the federal government has made in recent years is staggering: axing the...
For years, the skeptics have tried to discredit global warming projections by noting that, several decades ago, scientists were just as concerned about global cooling. Now it turns out that Sen. James Inhofe (“Global Warming is the Greatest Hoax Ever Perpetrated on the American Public”) has pressured Newsweek Magazine into highlighting this change. In fact some scientists say, their early concerns about climate change were not unjustified – since escalating climatic instability is the hallmark of early stage global warming.
It's a three-day event that has been happening annually for 17 years now. Every morning there are plenary speakers, and the afternoons are devoted to break-out sessions and panels. One of the coolest parts of Bioneers is that after it grew too big for the Marin Center where it's held, they began holding satellite conferences all over America. This year, there were 18 satellite events, which all feature live simulcast video of the plenary speakers, and then local workshops in the afternoons.
Since the environmental and scientific community presents too puny a target, Sen. James Inhofe (“Global warming is the greatest hoax etc.”) is now attacking the New York Times. A recent Times editorial concluded: “Mr. Inhofe has buttressed himself with a small jury of scientists who argue that climate change is only natural. But he has really buttressed himself with the will to disbelieve. He accuses scientists and the media of hysteria. But if there is such a thing as a hysteria of doubt, then Mr. Inhofe is its master.”
While the skeptics unanimously overstate the costs of climate protection, a new study calculates that the costs of climate inaction will cost the global economy trillions of dollars.
When Prime Minister Harper announced he will adopt an “intensity based” system for measuring greenhouse emissions, he was following the lead of President George W. Bush in using “greenhouse intensity” as a bogus way to measure carbon emissions. The “intensity based” system would do nothing to cut emissions – only marginally slow their growth. Moreover, as a “voluntary” mechanism, they would attract few, if any, serious polluters. “Intensity based” is merely a new form of jargon for “business as usual” while the world burns.