Re: [asa] ESA: Wilkins Ice Shelf under threat

From: Michael Roberts <>
Date: Wed Dec 03 2008 - 10:39:47 EST

Thanks Rich, beautifully put. You could have added the Acton Institute, ramblings of our Lord Nigel Lawson and some others. There is also a centre in Seattle who are also into GW denial and few other things..................


----- Original Message -----
  From: Rich Blinne
  To: Lynn Walker ; Randy Isaac ; Murray Hogg ; Don Winterstein
  Cc: John Burgeson (ASA member) ; Glenn Morton ; asa
  Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 2:52 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] ESA: Wilkins Ice Shelf under threat

  On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:36 PM, Lynn Walker wrote:

    John Burgeson: "But whether the IPCC is right -- or not -- we still have an energy "situation" to challenge us."


    Cooling Down
    IBD Tuesday, December 02, 2008

    Climate Change: Policymakers and other busybodies trying to save the planet will one day learn that, despite all the hype about global warming, most people are focused on issues that for them are more meaningful.

    During economic boom times, developed and developing nations have the luxury to indulge in meaningless gestures, such as the trendy campaign to beat global warming.

    But when the economy slows and energy costs increase, the people in those nations become a bit more focused and find that environmental issues might not be as important as they thought. This evolution of thought can be tracked by looking at how the public regards global warming now compared with last year.

  Our current economic and environmental crisis has the same roots, extreme economic libertarianism. All the information "sources", e.g. Heartland Foundation, Marshall Institute, Hoover Institute, IBD, Wall Street Journal, Daily Telegraph, and Rush, push this don't regulate ever, no way, no now, agenda. They did this for the link between cigarettes and cancer. Don't worry it's just media hype. Acid rain, ditto because cap and trade couldn't possibly solve the problem (it did). The ozone hole and the Montreal Convention, ditto. They opposed CAFE standards for automobiles resulting in the destruction of the American auto industry. They pushed the Gram Leach Bliley Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, because we needed to deregulate the financial industry. Results: the Second Great Depression. Next up, destroy the planet. The temerity that we should not solve this problem because of another problem that their economic theory caused frosts me. Ironically intelligent regulation is good for business. Xcel Energy opposed a citizen's initiative in Colorado to require alternative energy in our electrical production. Once it passed they came back to the legislature and asked them to double the targets! When are we going to stop listening to these guys?

  Rich Blinne
  Member ASA

  P.S. I recommend "A Very Short Introduction to the Great Depression and the New Deal". The parallels concerning this radical deregulation and the resulting economic carnage is scary. It's interesting all these op-eds act as if their side won. Oh well, the adults are in charge now. Not only must we solve these problems simultaneously, we can. Note to Don: one thing I noticed while listening to the President-elect's stump speech when he was at CSU is how popular his call for sacrifice is, particularly amongst young people.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Dec 3 10:40:23 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 03 2008 - 10:40:23 EST