An excellent summary of the ongoing dispute over Global Warming. Chuck.
By Marco Evers, Olaf Stampf and Gerald Traufetter
Der Spiegel 1 April 2010
Plagued by reports of sloppy work, falsifications and exaggerations, climate research is facing a crisis of confidence. How reliable are the predictions about global warming and its consequences? And would it really be the end of the world if temperatures rose by more than the much-quoted limit of two degrees Celsius?
… are they ready for the Rubber Room or Both? My guess is the answer is “both.” But read the attached article by Jonathan Cook and judge for yourself. One thing that is becoming clear, however: Global Warming can be used as a canonical fear to justify just about anything — from Obama’s plan to resurrect the nuclear power industry (while at the same time, he punts on the nuc waste issue by caving into political pressure to close the Yucca Mountain waste depository, after spending $17 billion since the 1980s) to Israel’s crackpot plan to win the so-called war on terror by impoverishing the petro-states via the weaning the industrial world off hydrocarbons (see below). If you want to get a realistic idea of the size of the energy numbers as well as the socio-economic implications of the policy transformations implied by displacing the West’s reliance on hydrocarbons, I urge you read my good friend Robert Bryce’s important new book, Power Hungry: The Myths of Green Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future, Public Affairs Press, April 2010. You do not have to agree with his specific recommendations to accept the value of his important work.