Obama Science Czar: Please Don't Say 'Global Warming'

We have a new name for it because the old one is discredited (from American Thinker):

John Holdren, our official fraudulent "Science Czar" for our equally mendacious President, has dumped "global warming" as a "dangerous misnomer." Ah, yes, that would be it then. It's not the facts but the words that are wrong, says America's official Doctor Science.

In scientific terms this means John Holdren has run up the white flag and is begging for mercy. "Warming" is something we can measure scientifically. "Global Warming" is a lot more speculative, but with satellites, weather balloons, and plenty of ocean buoys, we now know that it's just wrong. Global Warming has been shot down in flames by scientific skeptics who resorted to an unfair tactic called "facts and observations."

The wild hypothesis of "catastrophic anthropogenic global warming a 100 years from now," is so obviously harebrained sci fi that no sane person can believe in it.

Dr. Holdren's newest brainstorm? Forget all that warming stuff. No, we are now supposed to believe in something called "global climate disruption."

That way some wildly overpaid "internationally respected" climate modeler can predict that in a hundred years things will get two degrees warmer, colder, or neither one or the other, and still predict the end of the earth. That'll be a couple of hundred million dollars for more life-saving "research," if you please.

Only the Chicken Little caucus believes any of this crap anymore.

John Holdren, Climate Populist

John Holdren is the totalitarian loon who now serves as Obama's Science Czar. He's also a climate populist - somebody who chases whatever the "cool kids" in climate science say he should promote. Here's what he's had to say about global warming from the October 2008 Scientific American:

The ongoing disruption of the earth’s climate by man-made greenhouse gases is already well beyond dangerous and is careening toward completely unmanageable. Under midrange projections for economic growth and technological change, the planet’s average surface temperature in 2050 will be about two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than its preindustrial value. The last time the earth was that warm was 130,000 years ago, and sea level was four to six meters higher than today. No one knows how long it will take sea level to “catch up” with such an increase; it could be several centuries, or it could be less.

In other words, we're all gonna die.

Now, let's flash back to the Disco Era for this Holdren Golden Oldie, courtesy of Zomblog:

In 1971, John Holdren edited and contributed an essay to a book entitled Global Ecology: Readings Toward a Rational Strategy for Man. He wrote (along with colleague Paul Ehrlich) the book’s sixth chapter, called “Overpopulation and the Potential for Ecocide.” (Click here to view a photograph of the table of contents, showing Holdren’s essay on pages 64-78; click on the image to the left to view the cover.) In their chapter, Holdren and Ehrlich speculate about various environmental catastrophes, and on pages 76 and 77 Holdren the climate scientist speaks about the probable likelihood of a “new ice age” caused by human activity (air pollution, dust from farming, jet exhaust, desertification, etc.).

In other words, we're all gonna die.

This is the worst form of populism, based not on reality or even reliable science, but based on seeing a parade and running to get in front of it. Nothing he forecast in 1971 came true, and there's no reason to think that his latest rants will come true either.

Truth is not important to populists. Being one of the "cool kids" is what's important, and now that he's part of the Obama Czar Regime, he's one of the coolest.

Obama Czar Would Ban Hunting

This may be the next contestant on "Obama Czars With Bizarre Beliefs":

Another of President Obama’s appointments is coming under fire. This time it is Professor Cass Sunstein, tapped by the Obama administration to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. On the surface he does not seem nearly as extreme in his views as Van Jones. The hearing held by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Oversight Committee revealed a pragmatic approach to regulation viewed as centrist in nature. What is not centrist about Professor Sunstein are his beliefs on hunting, animal rights, and agriculture.

Professor Sunstein has stated in the past that all hunting should be eliminated by regulation. This is extremely dangerous to hunters as this is one of the most powerful positions in the White House, controlling all kinds of regulations that will directly affect hunting. At a Harvard University conference, he said “We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.” Even though he seems to have left the door open to some hunting for sustenance in that statement, his other beliefs on animal rights preclude nearly all animal use. That is an extreme viewpoint not shared by most Americans.

On animal rights Professor Sunstein has stated that animals may have the right to sue in court. His position stops short of granting animals full citizenship and while he believes they still may be considered property, they should be granted the opportunity to sue with human representation in a court of law. In this far-fetched parallel reality, there would practically be an end to any animal use anywhere in the United States. A chicken suing a farmer for better living conditions is just as preposterous as an attorney representing a deer that a hunter has harvested. Those kind of questions addressing animal welfare are usually settled through regulation. Unfortunately for farmers, hunters, fisherman and anyone else who makes their living with animals, the regulatory direction Professor Sunstein will take us in is guaranteed to be onerous.

It is an exercise in mental gymnastics to debate the merit of an animal having the right to be represented in a court of law. If this became the law of the land, it opens a Pandora's box for attorneys to enter into litigation on the behalf of animals. It also begs the question; if an animal can sue a human for damages, can an animal sue a human entity such as a wildlife management agency for introducing a predator into an Eco-system formerly devoid of predators? Would an attorney be able to represent a herd of elk in the case of wolf re-introduction? This is just one example of why this is not currently allowed. It is curious that people with these beliefs stop at granting animals rights equal to humans but never enter into the debate as to which animals have more rights than others. While the elk in this example would not be directly suing the wolves, the rights of the wolves would have to be balanced against the rights of the elk. This can only come from the basic premise that animals and humans are somehow separate and independent of each other and do not co-exist. This is not the case. Humans and animals will continue to be in direct competition for habitat and food as long as we both live on this planet. While the animals may or may not benefit from increased litigation the attorneys certainly would. Professor Sunstein is a professor of law. I guess it is true that when you are a hammer the whole world looks like a nail.

There's lots more where Sunstein came from. Don't forget Science Czar John Holdren, the totalitarian loon.

Czar Wars

Who's next?

Now czar regime opponents are looking into names such as John Holdren, Cass Sunstein and Mark Lloyd.

Holdren, the science czar, for example, has been described as a population control "zealot" who has stated his belief the Constitution justifies compulsory abortions. His 1977 book with Paul Ehrlich called "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," states: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated. It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

The authors created a "Planetary Regime" whose police forces would be able to "enforce" population limits around the globe.

Then there's Cass Sunstein, the Harvard Law professor named the regulator czar.

He's also been on the population control bandwagon, advocated animal rights and followed the teachings of Peter Singer devoutly. Singer has argued that abortion should be allowed because killing unborn babies isn't like homicide.

"Killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living."

He also discussed outlawing sport hunting and giving animals the legal right to file lawsuits.

"Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients' behalf," he suggested.

Then there's Mark Lloyd, the "diversity czar" who has talked about issues such as a 100 percent tax on broadcast outlets in order to collect money to provide alternative viewpoints, mandatory diversity in station ownership and the idea of requiring broadcast businesses to cater to the demands of local activism committees.

Republican Congressman Mike Pence said all such appointees should be reviewed by Congress like those who take various cabinet positions and must be approved by elected legislators.

You can bet the GOP will start looking hard at all the czar appointments, and the news today that none of them had to complete the vetting questionnaire required of cabinet and sub-cabinet positions will have a lot of people wondering what might be hiding in their past.

There's also a concern that the czar's are the ones actually making policy while the cabinet secretaries are just the front men for the cameras and the confirmation process. Even some Democrats in the Senate won't like the idea of being bypassed in this manner.

Obama's New Science Czar is a Totalitarian Loon

So says Zombie, who did the research:

Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.

The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?

These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology—informally known as the United States’ Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who “contribute to social deterioration” (i.e. undesirables) “can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility”—in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational “Planetary Regime” should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives—using an armed international police force.

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich.

You can see all the ugly details here.

More Czars Than a Romanov Wedding

That's how Charles Krauthammer describes the Obama Administration. For those of you keeping score at home, here's the current roster:

1. Herb Allison-TARP Czar
2. Alan Bersin-Border Czar
3. Dennis Blair-Intelligence Czar
4. John Brennan-Terrorism Czar
5. Carol Browner-Energy Czar
6. Adolfo Carrion, Jr-Urban Affairs Czar
7. Ashton Carter-Weapons Czar
8. Aneesh Chopra-Technology Czar
9. Jeffrey Crowley-AIDS Czar
10. Cameron Davis-Great Lakes Czar
11. Nancy-Ann DeParle-Health Czar
12. Earl Devaney-Stimulus Accountability Czar
13. Joshua DuBois-Faith-based Czar
14. Kenneth Feinberg-Pay Czar
15. Danny Fried-Guantanamo Closure Czar
16. J. Scott Gration-Sudan Czar
17. Richard Holbrooke-Afghanistan Czar
18. John Holdren-Science Czar
19. Van Jones Green-Jobs Czar
20. Gil Kerlikowske-Drug Czar
21. Vivek Kundra-Information Czar
22. George Mitchell-Mideast Peace Czar
23. Ed Montgomery-Car Czar
24. Dennis Ross-Mideast Policy Czar
25. Gary Samore-WMD Czar
26. Todd Stern-Climate Czar
27. Cass Sunstein-Regulatory Czar
28. Paul Volcker-Economic Czar

The beauty of appointing czars is they don't have to go through the inconvenience of a Senate confirmation while having all the power of a Cabinet secretary. Accountability? Only to Obama.

Great system we got.

Climate Change Through Science

Boy, what a bunch of clowns we've got in the Obama Administration:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.

John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed. One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays. Holdren said such an experimental measure would only be used as a last resort.

"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."

Holdren outlined several "tipping points" involving global warming that could be fast approaching. Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.

Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."

They're in a fog, alright.

The earth's climate has warmed and cooled for millenia. There's a lot of good science that indicates we're now in a cooling period and this joker wants to cool it further. We better be careful or these guys are gonna freeze us out.