From Prison Planet.com Saturday, February 5, 2011 – Lies about Texas not being affected by draconian EPA rules on greenhouse gases. – Deception about clean burning coal-fired plants producing “carbon pollution”. – Spin in denying EPA and Obama administration have publicly stated and openly embarked on mission to destroy coal industry by blocking construction of new power plants. The White House has publicly responded to the controversy surrounding the Obama administration’s agenda to bankrupt the coal industry and its connection to this week’s blackouts across the country, by attempting to deny the link in a rebuttal that amounts to nothing more than a tissue of lies, deception and spin. In a blog that appears on the front page of WhiteHouse.gov, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer begins by claiming that the story came from a “questionable” source and is “unquestionably false,” without even naming the source. Frightened that Americans might actually read the source and make their own minds up based on the facts, Pfeiffer fails to provide a link to our original article that was subsequently picked up by the Drudge Report, Fox News and numerous other media outlets. Pfeiffer then oversimplifies the debate by building a straw man argument based around the premise that “the Obama Administration is somehow responsible for the rolling blackouts in Texas,” before blaming the outages on cold weather. By framing the argument to make out as if we claimed Obama flipped a switch and the lights went out is completely deceptive. Of course the cold weather has shown that the country is vulnerable to blackouts, but that vulnerability is a direct result of the Obama administration’s stated goal to bankrupt the coal industry and its proven track record, through the enforcement of EPA regulations, of blocking power plants from being built that would be able to handle the extra demand. Pfeiffer then claims that the blackouts were a result of power plants experiencing “mechanical failures,” completely ignoring the fact that the blackouts were planned and were made necessary because of a lack of supply to meet increased demand. That’s why Texas had to rely on Mexico to meet its power shortfall, an offer that was subsequently suspended. Pfeiffer then attempts to counter the manifestly provable fact that desperately needed new coal-fired plants are being mothballed under the weight of draconian EPA regulations on CO2 emissions by claiming that Texas isn’t subject to such restrictions. Firstly, Texas supplies power to surrounding states that have been impacted by the new EPA regulations, leaving less energy to meet the demand of those living in the lone star state. Secondly, despite Texas’ best efforts to fight the new Clean Air Act standards, the EPA has aggressively enforced existing regulations, a process that has both delayed and prevented new plants in Texas from being built, such as the Las Brisas Energy Center, which has been the subject of a near three year battle between the EPA and state authorities. Indeed, a federal court ruling last month gave the EPA permission to proceed with greenhouse gas regulation in Texas, temporarily superseding Texas’ non-compliance with the new regulations which came into force on January 2. The White House’s claim that EPA regulations are not currently affecting Texas is a complete fabrication. The wider argument that the EPA is simply trying to implement reasonable measures to prevent “carbon pollution” is also a complete misnomer. Modern day clean burning coal-fired plants go to great lengths to remove all hazardous chemicals before any emissions leave the plant, through the use of sophisticated scrubbers and other techniques, to the point where the only emissions are water vapor and carbon dioxide. Watch the video below for a demonstration of these techniques. There can be no doubt whatsoever that the Obama administration has deliberately pursued a policy of bankrupting the coal industry by means of crippling EPA regulations. Candidate Obama himself explicitly stated this objective during a January 2008 interview. “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted,” he stated. This policy has led not only to new coal plants not being built, but also to existing coal plants being threatened with termination. EPA regulations are forcing power plants out of business across America – leaving the country vulnerable to more enforced blackouts and higher energy prices. – Back in July 2008, a Superior Court judge in Fulton County blocked the construction of a coal plant in Georgia, citing global warming concerns and the need to limit CO2 emissions. – In January 2009, the Obama EPA blocked approval for a coal-fired power plant in South Dakota, claiming the state, “didn’t meet requirements under the Clean Air Act in part of its proposed permit for the plant.” – As Governor of Kansas, Obama’s current Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius slapped a de facto ban on the construction of all new coal-fired plants across the state. – Last month, Senators in Obama’s home state of Illinois blocked the construction of a clean-burning coal gasification and power generating plant. – As a result of the EPA’s recent remand of air permits, Shell Oil announced this week that it has “dropped plans to drill in the Arctic waters of the Beaufort Sea this year and will concentrate,” ensuring more shortages and higher prices for Americans Last month Dayton Daily News reported that, “The power industry nationwide might have to spend more than $80 billion and retire 45,000 megawatts of coal-fired power plants over several years in adjusting operations to meet current and possible new EPA regulations.” The shortage of power plants to meet the demands of Texans and other Americans as cold weather grips the country is down to the EPA holding local utility companies hostage and blocking them from building desperately needed new power plants. Obama’s January greenhouse gas rules restricted the amount of emissions allowable for new power plants, while giving an exemption to General Electric, an intimate financial supporter of his administration. The Obama administration has crippled US infrastructure and its ability to meet the needs of Americans by declaring war on the coal industry. While smaller independent power plant companies are being squeezed out of existence by EPA rules, transnational giants are busy creating artificial scarcity to jack up prices and eliminate their competition. Indeed, we only have to recall how Enron shut down power plants on false pretenses during the 2001 blackouts in California as a ploy to raise prices to understand how the restriction of energy is used as a political and financial tool of oppression. Energy prices continue to skyrocket nationwide while the EPA prepares to shut down more plants, ensuring only higher prices in the years to come. The federal government’s siege against independent power companies’ efforts to build coal-fired plants is part of the unfolding globalist agenda to cripple American infrastructure even as China and Mexico build new power plants at ever accelerating speeds. The fact that the White House is so concerned that this agenda is being exposed that they feel the need to address it with a tissue of lies and deception on the front page of WhiteHouse.gov is a telling indication that the Obama administration is panicking about Americans becoming aware of the move to completely de-industrialize the United States.

I have been too busy lately to do my part to keep readers entertained, and I am sorry for that. There is so much nonsense in the world lately that it is getting more and more difficult deciding where to start! There have been a number of events consistent with the things I have written about on my companion web site ’Warmal Globing’… for example, I write on one of the pages about the way science works, or more importantly the way scientific funding works. As a former scientist and former grant applicant, I know that one must apply for the right things if one is to get funded. The applicant ALWAYS looks at who is funding the grant, and what that agency ‘wants’ to find. Yes, the grants always come with wording like ‘unrestricted funding’, but all scientists know the ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ behind that statement! And sure enough– we recently found that a number of very respected scientists have engaged in ‘unscientific’ behavior by covering up or distoring data, hiding messages that admit to doubts caused by the REAL findings– the findings that they can’t report, for fear of losing the golden goose that is global warming. Just think about it– can you imagine how much money will be lost by so many people, if global warming turns out to be a crock?! And it is a crock, of course. And eventually the truth will come out, because as much as Al Gore wants it to happen, the low-lying areas of the world will not be inundated with the floods– beyond the floods that they have ALWAYS been inundated by.

Which brings up another point that is also on my web site… the global warming zealots get to blame everything on ‘warming’! We recently had a cold spell and nasty snowstorm across the southeast US– in fact, it shut DC down for several days, just as they were getting ready to pass more carbon taxes ‘to stimulate the economy’ (you truly cannot make this stuff up). One of the Kennedy clan had just penned an op-ed about the good old days when it snowed so much more…. suggesting that it snows less now because of ‘global warming’. BTW, even the smart people out there who are idiots about global warming will admit that what they refer to as the current ‘climate change disaster’ has nothing to do with the snow that a Kennedy is writing about– that all of the local phenomena people tend to point to as they nod their heads in reality have nothing to do with ‘climate change’. But as he pens this piece, this massive snowstorm hits. But what does the mainstream media do? They BLAME GLOBAL WARMING FOR THE SNOW!!! They truly get it both ways– because in their odd world, warming causes cooling. Yes, I understand what they are saying- that the contrast in temps and the increased ‘thermal energy’ somehow causes storms that include snow and ice….. but it is not reasonable for them to claim that warming causes less snowstorms (ala Kennedy) and at the same time say that the snow is FROM the warming. And besides– also on my web site there is a copy of the Newsweek article from the 1970′s about the coming disaster of global cooling, and in that article the same scientists who are cited now were saying that the Earth would have increased glaciers and tornados and snowstorms, all from ‘global cooling’.

The other thing that happened just recently was that another leading global warming alarmist announced ‘never mind’, admitting that the Earth’s temp has not changed significantly in over 15 years.  Never mind.  Think about all the money wasted over the last few years, and the raised taxes, the increased government control, the sagging economy, the disastrous election of Democrats–  all over something that doesn’t exist.  Can we sue Al Gore?  Maybe he and Obama can travel to Stockholm together and both give their silly awards back at the same time!  You know what?  They are both so shameless that they would each give a speech about why it is OK flying separately, now that ‘they were right all along that the Earth wasn’t warming’.  And people would actually believe them, and some would credit them for finding out that global warming is a myth.

Another realist’s thoughts on the issue of global warming were sent my way.  Here is the link:  75 reasons to be skeptical of global warming

For the past few years the US news media have been silent as leading climate scientists walked away from the wild claims for weather catastrophes from global warming.  The press said nothing in response to the drop-off in hurricane activity, just as the fear-mongers on the left predicted wave on wave of Katrinas, destroying the Eastern US.  Now we have the findings that the few scientists who have remained outspoken about climate change have some ‘splaining to do– as we now know that they fudged the data to create impressions that were not true, and hiding studies that showed that the earth has been cooling for the past decade.

I will just site a few of them, and the reader can find them and give credit where it is due.

From ‘The Hill’:     Rep. Issa: Obama’s refusal to investigate ‘Climategate’ emails is ‘unconscionable’

From the Media Research Center:  Day Fourteen and Counting

From Politiken Denmark, the quote:   The Speaker of the Danish Parliament has issued a damning criticism of the climate debate, saying politicians gullibly turn theories into facts. (from the article Climate debate derailed?)

I can’t imagine any better argument for reading only the ‘foreign press’.  Why read press that is censored, when you can get the real story by turning on your computer?

Winter 2008-09—the coldest in 8 years—is to turn brutally cold the remainder of the workweek once snow exits Wednesday. Temperatures drop below zero Wednesday night and may remain there through Friday morning, producing what could be a 39 consecutive-hour stretch of subzero temperatures over many parts of the area (this sentence as published has been corrected). Only in the Loop and near Lake Michigan may the mercury struggle to zero (or just above) for a brief period Thursday—though that’s not guaranteed.

A full calendar day hasn’t failed to officially record an above zero temperature in Chicago since Feb. 3, 1996, when the high was 5 degrees below zero and the low was minus 19.

The snow Wednesday—the 26th day with measurable snow this season—is the product of the latest Alberta Clipper. With the storm system’s center tracking to Chicago’s south, winds just above the surface may take on an easterly component, blowing off the lake for several hours Wednesday afternoon and producing lake snow in addition to the system’s 1-4 inch snowfall.

21st coldest winter of past 139 years

Chicago’s 22.4 average temperature since Dec. 1 is 7 degrees colder than the same period a year ago.