Chu on that you sceptics – I resign!

Posted: February 1, 2013 by tallbloke in alarmism, Politics, propaganda

chuSteven Chu, the US energy secretary has stepped down. In his resignation letter he took aim at climate sceptics, saying:

 “The test for America’s policy makers will be whether they are willing to accept a few failures in exchange for many successes. America’s entrepreneurs and innovators who are leaders in global clean energy race understand that not every risk can—or should—be avoided. Michelangelo said, ‘The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.'”

“The overwhelming scientific consensus is that human activity has had a significant and likely dominant role in climate change. There is also increasingly compelling evidence that the weather changes we have witnessed during this thirty year time period are due to climate change.”

More here:–politics.html

  1. Oh that overwhelming scientific consensus along with increasing compelling evidence is just so alarming.

  2. tallbloke says:

    I’ve always preferred being overwhelmed by evidence to being overwhelmed by the consenseless myself.

  3. philjourdan says:

    Michelangelo forgot to add – the greatest danger is not learning from your mistakes. At least Chu can now leave – not angry – just leave.

  4. Stephen Richards says:

    As Steven Goddard says “chu thinks climate change is due to climate climate”

    “There is also increasingly compelling evidence that the weather changes we have witnessed during this thirty year time period are due to climate change.”

  5. oldbrew says:

    Maybe Mr Chu should have read this: ‘global sea-level rise during the 20th century was constant, not accelerated, and shows no evidence of “climate change” or human influence.’

    So much for ‘overwhelming evidence’ etc.

  6. tallbloke says:

    Well that’s the point isn’ it. There is no overwhelming evidence, so Chu had to fall back on the “overwhelming consensus”. Presumably he resigned because the consenseless have ‘moved on’.

  7. michael hart says:

    ”The test for America’s policy makers will be whether they are willing to accept a few failures in exchange for many successes.”

    If the American electorate had first been honestly asked which failures they are willing to accept, then perhaps he wouldn’t find himself currently aiming as low as he appears to think he is.

    America’s entrepreneurs and innovators are capable of winning races when not shackled and demonized by green-shirts who have been told untruths about carbon dioxide.

  8. Arfur Bryant says:

    “The overwhelming scientific consensus evidence is that human activity has had a no significant and likely dominant role in climate change.”

    There you go Mr Chu…

  9. Greg says:

    “The overwhelming scientific consensus..”

    That must be the famed 97% of the 3% that were selected from the 10% that replied to biased survey questions again.

    Who would have thought that the weather of the last 30years would be affected by climate, when climate is DEFINED as being weather on a 30 year scale.

    Thank you , ex-secretary Chu. Did we give you enought money or would like some more for the rest of your life to compensate for not being energy secretary any more?

  10. ntesdorf says:

    Mr Chu could have also mentioned that there have been no increases in the temperature of the World during the last 15 years and there have been no accelerations in global sea-level rise during the 20th century. He trusts his ‘consensus’ and his ‘climate models’, rather than observable facts.’

  11. holbrook says:

    Dear Mr. Chu,
    For your information 31,487 American scientists have signed The Oregon Petition, including 9,029 with PhDs
    We therefore cordially invite you to meet our team so that we can explain the difference between
    climate models and empirical data based science.
    You can leave your playstation in the trash can back home…
    …you won’t need it again…ever!!!!!

  12. tallbloke says:

    Poor Chu. There has probably never been a more badly misinformed energy secretary in U.S history.

  13. Roger Andrews says:

    Chu is history. The question is who comes next. As one might expect, most of the candidates are committed warmists:

    Christine Gregoire, former governor of Washington. “Has no doubts that humans are a cause of global warming and that government can, and should, play a lead role in combating it.”

    Dan Reicher, executive director of the Steyer-Taylor Center at Stanford: “By putting serious limits on carbon emissions …. (we can protect ourselves) from a global climate crisis.”

    Former Democratic governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan. Al Gore calls her “A supremely talented and dedicated public servant whose deep understanding of the issues makes her one of the most relevant voices in politics today”.

    Former Democratic governor Chet Culver of Iowa: “All Iowans should be proud that we’re generating 26% of our energy from wind power”.

    Byron Dorgan, North Dakota Democrat, “I’m in favor of taking action to reduce CO2 emissions and to protect our environment.”

    Ernest Moniz, physics professor at MIT: “Energy demand will double and demand for electricity will triple, leading to a catastrophic increase in the planet’s temperature.”

    Billionaire hedge-fund manager Tom Steyer: “It seems crazy to me we would roll back science-based clean air standards because there are skillful political operatives and wealthy political donors who really want to get rid of E.P.A. Regulations.”

    But there is one faint ray of hope. Obama might choose Bill Ritter, former governor of Colorado, who says: “If you want to get Americans on both sides of the political spectrum on board with clean technology and energy efficiency, avoid two words: ‘climate change’.”

    I’ll drink to that 🙂

  14. John F. Hultquist says:

    The person that wanted Steven Chu is the person that gets to pick the next energy secretary. Last I heard that person has not changed his mind about things. “Things” being where to funnel the government’s largess over the next four years so as to maximize future income from corporate board memberships, books, speakers fees, partnerships, and on and on. He hasn’t a clue about science but did learn a thing or two while a politician residing in Chicago.

  15. Bob Tisdale says:

    Oddly, President Obama hasn’t called to ask any of us to be Chu’s replacement.

  16. tallbloke says:

    Bob: Maybe he thinks it’d be too expensive to tempt us away from our ‘big oil’ paychecks.

  17. Roger Andrews says:

    I think I should disclose here that I once worked for Standard Oil of Ohio. I didn’t actually join them, they took over the company I worked for, but I guess it amounts to the same thing. Then BP took over Standard Oil, so I guess I worked for them too.

  18. tgmccoy says:

    Former Texaco Aviation fuel Jobber (manager for the Jobber) employee here. but that was 28 years
    ago haven’t got a check from them for a while…
    Personally I think we will see some sort of backfill with the new secretary ..
    Or sidestep. Chu was a disaster…

  19. Kon Dealer says:

    Good riddance to bad rubbish.
    Let’s hope his successor isn’t another blinkered zealot.

  20. Tim Clark says:

    I must admit I work for the oil companies. Not in the usual sense that bloviators intend when throwing that garbage out. I drive 100 miles a day to and from work. I spend around $80 a week or $320 a month on fuel. So essentially, I work a little more than one day a month for Conoco oil. I usually designate the last Friday of the month as my oil day, and spend the day excorciating ignorance on various AGW propagandist sites or government nut jobs, as Choo-Choo. Hey, if I’m going to work for them, I need to put in a full day!

  21. Brian H says:

    Good riddance. Not that Obonehead will replace him with anyone better.