WAS IT EVER REALLY a CRISIS? 2 0 0 9 International C O N F E R E N C E O N C L I M a T E C H a N G E
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
CAPITALISM a Treatise on Economics George Reisman
CAPITALISM CAPITALISM A Treatise on Economics Prepublication, Interim Edition George Reisman Jameson Books, Ottawa, Illinois Copyright © 1998, 1996, 1990 by George Reisman. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without written permission, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in reviews. Mail order copies of this book may be purchased from the publisher by call- ing 800-426-1357. All inquiries should be addressed to Jameson Books, 722 Columbus St., Ottawa, IL 61350. (815)-434-7905. Fax: (815)-434-7907. Distributed to the book trade by MidPoint Trade Books. All returns to the MidPoint warehouse. Bookstores, please call 800-243-0138 to order. Photocopying of excerpts from Jameson Books editions are licensed through the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. Call 508-750-8400 for information. ISBN: 0-915463-73-3 Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 96-78105 Manufactured in the United States of America 09 08 07 06 05 04 / 8 7 6 5 4 To Ludwig von Mises, my teacher, and Edith Packer, my wife. CONTENTS IN BRIEF PREFACE xxxix INTRODUCTION 1 PART ONE THE FOUNDATIONS OF ECONOMICS CHAPTER 1. ECONOMICS AND CAPITALISM 15 CHAPTER 2. WEALTH AND ITS ROLE IN HUMAN LIFE 39 CHAPTER 3. NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT 63 PART TWO THE DIVISION OF LABOR AND CAPITALISM CHAPTER 4. THE DIVISION OF LABOR AND PRODUCTION 123 CHAPTER 5. THE DEPENDENCE OF THE DIVISION OF LABOR ON CAPITALISM I 135 CHAPTER 6. THE DEPENDENCE OF THE DIVISION OF LABOR ON CAPITALISM II: THE PRICE SYSTEM AND ECONOMIC COORDINATION 172 CHAPTER 7. -
The Disclosure of Climate Data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia
House of Commons Science and Technology Committee The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia Eighth Report of Session 2009–10 Volume II Oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 24 March 2010 HC 387-II Published on 31 March 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Science and Technology Committee The Science and Technology Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Government Office for Science. Under arrangements agreed by the House on 25 June 2009 the Science and Technology Committee was established on 1 October 2009 with the same membership and Chairman as the former Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee and its proceedings were deemed to have been in respect of the Science and Technology Committee. Current membership Mr Phil Willis (Liberal Democrat, Harrogate and Knaresborough)(Chair) Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods (Labour, City of Durham) Mr Tim Boswell (Conservative, Daventry) Mr Ian Cawsey (Labour, Brigg & Goole) Mrs Nadine Dorries (Conservative, Mid Bedfordshire) Dr Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat, Oxford West & Abingdon) Dr Brian Iddon (Labour, Bolton South East) Mr Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South) Dr Doug Naysmith (Labour, Bristol North West) Dr Bob Spink (Independent, Castle Point) Ian Stewart (Labour, Eccles) Graham Stringer (Labour, Manchester, Blackley) Dr Desmond Turner (Labour, Brighton Kemptown) Mr Rob Wilson (Conservative, Reading East) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental Select Committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No.152. -
Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 1 of 6
Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 1 of 6 Larry Bell, Contributor I write about climate, energy, environmental and space policy issues. OP/ED | 1/10/2012 @ 4:12PM | 3,332 views Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change An extensively peer-reviewed study published last December in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics indicates that observed climate changes since 1850 are linked to cyclical, predictable, naturally occurring events in Earth’s solar system with little or no help from us. The research was conducted by Nicola Scafetta, a scientist at Duke University and at the Active Cavity Radiometer Solar Irradiance Monitor Lab (ACRIM), which is associated with the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California. It takes issue with methodologies applied by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) using “general circulation climate models” (GCMs) that, by ignoring these important influences, are found to fail to reproduce the observed decadal and multi-decadal climatic cycles. As noted in the paper, the IPCC models also fail to incorporate climate modulating effects of solar changes such as cloud-forming influences of cosmic rays throughout periods of reduced sunspot activity. More clouds tend to make conditions cooler, while fewer often cause warming. At least 50-70% of observed 20th century warming might be associated with increased solar activity witnessed since the “Maunder Minimum” of the last 17th century. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/01/10/global-warming-no-natural-predictable-c... 1/13/2012 Global Warming? No, Natural, Predictable Climate Change - Forbes Page 2 of 6 Dr. -
Investing in a Prosperous Green Future Investing in a Prosperous
Recommendations for Budget 2010 InvestingInvesting inin aa ProsperousProsperous GreenGreen FutureFuture Bird Studies Canada • Canadian Environmental Law Association Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society • Centre for Integral Economics David Suzuki Foundation • Ducks Unlimited Canada • Ecojustice Environmental Defence • Équiterre • Friends of the Earth Greenpeace Canada • International Institute for Sustainable Development MiningWatch Canada • Nature Canada • Nature Conservancy of Canada Pembina Institute • Pollution Probe • Sierra Club Canada Social Investment Organization • Wildlife Habitat Canada • WWF–Canada Dan Sokolowski Executive Summary “We need to take action, we owe it to future generations.” Prime Minister Stephen Harper1 Budget 2010 is a prime opportunity to create enduring economic and environmental benefi ts for Canadians. The Green Budget Coalition’s priority recommendations for Budget 2010 are: 1) Protecting Ecosystems and Biodiversity: A Necessity in the Face of Climate Change, 2) Investing in Canada’s Freshwater Future: Beginning with the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence Basin, and 3) Renewable Energy: Attracting Investment, Creating Jobs. Adopting these three recommendations alone would stimulate over eight thousand new jobs in renewable energy, ensure a clean source of drinking water for millions of Canadians, and protect key elements of our marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Investing in renewable energy and a national water is perhaps the biggest threat to confront the future of strategy will expedite the transformation of -
Volume 3: Process Issues Raised by Petitioners
EPA’s Response to the Petitions to Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act Volume 3: Process Issues Raised by Petitioners U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Atmospheric Programs Climate Change Division Washington, D.C. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3.0 Process Issues Raised by Petitioners............................................................................................5 3.1 Approaches and Processes Used to Develop the Scientific Support for the Findings............................................................................................................................5 3.1.1 Overview..............................................................................................................5 3.1.2 Issues Regarding Consideration of the CRU E-mails..........................................6 3.1.3 Assessment of Issues Raised in Public Comments and Re-Raised in Petitions for Reconsideration...............................................................................7 3.1.4 Summary............................................................................................................19 3.2 Response to Claims That the Assessments by the USGCRP and NRC Are Not Separate and Independent Assessments.........................................................................20 3.2.1 Overview............................................................................................................20 3.2.2 EPA’s Response to Petitioners’ -
EXTENSIONS of REMARKS April 23, 1975 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS
11576 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS April 23, 1975 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS FRANK J. LUCAS HONORED guiding principle has been that steady accustomed romantic beauty. (How spoiled employment with good pay and bene we New Yorkers a.re, but this is pa.rt of our dubious charm.) Downtown Brooklyn has no fits can only be realized when the em easy answer and is stlll fraughlt with real and HON. GLADYS NOON SPELLMAN ploying contractors are able to com continuing problems, but there 1s enough OF MARYLAND plete their contracts profitably, within visible accomplishment in terms o! design, specifications and in a timely manner. development and the creation a.nd reinforce IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. Lucas has been married for 43 ment of comm.unity and e.menity for a dozen Wednesday, April 23, 1975 years. He and his wife, the beautiful other cities. Eleanora, have one son, Francis Michael, Brooklyn's lessons in architecture and ur Mrs. SPELLMAN. Mr. Speaker, it was banism-which largely involve informed ef my pleasure to attend a testimonial din and two daughters, Mary Louise and forts to turn around an area. decimated by a ner on April 12, 1975, given by the Steam Ellen Gertrude, and they are blessed residential and commercial flight to the sub fitters local 603 of the United Associa with five grandchildren. For all of his urbs of the 1950's and 1960's--are hearten tion of Journeymen and Apprentices of life, Mr. Lucas has lived in the Wash ing. And so are the role and achievements of the Plumbing and Pipefltting Industry ington area. -
View / Open Q&A for Climate Skeptics.Pdf
Q & A FOR CLIMATE SKEPTICS Answers to the Most Frequently Stated Concerns Edited by the Climate Leadership Initiative Institute for a Sustainable Environment University of Oregon 541-746-0786 Http://climlead.uoregon.edu Background and Table of Contents Most of the information in this document is edited from: "How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic" a series by Coby Beck containing responses to the most common arguments opposing a belief in or action to resolve global warming. There are five parts. Each includes numerous objections heard by skeptics followed by answers to them. Responses will appear under multiple headings and may even appear in multiple subcategories in the same heading. 1. Climate Change is Not Real or Confirmed……………………………………..Page 1 2. We Don't Know Why It's Happening…………………………….……………. Page 31 3. Climate Change Is Natural…………………………………………………….. Page 39 4. Climate Change Is Not Bad……………………………………………………. Page 50 5. Climate Change Can't be Stopped (or Its Too Costly to Stop It)……………… Page 51 1. CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT REAL OR CONFIRMED a. Inadequate evidence Objection: Despite what the computer models tell us, there is actually no evidence of significant global warming. Answer: Global warming is not an output of computer models; it is a conclusion based on observations of a great many global indicators. By far the most straightforward evidence is the actual surface temperature record. While there are places -- in England, for example -- that have records going back several centuries, the two major global temperature analyses can only go back around 150 years due to their requirements for both quantity and distribution of temperature recording stations. -
1 B, Montague on Behalf of the Appellant 08 January 2012 in THE
B, Montague On behalf of the Appellant 08 January 2012 IN THE INFORMATION TRIBUNAL B E T W E E N : - BRENDAN MONTAGUE Appellant - And - THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER Respondent WITNESS STATEMENT OF BRENDAN MONTAGUE I Brendan Montague of Request Initiative Limited 27-29 Cursitor Street, HolBorn, London, EC4A 1LT 1. I am director of tHe Request Initiative, a community interest company. 2. I make tHis witness statement in support of Brendan Montague’s appeal. THe facts and matters set out in tHis statement are witHin my own knowledge unless otHerwise stated, and I Believe tHem to Be true. WHere I refer to information supplied By otHers, tHe source of tHe information is identified; facts and matters derived from otHer sources are true to tHe best of my knowledge and Belief. References in tHis statement are to documents in tHe Bundles of documents prepared for tHe TriBunal hearing. 3. I am appealing a decision [DN: FS50353245] By tHe Information Commissioner’s Office not to upHold my complaint against the Charity Commission following its decision not to disclose tHe name of tHe seed donor of tHe GloBal Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) citing Section 40(2) of tHe Freedom of Information Act. 1 4. THe CHarity Commission notes that the obligation under Principle 1 of the Data Protection Act is to process personal data “fairly and lawfully” and tHat it would Be unfair on tHe data suBject to release tHe name of tHe donor witHout His permission to a journalist. 5. The GWPF would, I assume, argue tHat campaigning against climate cHange mitigation is acting in tHe puBlic and national interest Because of tHe perceived adverse impact sucH policies could Have on tHe UK economy. -
Energy Forum Third Quarter 2008 International Association for Energy Economics
Energy Forum Third Quarter 2008 International Association for Energy Economics President’s Message n the month of June 2008 two historical records have been achieved: the price of Ioil and the extraordinary attendance at the 31st IAEE International Conference in Istanbul. Let me start with the latter: the Conference has undoubtedly been the most important event of our Association in the first part of the year. We had a record number of attendees (525) and a magnificent organisation up by the local Turkish Association (TRAEE). The quality of the papers presented during the parallel sessions was very high and this shows the vitality and the intellectual richness of our Association. Let me also mention to our international colleagues that for the first time IAEE is organising a joint session with AEA (American Economic Association) at the Annual ASSA Meeting, which will take place in January 2009 in San Francisco. This is a very important achievement for us, because the AEA has a very strict policy and very high internal standards for session organisation. The issues to be discussed include the mac- roeconomic and financial consequences of the oil price increase. Two more regional Conferences will take place this year: one in Asia, hosted by Australian Association, in Perth in November and the other in the U.S., organised by the USAEE in New Orleans in December. So, there are ample opportunities to meet and discuss crucial energy issues! CONTENTS I now turn to global world problems: in the month of July, on a Tuesday the G8 lead- ers set a long term objective of curbing emissions by 50% by the year 2050. -
1S T INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE on .HEALTH EFFECTS OF
AECL 6958 Atomic Energy of L'Energie Atomique Canada Limited Du Canada Limitee 1st INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON .HEALTH EFFECTS OF ENERGY PRODUCTION. 1ere Conference Internationale sur les Effets sur la Sante de la Production d'Energie Edited by NORMAN E. GENTNER and PAUL UNRAU CHALK RIVER NUCLEAR LABORATORIES, ONTARIO, CANADA 12-14 SEPTEMBER 1979 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HEALTH EFFECTS OF ENERGY PRODUCTION HELD AT CHALK RIVER NUCLEAR LABORATORIES, ONTARIO, CANADA 1979 SEPTEMBER 12-14 Edited by NORMAN E. GENTNER and PAUL UNRAU Published by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Chalk River, Ontario AECL-6958 11 Foreword A conference on Health Effects of Energy Production was held at the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories on 1979 September 12-14. This conference was organized at the time of the retirement of Dr. H.B. Newcombe after 32 years of service with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. A brief summary of Dr. Newcombe's distinguished career and a list of his publications has been appended to the end of the Proceedings of this conference. Financial support and facilities for this conference were provided by the Atomic Energy of Canada Research Company, of which the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories form a part. The conference was intended to help clarify the risks and benefits not only of nuclear power but of other energy options as well. This area is of scientific concarn to Atomic Energy of Canada Research Company as well as to many other organizations and individual persons; Dr. Newcombe had of course been directly involved in research on this topic for many years. -
From: John Mashey
Another Attack on Consensus - Monckton/Schulte/Ferguson/Morano/Asher vs Oreskes & Consensus ANOTHER ATTACK ON GLOBAL WARMING’S SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS A Case Study of Personal Harassment and Amplification of Nonsense by the Denialist PR Machine John R. Mashey, updated March 23, 2008, V 7.0, replaces earlier versions ABSTRACT Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) - the idea that recent temperature rises are substantially caused by humans – is supported by a very strong scientific consensus. But for ideological or economic reasons some people are absolutely sure that it cannot be true, frequently attack it. They are often called contrarians or denialists as a result. They try to manufacture doubt on the consensus among the public, not by doing good science, but by applying PR techniques well-honed in fights over tobacco-disease linkage. These are amplified by widespread use of the Internet, which can quickly propagating nonsense faster than truth. A recent, well-coordinated transatlantic attempt to attack the consensus included: - A not-very-good anti-consensus paper written in the UK by an NHS King’s College endocrinologist, Mr Klaus-Martin Schulte, not obviously qualified for this task, - of which much was posted by Viscount Christopher Monckton at a Washington, DC denialist website of Robert Ferguson, and publicized by Marc Morano of Senator James Inhofe’s staff. - The non-story then propagated rapidly and pervasively through the blogosphere. - This expanded further into personal harassment of a US researcher, Dr. Naomi Oreskes. All this generated -
The Libertarian Review September 1975
• © 1975, LIBERTARIAN REVIEW, INC an VOL. IV, NO.9-SEPTEMBER 1975 THE STATE By Franz Oppenheimer For centuries, the State and its intellectual apolo The State is unsurpassed in its analysis of the State as parasite and exploiter. gists have propagated the myth that the State is a Thus, Oppenheimer points out that there are two and only two ways by which voluntary instrument of society. Essential to that men can acquire income and wealth: One is through production and volun myth is the idea that the State arose on a volun tary exchange, what Oppenheimer calls "the economic means" to wealth, the tary, or at least on a natural, basis, arising organi means consonant with human nature and with the prosperity of mankind, the cally out of the needs of society. For if the State means which benefits all parties to the market and exchange process. The arose naturally or voluntarily, then it probably fol other means is robbery, the coercive looting and expropriation of someone :t>:;Y;:;:<1 ~::.:~:(" .;:,- ~:"~:: ::~:~:.., .. ~;;',:l~::::'i';; :'-:~::~:-: :~:~. lows that it fulfilled and still fulfills a vital societal else's production. This is the parasitic means, which not only violates the na function. Two major variants of the myth of State ture of man, but imposes a crippling burden on the victims and on production origins are the idea that the State arose out of a and economic growth. This path to wealth Oppenheimer called "the political "social contract" entered into by all members of means." Oppenheimer then goes on to define the State, on the basis of his society.