Democrats loss in Massachusetts is more significant than ClimateGate for climate skeptics

The counter IPCC blogosphere has been dining out lately on eight short weeks of snowballing good news post the mid November leaking of the sensational CRU emails from the University of East Anglia. Since then we have had Copenhagen crash and burn, three inquiries announced, CRU, Penn State and now a UK Parliamentary Inquiry – while in the background critics are closing in on the IPCC Chairman Pachauri over dodgy references to melting glaciers plus finance issues.
Comparing the current landscape IPCC critics find themselves – to where we were in early November – and we have to concentrate to keep our feet on the ground but we must admit that certainly in Australia – little of this IPCC meltdown is getting exposure in the GreenLeft dominated MSM.

IMHO the stunning Democrat election loss in the Late Edward Kennedy’s Senate seat, is of far greater importance. The Obamacrats have mid-term elections due within a year and surely the lesson from Massachusetts is that a Republican landslide threatens unless President Obama can quickly reclaim voter confidence. My guess would be that whatever efforts he makes in months ahead will be based on domestic USA issues and will not include saving the world from whatever scaremongering Chairman Pachauri has been promoting.
Any fleeting remnant possibility the USA would sign on to some future version of Copenhagen has been comprehensively dead and buried for the forseeable.
A word or two on our situation in Australia.
on 1st Dec 2009 I commented on our party elected a new leader who was not a solid IPCC supporter. The Rudd Government has said they will reintroduce their huge ETS tax proposal to the Senate in weeks ahead and a Federal election is due here in less than a year. We seem to have an interesting year coming up for those still believing the IPCC mantras.

12 comments to Democrats loss in Massachusetts is more significant than ClimateGate for climate skeptics

  • A relatively tame Hitler parody video

    Glaciergate: Hitler’s Last Straw

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-6U5MwyDM
    Added 25 Jan 1.20pm: We got a laugh here for sure, I thought the part near the end, I may not have the exact words, “..we had them in the palms of our hands..” so damn true. There must be people who inhabit that rare zone familiar with the IPCC Centre, certain UKMO types for example, who must be absolutely fuming that all this could have been prevented by tight email security. I bet there are IT consultants making big bucks in that area right now.

  • Peterb

    The involvement and influence of WWF (World Wildlife Fund) in the IPCC and various governments is a concern. The IPCC have relied on non-peer reviewed WWF reports and statements in many areas see here nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com . Note there are Australians mentioned eg Karoly, Lowe and the fellow with the hyphenated name who predicted (falsely) that the barrier reef will disappear in a few years. These people are environmental activists and no scientific basis for their statements and opinions.

  • pattoh

    Warwick

    I think we here in Australia are in for a real treat in the coming sitting of parliament. I get a strong impression that Senator Fielding will no longer be a lonely voice raising questions rightly starting with the veracity of the science.

    This finally where it should be before the bean counters & political point scorers go grandstanding & sound-biting there way though the “spin cycle”. ( & flying all over the world!)

    Either way I personally see the ETS debate as far more significant than any I have witnessed in my lifetime. To me the ramifications are far greater than any transient sideshow in the past.

    Even “The Dismissal”, with all its associated noise i.e. misleading parliament, mega dollars , egos & personal agendas, could pale into insignificance when compared to the long term social, economic & political change which would come from an ETS.

    Brendan Nelson challenged parliament to debate the real cost of an ETS in his valedictory speech.

    Hopefully that debate will properly come once some balance has been brought into the scientific argument.

  • Ian

    While there is the delay effect that you’ve noted, I think Climategate remains much more important. In the long term, exposing the manipulation that lies at the heart of the extreme claims (and demands) is much more critical. The taint that this has created has made it easier for the MSM to begin (at last) to look a little more sceptically and critically at what is going on. I would argue that the stories around Pachauri’s conflicts of interest/self-interest and the emerging errors in the IPCC reports – which are certainly gaining traction in the UK press – previously would have been shrugged off with ease. Now, those stories are gaining traction, and the pressure is actually beginning to mount. Between the two, perhaps now it will be possible for views sceptical of the mainstream armageddon scenarios finally to be properly aired. Added 28th Jan 6.40am: I am very happy thank you if you are right Ian and ClimateGate remains the bigger factor.

  • Hi,

    I’m not at all sure that Scott Brown’s winning the Mass. election is all that important for skeptics since it won’t do much to break the Alarmist’s hold on our various governments. What will break that hold is for our media to realize that there is a juicy enough scandal here that they are willing to break their well established pro-AGW stance. So far, like yours, the US media is pretty much ignoring the issue. (Makes one wonder about the future of their business’s.)

    We, in the US, have our fair shore of big tax increases coming down the tubes due to the insane spending orgy that our government is engaged in. Our hopes are that Mr. Brown will help break those tubes.

    What would really help on all issues is for the Republican party to realize where the winds are blowing and act accordingly. If they do that then the Democrat losses in Nov 2010 will be large and we will have a few years respite from the insanity. Unfortunately, we shouldn’t underestimate the Rep. party’s ability to blow a good thing. “Guaranteed easy win? No, we’ll do something else…”

    The Reps may learn to regret their inability to learn. There are a lot of people here who are pretty unhappy with the Republicans (not to mention the Democrats) and our Gov’s excesses.

    Good luck getting rid of your tax hikes and IPCC friendly Pols.

  • Brooks Hurd

    Warwick,

    I was so happy 8 days (-one hour) when it became evident that Scott Brown had won. The first person to call the election correctly was Howie Carr, a veteran Boston reporter. The people of Massachusetts wanted to send a message to Washington. Although the message was clear, I do not beleive that either the Obama administration, nor the Democratic leadership is listening.

    I do not beleive that this election was pro Republican. In my opinion, this was an anti-incumbent message. The Republicans need to understand this clearly if they are to capitalize on the momentum carried on by Scott Brown’s election.

    The importance of Brown’s election to those of us who are sceptical of the IPCC’s agenda is that expensive bills like Waxman’s cap & trade are unlikely to be pushed through Congress this year with so many Democrat seats in play in November 2010. Those Democrats who might have supported the more outrageous parts of Obama’s agenda will be much less likely to do so now, at least if they want to be re-elected. I agree with you that Brown’s election is more important than either Climategate or the NASA emails in cooling the warmers passions.

  • harrywr2

    “I’m not at all sure that Scott Brown’s winning the Mass. election is all that important for skeptics since it won’t do much to break the Alarmist’s hold on our various governments.”

    The way ‘real politics’ works…some advocacy group spoon feeds some reporters some information. They then take a poll and trot down to our elected representative and show the elected representative how big a problem he/she will have in the next election if they don’t support ‘X’ cause.

    There isn’t any polling that showed Scott Brown had even a remote chance of winning in Massachusetts more then 30 days before the election. All the people who were advising Mrs Coakley as to what policies she should spout off on based on the polling were wrong.

    The only poll that counts to a politician showed it’s okay to express doubts as to global warming and express doubts about what to do about it.

    The WWF has been trying to sell half truths to the public…they or one of their merry band certainly been doing their best to sell half-true polling numbers to politicians as well.

  • JAE

    Obama showed, again in his State of the Union speech, that he is completely disconnected from reality. The Democrat Ship is without a rudder. It will be a miracle if they get ANYTHING done during “The One’s” next three years. Also, it now looks like “Climate Change” may a joke in Congress! Can anyone explain this laughter any other way?

  • Romanoz

    What about the Heath Robinson like solutions which the Warmenistas are pushing.
    I think they deserve more attention. Here is my list.

    James Lovelock’s plan to pump ocean water to stop climate change. Should have the same effect as opening a cold bottle of Coke!

    To Dump Iron Sulphate in the Southern Ocean, or Not. Shame about our ignorance of any side effects.

    Simulated volcanic eruptions to block sun . I wonder what the EPA would think about this?

  • [...] Government protecting its own, More government climate reports get an F, More BS from yet another self serving climate institute, ERRORS in IPCC climate science, [...]

  • The Penn State report on Mann just came out. Pretty much the whitewash we all expected, though they are asking for an expanded inquiry into his professional actions. Links at Climate Audit and Watts Up With That.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>