US Action News

When Democrats lecture us about lower-cost clean energy and planet-friendly conservation, what are they actually talking about? Beware. Their proposals are not as virtuous as they sound.

The environmental movement is not just a well funded special interest, it is a big bully gaining increased control over the U.S. economy. Environmentalists are cozy with the Democratic Party, are funded in part by the government, and are rapidly expanding their power in Washington, D.C. Joe Hicks talks to leading scholars about the motives and intentions of Big Green in this PJTV Special Report.

Today Hungarian atmospheric physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi, says he has found and proven that the IPCC and their experts are wrong in their theory about how the greenhouse effect works. In the process, he has shown that changing CO2 concentrations are not the determining factor the IPCC and other scientists claim.

Of the seven members appointed to the commission, not one is a petroleum engineer, and all have long-standing ties to the environmental movement.

John P. Holdren, who then-President-elect Barack Obama nominated as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy in December 2008, called just five months before his nomination for a global climate-change agreement that would allow wealth to be redistributed from countries in the global “North” to countries in the “South.”

He followed the established but failed practice of proposing complex, indirect remedies that aim to hide costs from consumers (and thus, voters). At best, this political sleight-of-hand makes import reductions and emission controls far more costly to achieve than would otherwise be the case. Economic harm is the more likely outcome.