Who Are We?

GreenWatchAmerica is an organization with a weekly newsletter dedicated to exposing the omissions, half-truths and outright lies of the radical Green Agenda, and to giving a voice to the Global Warming 'Deniers' throughout the scientific community.

You can sign up for our newsletter here.

You can email us at GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Quote of the Week

Via Edward John Craig at Planet Gore, Newt Gingrich and Henry Waxman get into a tiff over the Democrats' plans to regulate (see: punish) energy industries to promote the latest "Green" cause du jour:

Gingrich: "We didn’t build the trans-continental railroad by punishing stage coaches."
Waxman: "Well I am glad you’re not in charge of foreign policy."
Gingrich: "I don’t think of the American people in the same terms as foreign dictators."

Friday, April 24, 2009

GreenWatch Newsletter 24 (April 20, 2009)

Spread the Word:

We here at GreenWatchAmerica are excited and delighted to announce that, starting today, we are launching the GreenWatchAmerica blog.

Every GreenWatch Newsletter will be archived on the website one week after its released. The site already features every previous installment of the newsletter. We will update the blog regularly. We will have web-exclusive content on the blog, and email-exclusive content in our newsletter. Be sure to bookmark the site and check it regularly.

We are also now on facebook! Become a fan of GreenWatchAmerica. Point your friends to our facebook page.

But it doesn't end there. GreenWatchAmerica is also on Twitter! Every time the blog is updated, our Twitter account, GWAmerica, will be updated with a link.

It doesn't end here for GreenWatch. We will constantly be improving and upgrading the website. We also would love to hear suggestions from our readers. Email us at GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com and let us know what features you'd like to see on our site.Part of the reason we're expanding like this is because we got so many emails from our readers clamoring for it. Now spread the word to your friends and family. Tell them to read the blog, sign up for our newsletter, and follow us on facebook and Twitter.

Featured Story:

John Fund in the Wall Street Journal reports on a brand new documentary, "Not Evil, Just Wrong" that will have its premier tomorrow (Wednesday) at Rachel Carson Elementary School in the suburbs of Seattle.

Irish documentary filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney have stirred up trouble before by debunking smug liberal hypocrisy. Their latest film, "Not Evil, Just Wrong" takes on the hysteria over global warming and warns that rushing to judgment in combating climate change would threaten the world's poor.

The film reminds us that environmentalists have been wrong in the past, as when they convinced the world to ban the pesticide DDT, costing the lives of countless malaria victims. The ban was finally reversed by the World Health Organization only after decades of debate. The two Irish filmmakers argue that if Al Gore's advice to radically reduce carbon emissions is followed, it would condemn to poverty two billion people in the world who have yet to turn on their first light switch.

The filmmakers previously made "Mine Your Own Business," another documentary that focused on a small, incredibly poor village in Romania that desperately wanted to open a new gold mine. The new mine would have helped alleviate the town's nearly 70% unemployment rate. Radical environmentalists, predictably, and unfortunately, would have none of it. And it was yet another example of environmentalists getting the science wrong, and hurting people in the process.

To see the trailers for both films, visit the GreenWatch Blog.

The Radical Green Movement far too frequently get the science wrong, but the real damage comes when foolish policy based on that bad science is implemented. The latest example of that bad policy? One need look no further than the President of the United States. To read more about Obama's railroad blunder, click here to visit the GreenWatch blog.

Know someone who'd like to receive our newsletter? They can sign up by clicking this link.

More Headlines:

U.S. Power Company to Tap Solar Energy in Space

Talking Climate Change with Anthony Watts

Hurricane Predicted to be Down in 2009

Stay Slim to Save the Planet

Energy and the Environment: Myths and Facts

There are even more headlines on the GreenWatch Blog. To see them, click here.

The Reader's Corner:

From David, who's fed up in Michigan:

"I am so fed up with the Global Warming lies. There is NO Global Warming, it's just a way for the Government to take more control over all of us. It is the middle of April and we have not had a day with the temperature over 50 degrees during the day and above 40 degrees during the night. It has been getting colder for the last 15 years, not warmer. We long for 75 or 80 degree weather."

Daniel writes:

"I've just read your story from the Washington Times about the "Waxman Markey" bill, allowing anyone "who has suffered, or reasonably expects to suffer, a harm attributable, in whole or in part" due to government inaction to combat greenhouse gas emissions to sue the federal government.

Does this mean that the converse is also true, that anyone who suffers harm due to government action on the environment could file suit?

I've been waiting for this!!! I'd love to see a RICO lawsuit against the "environmentalists" who have blocked every attempt to expand production and distribution of energy within our borders."


"As to the "Most Egregious Claim of the Week", no surprise it came from Andy
Rooney, but where is the proof that we are running out of oil? I've never
seen this ridiculous claim substantiated. As with everything else these
global warming nuts claim, it's bogus. If the climate did not change
periodically as it was made to do by powers far greater than man, wouldn't
I be walking my dinasours in the woods every morning rather than my dogs?

"Reigning in pollution is one thing, and striking a balance between our
industrial genius and our beautiful landscape is important, but these
people want us to stop driving, stop heating our homes, they are even going
after livestock so that we stop eating animal products. Anyone who does not
see the obvious agenda here is a fool."

But the e-mail of the week comes from Dave, responding to the same Andy Rooney piece with just four words: "Bring on the iceberg..."

Most Egregious Claim of the Week:

The nominees are:

Stephen Chu, Energy Secretary of the United States.

"I think the Caribbean countries face rising oceans and they face increase in the severity of hurricanes. This is something that is very, very scary to all of us. The island states in the world represent -- I remember this number -- one-half of 1 percent of the carbon emissions in the world. And they will -- some of them will disappear."

Scientists and Hunters in Germany

The boar population has increased recently, and the new boars are wreaking havoc in cities throughout the country. The reason cited for the increase?

"Scientists and hunters blame global warming for a surge in the boars' reproduction rate, now estimated at over 300 per cent a year, which means 100 boars can grow into almost 10,000 within five years."

Of course it is.

Researchers in Yellowstone National Park

In an impressive display of double talk, they argued that Global Warming has destroyed the food supply of the local Grizzly Bear, while worrying about the increase and spread of the bear's population.

And the winner is:

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Happy Earth Day!

Let's say the Radical Green Agenda is right about Global Warming... It won't be all bad:

Monday, April 20, 2009

Obama's Foolish Rail Plan

The New York Times reports on President Obama's new plan to build a "high speed" rail system across the U.S. During his speech outlining the proposal, he said:
“What we need, then, is a smart transportation system equal to the needs of the 21st century, a system that reduces travel times and increases mobility, a system that reduces congestion and boosts productivity, a system that reduces destructive emissions and creates jobs.”
Too bad President Obama's plan will do practically none of those things.

Over at The Corner, Richard Nadler outlines 5 reasons President Obama's plan is a misguided one. Of interest to GreenWatch Readers:
3) If you (unlike this author) believe that greenhouses gases are a problem, you DON’T WANT a shared passenger/freight system. One of the reasons why Europe is doing such a wretched job of complying with Kyoto is that it does only 10% of its freight by rail, as opposed to 51% in the U.S. Europe moves more people by rail, and more freight (i.e., heavier stuff) on trucks. Our intermodal system of truck-to-rail container transfer helps account for the fact that freight emissions of greenhouse gases are 155 grams per ton mile in the U.S. compared to 193 grams per ton mile in Europe.
David Freddoso elaborates on NRO.

The Oregonian points out the flaws in Obama's plan from the other end of the political spectrum.

In the end, the trains he's proposing are not modern upgrades, but retreads of past train systems that have already failed. Which is funny, because some might argue that "retreads that have already failed" are the exact words they'd use to describe his entire economic plan.

Featured Story Continued

Watch the trailers for both films below:

This Week's Headlines

The GOP & Climate Skepticism

Ford Fears Australia's Emissions Trading Scheme Will Drive Jobs Out of the Country

Obama Flunks Global Warming 101 on Fargo Floods

China Considers Setting Targets for Carbon Emissions

Will Global Warming Make Future Generations Worse Off? (No!)

1970's Lifestyle 'Protects' Planet

Third World Stove Soot is Target in Climate Fight
(How dare those poor people cook their food!)

Global Warming Heretics Increase in Numbers

Most Egregious Claim of the Week

Stephen Chu, Energy Secretary of the United States.

"I think the Caribbean countries face rising oceans and they face increase in the severity of hurricanes. This is something that is very, very scary to all of us. The island states in the world represent -- I remember this number -- one-half of 1 percent of the carbon emissions in the world. And they will -- some of them will disappear."

But he didn't stop there:

"Lots of area in Florida will go under. New Orleans at three-meter height is in great peril. If you look at, you know, the Bay Area, where I came from, all three airports would be under water. So this is -- this is serious stuff. The impacts could be enormous."

We announce the winner of the Most Egregious Claim of the Week on this blog every week. To see the other nominees, sign up for our weekly newsletter here.

Monday, April 13, 2009

GreenWatch Newsletter 23 (April 13, 2009)

Featured Story:

The Washington Times brings word of disastrous new provision in the House climate bill that would allow anyone "who has suffered, or reasonably expects to suffer, a harm attributable, in whole or in part" due to government inaction to combat greenhouse gas emissions to sue the federal government.
Environmentalists say the measure was narrowly crafted to give citizens the unusual standing to sue the U.S. government as a way to force action on curbing emissions. But the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sees a new cottage industry for lawyers.
"You could be spawning lawsuits at almost any place [climate-change modeling] computers place at harm's risk," said Bill Kovacs, energy lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The bill was written by two Democrats; Henry Waxman of California and Edward Markey of Massachusetts. Though the payouts for such lawsuits are minimal, capped at a total of 1.5 million dollars per year, what it could do is force the government to take action against climate change at the order of a judge, allowing activist judges to decide a crucial portion of economic policy for the entire country.

Of course, there's a part of me that sees a story like this and says, "alright, bring on the lawsuits. Let's see those claims of settled science exposed as the frauds they are in a court of law."

Perhaps Waxman and Markey are seeing the writing on the wall with regards to the entire global warming movement and this is their last, desperate ploy to get something done. Americans still aren't drinking the kool-aid, funds for climate projects are being cut, and former pro-anthropomorphic global warming propagandists are starting to realize that The Deniers may well have a point.

I propose a second bill: Allow citizens like you and me to sue the federal government and private businesses for the mental anguish of having to deal with this incessant campaign to convince us the world is going to end because of the success of industry - a campaign that was built on lies and that, fortunately, seems to be on the verge of failing.

More Headlines:

George Will and the Sea-Ice Controversy: Was He More Correct That Thought?

Fewer Showers to Help Global Warming

Study: Biofuel Threatens Water Supplies

Obama's Economic Mirage

UCLA saves the world by not eating beef on Thursdays

For Alaska's Inupiat, Climate Change and Culture Shock

The Reader's Corner:

Send your questions, comments and story leads to GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com with the subject line "The Reader's Corner".

Donald B Parsons: "Whenever I read the articles saying the sky is falling and blaming mainly CO2 emissions I would chuckle a little. I always respond with the same rhetoric that this article does and that is that for at 30 years (since science class) that we emit CO2 and breath O2 and our symbiotic partners (all flora) take in CO2 and emit O2. I know from reading botany books as well as horticulture books and being a hands in the dirt farmer who has had a small garden for our own food source knows that 283 ppms are minimal even up to 380 ppms are small, most plants especially large ones like tomato plants and trees can accept 1200-1500 ppms. I fear the extreme Global Warmers are going to plunge Mother Earth into a tall spin by going TOO far in the WRONG direction. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK and continue refuting all the LIES and over exaggerations by the Al Gores of the world."

Felix Stinson, Winston Salem, NC: "Thank you for your work. This manmade climate change agenda of socialists all over the world is the biggest threat to this country besides terrorism. It will break our economy and our freedom. It is also the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on this ol' world....the propaganda is almost overwhelming and has influenced our kids and many gullible folks our there.....keep hammering away....I hope you all are not just preaching to choir."

[PG]: Don't worry, Felix. We're going to keep hammering away as long as it takes. And we're continuing to explore new ways to get the word out. Along those lines, we've got some exciting plans in store for GreenWatch. Keep an eye out for announcements in the next newsletter.

Most Egregious Claim of the Week:

"It may be wrong to suggest impending doom, but if doom isn't impending, it's out there somewhere...If running out of oil doesn't scare you, maybe an iceberg the size of Connecticut floating away from Antarctica and hitting the United States will get your attention."

-Andy Rooney

Monday, April 6, 2009

GreenWatch Newsletter 22 (April 6, 2009)

Featured Story:
It's one of the first things I remember learning in second grade science class: People breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide, plants "breathe" in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen. It seems that some scientists and journalists missed that day of class:

The phenomenon has been discovered in a variety of flora, ranging from tropical rainforests to British sugar beet crops.

It means they are soaking up at least some of the billions of tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere by humans that would otherwise be accelerating the rate of climate change.

Plants survive by extracting CO2 from the air and using sunlight to convert it into proteins and sugars.

Since 1750 the concentration in the air has risen from of CO2 278 parts per million (ppm) to more than 380 ppm, making it easier for plants to acquire the CO2 needed for rapid growth.

Plants are getting bigger and stronger, taking in more CO2 and, I presume, sending out more O2. Could it be that a little extra CO2 in the atmosphere, rather than spelling out doom for every living thing on the planet, is...a good thing? Could it be that increased CO2 will mean stronger plants, and thusly more and better crops? Could it be that efforts to stem the tide of the increase in CO2 will lead to decreases in food production and food shortages across the globe?

Lawrence Solomon, author of The Deniers, wrote about this very phenomenon last June in the Financial Post, in a column called "In Praise of CO2."

Doubling the jeopardy for Earth is man. Unlike the many scientists who welcome CO2 for its benefits, many other scientists and most governments believe carbon dioxide to be a dangerous pollutant that must be removed from the atmosphere at all costs. Governments around the world are now enacting massive programs in an effort to remove as much as 80% of the carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere.

If these governments are right, they will have done us all a service. If they are wrong, the service could be all ill, with food production dropping world wide, and the countless ecological niches on which living creatures depend stressed. The second order effects could be dire, too. To bolster food production, humans will likely turn to energy intensive manufactured fertilizers, depleting our store of non-renewable resources. Techniques to remove carbon from the atmosphere also sound alarms. Carbon sequestration, a darling of many who would mitigate climate change, could become a top inducer of earthquakes, according to Christian Klose, a geohazards researcher at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. Because the carbon sequestration schemes tend to be located near cities, he notes, carbon-sequestration-caused earthquakes could exact an unusually high toll.

Amazingly, although the risks of action are arguably at least as real as the risks of inaction, Canada and other countries are rushing into Earth-altering carbon schemes with nary a doubt. Environmentalists, who ordinarily would demand a full-fledged environmental assessment before a highway or a power plant can be built, are silent on the need to question proponents or examine alternatives.

Everywhere you look, there's another hole in the theory of Global Warming. Even a second grader could tell you that.

Additionally, a few weeks ago in this space we told you about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). The goal of this act was to protect small children from ingesting lead. Andrew in New York brings my attention to the sobering reality; the consequences have been disastrous for business, families, and, as it turns out, could be putting children in harm's way:
Thousands of children 12 and younger ride motorcycles, ATVs and snowmobiles, which is why a lot of effort and time has gone into designing vehicles made for smaller folks. On Friday, The Wall Street Journal noted a study by the Motorcycle Industry Council that concluded "90% of the youth fatalities and injuries on motorcycles occur when kids ride adult vehicles.
On Thursday of last week, the Senate of the United States voted 58 to 39 to reject an amendment to the budget bill designed to keep kids on bikes designed for them and thus off adult vehicles. The reason the amendment was offered by South Carolina's Jim DeMint is because the 2008 "Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act" mandates that products containing even trace amounts of lead --trace amounts highly unlikely to ever come in contact with a child's digestion system-- were banned from sale to children 12 and under.
The law took effect in February an instantly made it illegal to sell the kid-sized vehicles because of nearly undetectabl amounts of lead in tire valves, brakes, batteries etc. Replacement parts for vehicles for kids are similarly interdicted.
Ed Morrissey states the obvious:

I find it ridiculous to point this out to Congress, but children do not eat ATVs. The lead content of its components will not end up in small stomachs. Children do not ride ATVs without being clothed, so skin contact is minimal and transitory. What's next -- banning cars because children might ride in them?

No, they'll be banned because of the emissions, silly!

More Headlines:

Earth Population Exceeds Limits

Sun Has Fewest Sunspots Since 1913

Global Warming: A Classic Case of Alarmism

China, India Reject Climate Agreement That Obstructs Economic Growth

Vanity Fair Abandons Green Issue

The Great Antarctic Ice Scare: The Facts

Most Egregious Claim of the Week:

Will Global Warming Doom Maple Syrup? The mere thought keeps me up late at night, fearing for the fate of my french toast. This article in The Daily Green seems to claim that it will:
All farming depends on the weather, but few foods are more dependent on a specific climate than maple syrup. After all, for the sugar maple's sap to run at all requires cooperative weather - freezing nights followed by warmer days.
But with the buildup of invisible greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, those temperature swings don't happen as reliably. At risk is an American tradition that stretches back even before Europeans discovered the "New World."
"Weather controls it all," says Marty Fitzgerald, a fifth-generation sugarmaker in upstate New York.
But this claim, just like every dubious dire prediction from the Green Agenda, has no basis in reality.

From the Wausau Daily Herald, April 6, 2009: Maple Syrup Producers Optimistic
From the Lindsay Post in Ontario, CA, April 2, 2009: So Far, So Good for Maple Syrup Producers

Eventually, the Green Agenda will have to feel at least a little twinge of guilt from egregious claim after egregious claim...right?