The Obama administration is just fraud all the way down.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration is concerned that a crucial United Nations report on climate science may be too harsh in assessing the cost of fighting global warming.
Such a finding may lower the incentive for the world to reduce fossil fuel pollution and feed the arguments of those skeptical about whether it’s worth spending money to curtail rising temperatures.
Global temperatures haven’t risen in 15 years, but never mind that. Pay no attention to the Sun’s role in our climate.
The UN report is set for release next week. Plenty of time to inject some happy math.
“The discussion of the economic costs of mitigation is too narrow and does not incorporate co-benefits of action,” U.S. officials wrote in a submission to the UN, according to a document obtained by Bloomberg. They said including only one side of the equation “unnecessarily skews the information.”
Well, the “side” that the administration wants included isn’t real. It’s conjecture. Made-up.
The comment refers to “global consumption losses” identified in the report of as much as 4 percent in 2030, 6 percent in 2050 and 12 percent in 2100 as a result of action to protect the climate, according to a draft leaked in January.
State Department officials are pressing to factor in improvements to public health and lower energy costs from increased efficiency that would happen if fossil fuels were limited. Those would offset the price to be paid for switching over to cleaner forms of energy such as wind and solar and paring back on lower-cost fuels such as coal.
This is the math on which Solyndra was built. And Obamacare.
Nowhere will the Obama administration ever acknowledge Climate Gate.