Senator John Kennedy (R) fired a round of questions on climate change reduction policies and goals that turned out to be devastating for Democrat Jamie Raskin.
h/t Townhall
Sen. John Kennedy Makes Climate Alarmist Democrat Look Like A Fool At Hearing
Comments 5
Recent Posts
EPA Head Details How Tax Dollars Funded Activists, Wasteful Green SchemesMay 8, 2026EPA chief Lee Zeldin reveals how environmental justice grants passed through multiple groups taking cuts, funding activism instead of remediation work. […]
Despite Contradictory Science, Academia’s Climate Groupthink PersistsMay 8, 2026Academia ignores lab evidence disproving CO2 warming while cap-and-trade regulations continue closing California factories and refineries. […]
Labour Council Scraps Electric Garbage Trucks, Goes Back To DieselMay 8, 2026A UK council ditched electric trash trucks after a trial found numerous charging faults and mechanical issues, opting for cheaper, reliable diesel trucks. […]
China’s Wind Power ‘Bet’ Will Cost Trillions — Yet Coal Still Rules The RoostMay 7, 2026China's massive wind power expansion looks like a bet on the future—until you notice they're still building coal plants at a record pace. […]
Calif. Copied Europe’s Insane Energy Playbook, And Residents Are Paying The PriceMay 7, 2026California embraced Europe's punitive fuel taxes and anti-production policies — and now suffers the same inflated prices and energy insecurity. […]
Bug Out: Major Swiss Grocer Ditches Insect-Based Foods After Years Of Poor SalesMay 7, 2026Switzerland's Coop is removing insect-based foods after years of weak sales. Competitors already withdrew, leaving bug-based proteins as a niche market. […]
The Climate Models Used To Regulate Your Life Were Never PlausibleMay 7, 2026IPCC abandons the extreme climate scenarios that justified trillions in spending and sweeping regulation — after decades of using them to drive policy. […]
Keystone XL Pipeline Revival Advances After Years Of Climate OppositionMay 6, 2026Oil companies commit to moving 400,000 barrels a day through a proposed Canada–U.S. pipeline tied to a revived Keystone XL-style route. […]
California Energy Crunch Deepens As Foreign Oil Reliance BackfiresMay 6, 2026California’s gas tops $6 as import reliance deepens, refinery closures bite, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright warns of a growing national security risk. […]
Calif. Dems Move To Extract Billions From Oil Companies For Wildfire DamagesMay 6, 2026California Dems target oil companies with billions in wildfire liability while state regulations strangle energy production and forest management. […]
Books You May Like
Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.
Making Gore and DiCaprio squirm around a while
I’m also bothered by the careless use of carbon and carbon dioxide interchangeably, but we need to focus on what matters.
At the time of the Kyoto Treaty the US was admitting more than half the carbon dioxide of world’s nations. Therefore it appeared that a drastic reduction by the US would be significant on the world wide scale. Those who are ignorant or support agendas hitchhiking on climate change movement have refused to let go of what appeared to be the case. China has significant emissions and they are growing fast. India will continue increase it emissions. Forest fires in the Boreal Forests may not emit as much carbon dioxide as Senator Kennedy says but they amount is obviously huge. We don’t know how much carbon dioxide is emitted geologic action but it is obvious immense. Our emissions are obviously small in the context world emissions and there certainly is no justification for spending a trillion dollars a year to reduce our emissions.
“Geologic action”. Add to that the carbon dioxide released from ocean/seawater as it warms.
I don’t have the figures in front of me, but I believe the quantity released for degree C. rise is not inconsiderable.
A doubling of CO2 will result in a 1 to 1.2 degree Celsius temp rise. The effect is logarithmic, it diminishes with increasing volume. That kind of warming is no crisis, is mainly beneficial, plants, crops, trees grow much better with higher levels of CO2, make them more efficient with water use.
As usual the entire discussion is nonsensical since nobody there realizes that carbon and carbon dioxide are completely different substances. Even where the focus is on scientific matters, there is not excuse for not having good command of the language