h/t to Glenn Reynolds at http://www.pjmedia.com/instapundit
A former community organizer, part-time lawyer, adjunct law instructor with no science or math background whatsoever is a sudden expert on global warming or whatever the trend word is today.
I’ve discussed the fallacy of the 97% stat that is perennially touted by Big Green and now embarrassingly pushed by the President of the United States to raise more tax revenues. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/30/the-myth-of-the-97-climate-change-consensus/
Keep in mind that there is no proof higher carbon dioxide threatens the planet, indeed it has been higher without any problems and could improve life here by increasing food production areas and season times. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/03/epas-new-proposed-regulations-to-restrict-emissions-from-existing-fossil-fuel-based-electric-generation/#more-110724
Keep in mind that even the EPA admits the difference in global carbon dioxide emissions will be negligible.
What will happen as a result is quite predictable: Greatly increased rates for electric power, decreased availability of the electric power so vital to our way of life, decreased reliability of the electric grid, a lower standard of living, decreased competitiveness of US products in world markets since most countries do not have such regulations, and Communist-style central control of the electric generating industry by a Washington-based bureaucracy with no understanding of the industry.
This political agenda won’t make any difference in our climate but it does have real-life consequences, all to push a tax. If you haven’t figured out that the purpose behind all this AGW talk from Obama is about raising a new tax, you’re not paying attention.
Obama isn’t a progressive, he’s a regressive socialist who is using an outdated model of AGW to push for higher taxes that punish fossil fuels from red states. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/03/ontario-canada-a-mirror-of-americas-economic-future-mortgaged-to-falsified-climate-science/#more-110742
Am I a scientist? No but critical thinking skills never go out of style. The green predictions have never occurred but that doesn’t stop greenies from making new ones. I’m a denier? Hey it’s the job of greenies to convince us of a drastic change in the status quo of accepted science. They haven’t. They’re hypocrites, their computer models don’t work, they’ve lost the original raw data that supposedly “proved” AGW, none of their predictions occurred, there’s plenty of opposition from renowned scientists, their choices for enforcement is subjective, they can’t replicate any of their “research” and they must enforce totalitarian oppression on any opposing views
It would be appropriate and admirable for a FLOTUS to visit schools and encourage kids to eat healthy and/or exercise. It is pathetic for her to use her clout to push legislation that forces what schools can buy and serve kids, that punishes those who do not by withholding federal funds, that declares areas ‘food deserts’ that pick winners and losers in grocery produce stores, and takes control of lunches out of the hands of parents. When challenged by kids who don’t like her food dictates, Michelle Obama blames Republicans who are “antiscience” and will hurt kids. She blames parents, who need her “help” making choices. IOW she reacts as viscerally thin-skinned as her husband and turns her problems into a partisan attack.
She doesn’t seem to realize that her demands aren’t supported by all food scientists. Some schools are insisting on 1% skim milk to reduce the fat. When my kid was born, I embraced a healthy diet for her until she left home for college. I followed principles of people like Sara Sloan, a school nutritionist, Lendon Smith, Marion Nestle and the like. Everyone, the most ardent healthy food pusher, insisted that kids drinking milk require the full fats for brain development, not some skim version. There’s no clear evidence vegetarian is a better food life style for children or adults, and cutting calories for kids is a dangerous venture.
How bad is the first lady’s hastily-installed and arbitrary program? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/05/30/not-media-narrative-school-lunch-standards-rolling-fiasco-cuisine-centra
The rules impose very specific quotas for the type and amount of food served. Cafeterias, for example, must feature five “vegetable subgroups” across “dark green, red/orange, beans/peas (legumes), starchy and ‘other’ vegetables.” Schools have had to eliminate popular menu items such as sandwiches. Two slices of bread over five days exceed the weekly grain limits
Just the latest view on the ever-changing state of food service below:
Politics have corrupted science; we don’t need the POTUS and FLOTUS making it worse. Why don’t you work on the economy, President Obama?