Yeah, this is a hat tip to a 2-day-old Instapundit post, which is eons in blog time, but I thought it worth highlighting. In this story about how the tiny country of the United Arab Emirates beats the United States per capita in putting “demand on the global ecosystem”, this line is mentioned about the second place US.

The United States is no longer bound by Kyoto, which the Bush administration rejected after taking office in 2001.

But as Glenn notes, based on a passage from what he calls “the not especially Bush-friendly Wikipedia”, that is simply not true. You can chalk it up to “mere” incompetence or “simple” laziness, but it seems that almost always when the mainstream media get incompetent or lazy, conservatives and/or Republicans suffer (and liberals and/or Democrats look better). Honestly, when’s the last time any news source (or your friendly, neighborhood liberal buddy) correctly noted that Clinton never submitted it to the Senate for ratification? If your going to insist that Bush”rejected” it, you must say the same thing about Clinton & Gore (notwithstanding Gore’s “symbolic” signing of it; liberal good intentions don’t count if they don’t produce results).

Somehow, the fact that 80-90% of journalists vote Democrat just doesn’t seem to register with folks like Eric Alterman who insist that the media lean conservative. That Bush “rejected” Kyoto is such a Known Fact(tm) in those circles does make its way into reporting, and it ain’t the only thing that does.

Technorati Tags: Associated Press, liberal media, Kyoto, global warming

“The Reference Frame” enumerates a long list of bad news for those who say we’re to blame for global cooling warming climate change.

Technorati Tags: global warming, science

First we had Walter Cronkite and Sen. Edward Kennedy come out against wind power in their backyard of Nantucket Sound. Now the Left is protesting clean-burning natural gas.

Former James Bond actor Pierce Brosnan and other celebrities gathered Sunday to protest a natural gas facility proposed for a site 14 miles off the Malibu coast.

“We have to use our voices and band together and stop this,” said Oscar winner Halle Berry.

The gathering _ also attended by Cindy Crawford, Jane Seymour, Dick Van Dyke and Tea Leoni _ was intended to raise awareness about how the energy industry has invested billions to liquefy and ship natural gas across oceans.

There are five facilities proposed for California, with three along the Southern California coastline. One of the world’s largest energy companies, Australian-based BHP Billiton, is seeking to build the terminal off the coast of Malibu and Oxnard. A decision is expected next year.

BHP officials say the terminals would provide a reliable source of low-polluting energy. Opponents, however, say the terminals would not meet clean air requirements and could be terrorist targets.

“Could be terrorist targets”? Hey, let’s stop building high-rise buildings, or shopping malls, or theaters to watch your movies in. They could be terrorist targets, too. And this natural gas plant would be 14 miles away from shore, not in the middle of a crowded suburbia.

This isn’t just a NIMBY issue–Not In My Back Yard–it’s an attempt to keep this clean fuel it out of anyone’s backyard.

Brosnan, who hosted the protest, said his opposition to the terminals extends beyond the beach in his backyard. He plans to oppose other proposed terminals, including one in Long Beach and one in Port Hueneme.

Where do these liberals elites expect clean energy to come from? You have to build wind farms, or solar farms, or natural gas plants or geothermal plants or something. If you’re serious about caring about global warming, why be against something like this? As soon as they come up with some sort of energy that will replace all our energy needs, not take up space, not ruin views, and not be a terrorist target, then let’s talk. Until then, this is simply actions that belie their words.

Technorati Tags: energy, natural gas, global warming, Pierce Brosnan, Halle Berry, Sierra Club

If some blogger wrote that those who disagreed with the current global warming orthodoxy should be tried Nuremberg-style, would you just write it off? Perhaps. He might be just fringe kook. OK, how about if that blogger was a writer for an environmental magazine?

Grist Magazine’s staff writer David Roberts called for the Nuremberg-style trials for the “bastards” who were members of what he termed the global warming “denial industry.”

Roberts wrote in the online publication on September 19, 2006, “When we’ve finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we’re in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg.” (http://gristmill.grist.org/print/2006/9/19/11408/1106?show_comments=no )

Can you still write him off? Maybe. Could be just a fringe paper.

OK, how about if the paper had a good reputation among some big names?

A U.S. based environmental magazine that both former Vice President Al Gore (http://gristmill.grist.org/print/2006/9/19/11408/1106?show_comments=no ) and PBS newsman Bill Moyers, for his October 11th global warming edition of “Moyers on America” titled “Is God Green?”

(http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/05/09/roberts/index.html ) have deemed respectable enough to grant one-on-one interviews to promote their projects, is now advocating Nuremberg-style war crimes trials for skeptics of human caused catastrophic global warming.

Still writing him off? Still wondering if man-made global warming is some sort of article of faith among the true believers?

(Hat tip: KnightHawk at PoliPundit.)

Technorati Tags: global warming, Al Gore, Bill Moyers, David Roberts, Grist