Last week, NASA's head guy said that while he didn't doubt the Earth was warming, “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with.”
Calm and understated is the way I would characterize the comment, but it caused a fury among warming wackos. So today, Michael Griffin said that “unfortunately, this is an issue which has become far more political than technical, and it would have been well for me to have stayed out of it…. All I can really do is apologize to all you guys…. I feel badly that I caused this amount of controversy over something like this,”
"… far more political than technical." What an even more subtle and accurate characterization, as the warming bandwagon seems to roll merrily along.
Griffin added that his "goal is usually to avoid controversy."
That is SO not my goal.
Which is probably the only reason I'm not running NASA today.
And while I'm on the subject of warming – which gets me hot, and not in a good way, there's this:
"An investigation by BBC Radio 4's File on 4 programme has found that the EU's carbon trading scheme has increased electricity bills, given a windfall to power companies and failed to cut greenhouse gases, it is claimed."
Even better, after two and half years the scheme has yet to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
"The consumer body Energywatch said customers are getting a raw deal."
Now the best part:
"But a government minister has promised that the scheme's next phase will be a big improvement."
Did I say, "best?" Then this is the bestest…
"Power generators received their allowances free of charge but were allowed to reflect the value of those in increased prices to customers, as if the companies had actually had to buy the allowances.
Energywatch believes this increased electricity bills by about 7% in 2005 and delivered windfall profits of up to £1.3bn to the generators – higher than environmental campaigners had claimed last year.
Meanwhile: "It is also reckoned that CO2 emissions across the EU also rose by between 1 and 1.5% over the last two years."
Ya hate to see that. Such good intentions gone astray. But if it had to happen, why not Europe?
"But the Minister for Climate Change, Ian Pearson, told File on 4 that the carbon trading scheme has been an administrative success…" (spit-take)
"If you are saying to me it hasn't achieved a massive amount so far when it comes to CO2 reductions, well I agree with you and I think Phase Two will be a big, big improvement…and a key instrument in helping us all to achieve our carbon reduction targets across Europe."
Perhaps a better, easier, and quicker way to achieve carbon reduction in Europe is to reduce Europe?!?