Serious About Global Warming? Encourage Nuclear in Wisconsin

WUI Executive Director Bob Seitz called out Wisconsin global warming activists in an interview with

“If the goal is to have carbon-free generation, then the only real solution is nuclear energy. If the goal is clean energy, the solution is still nuclear energy. If it’s jobs, it really is nuclear energy for export,” Seitz says in a new WisPolitics interview.

Seitz said the group supports real changes to the state’s limits on the construction of new nuclear power plants. Still, he said any suggestion the climate change will actually loosen those limits is off base.

Seitz said after sitting through 16 hours of public hearings on the bill, he suspects the provision was crafted intentionally to ensure no real change to the limits on building a new nuclear power plant in Wisconsin. If it was done mistakenly, it should be fixed, he said.

“It’s a new moratorium or an old moratorium,” Seitz claims. “This is why people are cynical about their government.”

You can click at the bottom of the article to hear the whole interview.

Scientists Retreat as Global Warming Bill Pushed in Wisconsin

Supporters of Wisconsin global warming legislation are pushing away on their bill to save glaciers and rainforests from catastrophe.

Meanwhile, the “experts” who sounded the alarm about these catastrophes have been forced to admit many of those predictions were based on magazine articles and offhand comments rather than science.

Following the “Climategate” scandal in which scientists appear to have been working together to discredit anyone who disagreed, so many accepted “facts” have been exposed as meritless that a respected international newspaper is calling for the head of the IPCC, the International Panel on Climate Change (the United Nations “Experts”), to step down:

 January 31 London Telegraph: We need facts, not spin, in the climate debate”

“In its zeal to persuade the world of the catastrophic consequences of man-made global warming, the IPCC has lost both its objectivity and the trust of the public. That is one of the main reasons why we, along with our sister newspaper The Daily Telegraph, believe that Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC’s chairman, should step down.”

 This call comes after two weeks in which:

 –          Claims by the IPCC that 40% of Rainforests are threatened by man-made global warming have been debunked.

January 31 London Times:  UN Panel Shamed by Bogus Rainforest Claim”

 “A STARTLING report by the United Nations climate watchdog that global warming might wipe out 40% of the Amazon rainforest was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise.”

 –          Claims that glaciers in the Alps are disappearing due to man-made global warming have been debunked.

January 30 London Telegraph:  UN Climate Change Panel Based Claims on Student’s Dissertation and Magazine Article”

 “The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming.”

 –          Claims that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 have been debunked.

January 21 Christian Science Monitor:  Himalayan Glaciers Gone by 2035?  IPCC Mistaken”

“Scientists did not challenge the spurious date for years and some now warn that, in fact, our understanding about Himalayan glaciers rests on thin data.”

Our question:  With international action stalled in the face of scandal over the facts and US action unlikely this year, shouldn’t Wisconsin allow the science to be corrected before we act?

Emails Show Global Warming Scientists Abuse The Facts

Recently released email conversations between climate change scientists in Europe show how they have manipulated evidence and silenced their critics, creating a scandal now known as ‘Climategate.’

Gordon Crovitz, recently editorialized the scandal in the Wall Street Journal:

For anyone who doubts the power of the Internet to shine light on darkness, the news of the month is how digital technology helped uncover a secretive group of scientists who suppressed data, froze others out of the debate, and flouted freedom-of-information laws. Their behavior was brought to light when more than 1,000 emails,and some 3,500 additional files were published online, many of which boasted about how they suppressed hard questions about their data.

Crovitz goes on to detail some of the emails:

The emails showed how the global-warming group stifled dissent. They controlled the peer-review process, keeping opposing views unpublished, then cited “peer review” as evidence of their “consensus.” One of the dissident scientists, Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado, wrote on his blog that the emails show the “collusion to suppress other scientifically supported views of the climate system, and the human role within it, is a systemic problem with the climate assessment process.”

Not only did they limit the peer review process, but the London Times discusses how the scientists dumped the data which they have used in their attempt to prove that global warming existed:

Scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

These emails are damaging evidence for the climate change community.  They also show the extent to which those who control the “evidence” will go to hinder their opponents.