Friday, October 24, 2008

Greens Aim to Take Us Forward to the Past

Take a look at this if you get a chance. I found this over at Its in the junk science section and is originally published at Junk If you're interested in science, you should stop by to get Milloy's opinion about the crap that's out there.

Usually I like to read NewScientist on a regular basis. But they do have a political agenda when it comes to Global Warming. I've seen appeals for more funding to study it and none to combat it.

Greens Aim to Take Us Forward to the Past

Thursday, October 23, 2008

If you need more evidence that the Greens intend to destroy our standard of living, you need not look further than the Oct. 18 issue of New Scientist magazine — the cover of which reads, “The Folly of Growth: How to stop the economy killing the planet.”

The issue features eight articles that New Scientist editors believe justify their editorial entitled, “Why economic growth is killing the planet and what we can do about it.” Presented below the editorial is an ominously drawn graph purporting to show how global temperatures, population, carbon dioxide concentrations, GDP and loss of tropical rainforest and woodland have dramatically spiked upward since 1750, and how species extinctions, water use, motor vehicle use, paper consumption, fisheries exploitation, ozone depletion and foreign investment spiked during the 20th century.

The editorial concludes that “the science tells us that if we are serious about saving the Earth,” economic growth must be limited.

In the first essay, University of Surrey (UK) sustainable development professor Tim Jackson doubts renewable energy technologies will work without reduced consumption. Rather than buying an energy efficient TV, he says, you ought to consider not buying a TV at all.

Next, prominent Canadian Green David Suzuki says that nothing is more important than the environment and that we need to lower our standard of living. You need to judge your standard of living by “quality of life, your relationships with other people and your community,” Suzuki says. Stores filled with food, record longevity and wealth are an “illusion,” he asserts, because we’re using up our children’s and grandchildren’s inheritance.

University of Maryland ecological economist Herman Daly claims that we’ve passed the point where economic growth provides benefits and that we need to “transform our economy from a forward-moving aeroplane to a hovering helicopter,” but that such a “steady-state” economy “doesn’t have to mean freezing in the dark under a communist tyranny.” In trying to explain his latter comment, he says that “Most of the changes could be applied gradually, in mid-air,” by which he apparently means replacing the income tax with a tax on goods to “encourage people to use them sparingly.” Although he acknowledges that this regressive policy would hurt the poor, he says taxes could be used to provide welfare.

James Gustave Speth — Yale University dean, co-founder of the Natural Resources Defense Council and former adviser to President Jimmy Carter — says that green values stand no chance against market capitalism. Economic growth “creates barriers to dealing with real problems,” he says. While we need to spend more money on social services and environmental protection, he is “not advocating state socialism," he claims, but rather a “non-socialist alternative to today’s capitalism,” whatever that means.

Andrew Simms of London’s New Economics Foundation describes as "disingenuous" the argument that global economic growth is needed to eradicate poverty. He says that “we have to overcome knee-jerk rejection of the ‘R’ word — redistribution” and that we need a “Green New Deal” that controls capital and raises taxes to create environmental jobs.

Susan George of the Amsterdam-based Transnational Institute advocates developing a World War II-type mentality toward life including rationing, “victory” or home gardens and the government run by wealthy elites who would work for a salary of $1 per year.

London Metropolitan University “environmental philosopher” Kate Soper says that the tourist industry, food service industry, dating services and gyms are evidence that we need to shift to a less work-intensive economy. “Of course, we would have to “sacrifice some conveniences and pleasures: creature comforts such as regular steaks, hot tubs, luxury cosmetics and easy foreign travel,” she says, but “human ingenuity will surely contrive a range of more eco-friendly excitements.”

What’s missing from the New Scientist compilation of Green-think, of course, are essays from Thomas Malthus, Karl Marx and, perhaps, Al Gore. Malthus, a prominent 19th century economist, famously predicted that a geometrically expanding human population would outpace the arithmetically expanding food supply. Unable to foresee the improvements in agricultural technology, he turned out to be entirely wrong.

Karl Marx could have chimed in with his communist slogan, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” — where the government gets to determine what your needs are. As implemented in the Soviet Union and Communist China, Marxism resulted in the starvation and murder of perhaps more than 100 million people and the political and social repression of the survivors.

Al Gore could have contributed an essay reassuring Green elites that none of this wealth redistribution and standard of living contraction would affect those who, like him, can already afford home indoor heated pools or those who can could afford to spend $65,000 and three weeks jetting around the world with the World Wildlife Fund.

The New Scientist essays reveal how the Greens aim to eviscerate life as we know it. They want to take us from 200 years of “more-bigger-better” to a future of “less-smaller-worse.” Won’t happen, you say?

With Barack Obama leading in the polls, one of his advisers recently issued an ultimatum to Congress regulate carbon dioxide emissions in 18 months, or an Obama EPA will do it unilaterally. And then there’s Obama’s famous colloquy with “Joe the Plumber,” where he said he was for redistributing the wealth. And let’s not forget Obama’s comment in May that “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times…”

Obama has said he’s for economic growth, yet he’s willing to force-feed us Green policies that would crush it. And as it turns out, that’s what the Greens are really after in the first place.

Where it all began

Hat tip to Doc Holiday.

Where it all began

A little girl wrote to Sarah Palin and asked;

'How did the human race start?'

Sarah Palin answered, 'God made Adam and Eve;

They had children; and so was all mankind made.'

Two days later the girl wrote to Michelle Obama

and asked the same question.

Michelle Obama answered,

'Many years ago there were monkeys from

which the human race evolved.'

The confused girl went to her father and said,

'Dad, how is it possible that Sarah Palin told me

the Human race was created by God,

And Michelle Obama said they evolved from monkeys.'

The father answered, 'Well, Dear, it is very simple,

Sarah Palin told you about her ancestors

and Michelle Obama told you about hers.'

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Spain's ex-prime minister blasts 'new religion' of climate change

More global warming goodness for the deniers. AFP has this from the former prime minister of Spain no less. Does a prime minister outrank a VP? If so, the Goracle will need to figure out a way to achieve higher office in order to keep up with this AGW escalation.

Spain's ex-prime minister blasts 'new religion' of climate change

MADRID (AFP) — Former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar Wednesday dismissed climate change as a "new religion" that is drawing hundreds of billions of euros at a time of economic crisis.

Aznar made the remarks at the presentation of a book by Czech President Vaclav Klaus, "Blue Planet in Green Shackles", in which he also questions the widely held theories about climate change.

"In these times of global cooling of the international economy ... the standard bearers of the climatic apocalypse demand hundreds of billions of euros" to combat global warming, said Aznar, who was conservative prime minister from 1996 to 2004.

"They want to throw onto the bonfire anyone who, like Vaclav Klaus, questions the new religion," he said.

"The slightest doubt on the man-made origin of climate change is cause of automatic ex-communication."

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has said global warming is "unequivocal" and "most of the observed increases in temperatures over the last 60 years is very likely due to increases in human-generated greenhouse gas concentrations."

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Microsoft Takes the Fight to China - Not Politically Correct?

Since when is it wrong to protect your intellectual property? That's what MS is being accused of in China. Where 82% of all software is pirated, the Chinese have the nerve to accuse MS of being unfair to users. They even blame MS because the software is too high priced.

This is patently unfair especially since the US has been battling China for years on the rights of US companies to their intellectual property. Add CDs & DVDs to the list and the cost to our economy becomes staggering. See article below.

Microsoft accused of hacking in piracy clampdown
  • 14:10 22 October 2008
  • news service
  • New Scientist staff and Reuters

Across China thousands of computer screens are turning dark. The reason is a piece of software from a US firm.

Software giant Microsoft is deactivating unauthorised copies of its Windows operating system, in a nation where 82% of all software is pirated – even if many end users do not know it.

The deployment of Windows Genuine Advantage in China has sparked outrage from computer users all over the country. If a validation test is failed, the software changes the desktop background to a black screen every 60 minutes and displays constant warning messages.

Some users fear that their data is at risk because the package can disable some Windows features. The package has been used in many other parts of the world for several years, but was only enabled for Chinese language systems this month.

Dong Zhengwei, a Beijing lawyer claims in the China Daily that Microsoft's action could even be illegal under Chinese law. He calls the company the "biggest hacker in China with its intrusion into users' computer systems without their agreement or any judicial authority".

Zhengwei is one of many that say the crackdown unfairly harms users unable to know if the software they bought was genuine. Others claim Microsoft's high prices are responsible for the problem.

The software giant defends its use of the program, saying its goal is to "help our customers to determine (if) genuine software is installed on their computers," Microsoft told Reuters.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Hit By the Ref! Looks Intentional to Me

Hat tip to Novo.

You Tube video here.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof

Global warming heretics show more evidence of holes in the AGW narrative. The article below cites some inconvenient facts that poke holes in science of the "Goracle". Enjoy.

Lorne Gunter: Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof
Posted: October 20, 2008, 10:26 AM by Kelly McParland

In early September, I began noticing a string of news stories about scientists rejecting the orthodoxy on global warming. Actually, it was more like a string of guest columns and long letters to the editor since it is hard for skeptical scientists to get published in the cabal of climate journals now controlled by the Great Sanhedrin of the environmental movement.

Still, the number of climate change skeptics is growing rapidly. Because a funny thing is happening to global temperatures -- they're going down, not up.

On the same day (Sept. 5) that areas of southern Brazil were recording one of their latest winter snowfalls ever and entering what turned out to be their coldest September in a century, Brazilian meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart explained that extreme cold or snowfall events in his country have always been tied to "a negative PDO" or Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Positive PDOs -- El Ninos -- produce above-average temperatures in South America while negative ones -- La Ninas -- produce below average ones.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Shrunken Michelle

What happened to Michelle? Must have been hit with the shrink ray from Duke Nukem I'm guessing. The woman on the right got blasted at a higher setting no doubt.

Now if we could only turn the ray on Obambi's lead in the polls ......

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

ABC deems Gore climate change advert too 'controversial' for TV

While we're on the subject of the Guardian, I found this on the environmental page. Funny, I haven't seen this covered anywhere else. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough. Can it be that ABC has some scruples after all? This makes me wonder.

ABC deems Gore climate change advert too 'controversial' for TV

The ABC network has refused to air an advert produced by Al Gore's environmental group, ruling that its charge of US government favouritism to the oil industry is too "controversial" for television.

The TV commercial, part of the WE campaign run by Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection, was submitted for airing after this week's presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain - both of whom have vowed to limit greenhouse gas emissions if elected.

But ABC concluded that the advert violated its internal policy against "controversial" content during network-sponsored programmes, network spokeswoman Julie Hoover told the Guardian.

"All of our advertising is reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and the context of this particular ad was determined not to be acceptable per our policy on controversial issue advertising," Hoover said.

The WE campaign has since attracted more than 170,000 supporters to an online petition drive asking ABC to reconsider its decision.

The script of the advert is similar in tone to political speeches made by Obama and McCain during the election season. An unseen narrator states that climate change can be combated through wind and solar power as well as "end[ing] our dependence on foreign oil".

Over an image of a young child playing with blocks, the narrator continues: "So why are we still stuck with dirty and expensive energy? Because big oil spends hundreds of millions of dollars to block clean energy. Lobbyists, ads, even scandals. All to increase their profits, while America suffers."

An ABC email published on the blog of Grist magazine stated that the advert was rejected due to its split-second shot of the US Capitol building.

"Per our guidelines, national buildings may be used in advertising provided the depictions are incidental to the advertiser's promotion of the product or service," the email stated. "Given the messages and themes of this commercial, the image of the Capital [sic] building is not incidental to this advertising."

Cathy Zoi, chief executive of the WE campaign, called ABC's decision "outrageous" in light of US networks' frequent airing of adverts from Chevron, Exxon Mobil and other oil companies.

"As our country faces deep economic problems, we need to be able to have an honest debate about the root causes of our problem," Zoi wrote in an email to supporters of Gore's group on Wednesday.

To build publicity for their products, American companies often produce TV adverts with content that pushes the limits of broadcast standards. A Snickers commercial featuring two men embarrassed after sharing a kiss was pulled from the US airwaves last year after complaints from gay-rights groups.

But rejection of an advert from a non-profit group is a far more rare occurrence. At the height of the US controversy over same-sex marriage in 2004, CBS and NBC turned down a commercial from the United Church of Christ that touted its acceptance of gay congregants.

Guardian Blogger or Democrat Shill?

If this a**hole from across the pond ever wants to move here, he should have no trouble getting a job at Newsweek or the NYT. This piece reads like an indictment of the McCain campaign. Check out his sources. He cites the HuffPo, Newsweek, ignores the Zogby and Rasmussen polls and of course a NYT piece as "insightful". The Guardian UK and Britons in general continue to view us as gun toting bible thumping racist yokels. What's up with that?

Wednesday memo: Fourteen points

A last-chance debate; McCain's Saddam link; racist voters speak

Barack Obama surges to a 14 point lead, 53% to 39% among likely voters, in a New York Times/CBS poll -- allowing Democrats a few hours of elation before John McCain wins back America's heart at tonight's final debate with some impressive magic tricks and a few old-time song-and-dance numbers. The McCain campaign calls the poll improbable; Gallup's tracking poll remains essentially unchanged at Obama 51%, McCain 42%.

Yes indeed! I will be liveblogging the debate right here, in real time, as it happens, live.

The head of John McCain's transition team, William Timmons, allegedly spent a five-year period in the 1990s engaged in the maverick activity of lobbying on Saddam Hussein's behalf. [Huffington Post]

An insightful New York Times package draws some strikingly candid comments from white voters in the South and elsewhere on how they feel about Barack Obama's race.

Obama will bring "instituionalised thuggery" to the White House. We know this because Melanie Phillips says so, in a fine and spirited piece that takes a refreshingly cavalier attitude to actually marshalling any evidence for the unpleasant conclusions she reaches. [Spectator]

Hayden Panettiere's pro-Obama comedy ad is only marginally amusing, really, to be honest. [Funny Or Die]

The crucial question for Republicans: Palin or Romney in 2012? [Newsweek]

Bad weather was good for Alaska glaciers

Here's some good news on the Global Warming front. You will not see coverage of this in the MSM even though its from a state that's getting a lot of scrutiny. Its good news but its just not enough if the glaciers are to recover. It will take a century of this kind of weather to make up for what's been lost so far. Let's hope its a trend that will continue.

Bad weather was good for Alaska glaciers

MASS BALANCE: For decades, summer snow loss has exceeded winter snowfall.

Two hundred years of glacial shrinkage in Alaska, and then came the winter and summer of 2007-2008.

Click to enlarge

Unusually large amounts of winter snow were followed by unusually chill temperatures in June, July and August.

"In mid-June, I was surprised to see snow still at sea level in Prince William Sound," said U.S. Geological Survey glaciologist Bruce Molnia. "On the Juneau Icefield, there was still 20 feet of new snow on the surface of the Taku Glacier in late July. At Bering Glacier, a landslide I am studying, located at about 1,500 feet elevation, did not become snow free until early August.

"In general, the weather this summer was the worst I have seen in at least 20 years."

Never before in the history of a research project dating back to 1946 had the Juneau Icefield witnessed the kind of snow buildup that came this year. It was similar on a lot of other glaciers too.

"It's been a long time on most glaciers where they've actually had positive mass balance," Molnia said.

That's the way a scientist says the glaciers got thicker in the middle.

Mass balance is the difference between how much snow falls every winter and how much snow fades away each summer. For most Alaska glaciers, the summer snow loss has for decades exceeded the winter snowfall.

The result has put the state's glaciers on a long-term diet. Every year they lose the snow of the previous winter plus some of the snow from years before. And so they steadily shrink.

Since Alaska's glacial maximum back in the 1700s, Molnia said, "I figure that we've lost about 15 percent of the total area."

What might be the most notable long-term shrinkage has occurred at Glacier Bay, now the site of a national park in Southeast Alaska. When the first Russian explorers arrived in Alaska in the 1740s, there was no Glacier Bay. There was simply a wall of ice across the north side of Icy Strait.

That ice retreated to form a bay and what is now known as the Muir Glacier. And from the 1800s until now, the Muir Glacier just kept retreating and retreating and retreating. It is now back 57 miles from the entrance to the bay, said Tom Vandenberg, chief interpretative ranger at Glacier Bay.

That's farther than the distance from glacier-free Anchorage to Girdwood, where seven glaciers overhang the valley surrounding the state's largest ski area. The glaciers there, like the Muir and hundreds of other Alaska glaciers, have been part of the long retreat.

Overall, Molnia figures Alaska has lost 10,000 to 12,000 square kilometers of ice in the past two centuries, enough to cover an area nearly the size of Connecticut.

Molnia has just completed a major study of Alaska glaciers using satellite images and aerial photographs to catalog shrinkage. The 550-page "Glaciers of Alaska" will provide a benchmark for tracking what happens to the state's glaciers in the future.

Climate change has led to speculation they might all disappear. Molnia isn't sure what to expect. As far as glaciers go, he said, Alaska's glaciers are volatile. They live life on the edge.

"What we're talking about to (change) most of Alaska's glaciers is a small temperature change; just a small fraction-of-a-degree change makes a big difference. It's the mean annual temperature that's the big thing.

"All it takes is a warm summer to have a really dramatic effect on the melting.''

Or a cool summer to shift that mass balance the other way.

One cool summer that leaves 20 feet of new snow still sitting atop glaciers come the start of the next winter is no big deal, Molnia said.

Ten summers like that?

Well, that might mark the start of something like the Little Ice Age.

During the Little Ice Age -- roughly the 16th century to the 19th -- Muir Glacier filled Glacier Bay and the people of Europe struggled to survive because of difficult conditions for agriculture. Some of them fled for America in the first wave of white immigration.

The Pilgrims established the Plymouth Colony in December 1620. By spring, a bitterly cold winter had played a key role in helping kill half of them. Hindered by a chilly climate, the white colonization of North America through the 1600s and 1700s was slow.

As the climate warmed from 1800 to 1900, the United States tripled in size. The windy and cold city of Chicago grew from an outpost of fewer than 4,000 in 1800 to a thriving city of more than 1.5 million at the end of that century.

The difference in temperature between the Little Ice Age and these heady days of American expansion?

About three or four degrees, Molnia said.

The difference in temperature between this summer in Anchorage -- the third coldest on record -- and the norm?

About three degrees, according to the National Weather Service.

Does it mean anything?

Nobody knows. Climate is constantly shifting. And even if the past year was a signal of a changing future, Molnia said, it would still take decades to make itself noticeable in Alaska's glaciers.

Rivers of ice flow slowly. Hundreds of feet of snow would have to accumulate at higher elevations to create enough pressure to stall the current glacial retreat and start a new advance. Even if the glaciers started growing today, Molnia said, it might take up to 100 years for them to start steadily rolling back down into the valleys they've abandoned.

"It's different time scales," he said. "We're just starting to understand."

As strange it might seem, Alaska's glaciers could appear to be shrinking for some time while secretly growing. Molnia said there are a few glaciers in the state now where constant snow accumulations at higher elevations are causing them to thicken even as their lower reaches follow the pattern of retreat fueled by the global warming of recent decades.


Ever wonder why our cities get into trouble when it comes to economic issues? Well maybe this could be a reason. I know Chicago doesn't appear on the list but it too has budget problems. Let's see, a $400M budget short fall, increasing the parking tax to 33% and a shutdown of all non emergency services around holidays. Hmmm ..... could it also be a candidate for out list? Hat tip to Dave "Doc Holiday" for passing this on.

What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list)…hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961;

Buffalo , NY (2nd)…hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954;

Cincinnati, OH (3rd)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984;

Cleveland, OH (4th)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989;

Miami, FL (5th)…has never had a Republican mayor;

St. Louis, MO (6th)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949;

El Paso, TX (7th)…has never had a Republican mayor;

Milwaukee, WI (8th)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908;

Philadelphia, PA (9th)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952;

Newark, NJ (10th)...hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.

Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

It is the disadvantaged who habitually elect Democrats --- yet they are still disadvantaged!

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Ugly American Abroad (Or just an ugly broad)

From our friends across the pond. The Guardian (UK) has an interview with Roseanne Barr on the US presidential campaign. Needless to say, she is her normal disgusting self when it comes to discussing current events. The interviewer just laps it up and eggs her on.

Guess who she's voting for. Maybe AARP can get the ACLU to file a suit for elder abuse? One can only hope!

Roseanne Barr: 'A nation run by old men on Viagra'

Comedian Roseanne Barr gets on the Guardian bus and lets rip her views on John McCain and the state of US politics

Roseanne Barr has lost none of the brilliance and sharp wit that made her sitcom Roseanne such a hugely successful and cutting edge portrayal of the struggles of an American working class family.

Barr, who came out of the stand-up comedy world, was the show's matriarch throughout its nine year run on network television. She has now returned to the stand-up comedy circuit and progressive radio work. She has become politically active against the war in Iraq and as an advocate for ordinary working class Americans.

Global Warming - Guardian Offers Dissenting Opinion

Its most unusual for the Guardian (UK) to offer a different viewpoint when it comes to Global Warming. Far and away, most stories in the online version of the paper only runs pro Global Warming opinion.

Lomborg is considered a denier of AGW in Europe and routinely hammered for voicing his opinion. Forget that he provides data to back up his conclusions. That isn't what the MSM is interested in. So, this is a relatively big deal that he's given some coverage. The article is shown below.

Let the data speak for itself

Despite the message favoured by environmental campaigners, temperatures in this decade have not been worse than expected

Have you noticed how environmental campaigners almost inevitably say that not only is global warming happening and bad, but also that what we are seeing is even worse than expected?

This is odd, because any reasonable understanding of how science proceeds would expect that, as we refine our knowledge, we find that things are sometimes worse and sometimes better than we expected, and that the most likely distribution would be about 50-50. Environmental campaigners, however, almost invariably see it as 100-0.

If we are regularly being surprised in just one direction, if our models get blindsided by an ever-worsening reality, that does not bode well for our scientific approach. Indeed, one can argue that if the models constantly get something wrong, it is probably because the models are wrong. And if we cannot trust our models, we cannot know what policy action to take if we want to make a difference.

Yet, if new facts constantly show us that the consequences of climate change are getting worse and worse, high-minded arguments about the scientific method might not carry much weight. Certainly, this seems to be the prevailing bet in the spin on global warming. It is, again, worse than we thought, and, despite our failing models, we will gamble on knowing just what to do: cut CO2 emissions dramatically.

But it is simply not correct that climate data are systematically worse than expected; in many respects, they are spot on, or even better than expected. That we hear otherwise is an indication of the media's addiction to worst-case stories, but that makes a poor foundation for smart policies.

The most obvious point about global warming is that the planet is heating up. It has warmed about 1C (1.8F) over the past century, and is predicted by the United Nations' climate panel (IPCC) to warm between 1.6-3.8C (2.9-6.8F) during this century, mainly owing to increased CO2. An average of all 38 available standard runs from the IPCC shows that models expect a temperature increase in this decade of about 0.2C.

But this is not at all what we have seen. And this is true for all surface temperature measures, and even more so for both satellite measures. Temperatures in this decade have not been worse than expected; in fact, they have not even been increasing. They have actually decreased by between 0.01 and 0.1C per year. On the most important indicator of global warming, temperature development, we ought to hear that the data are actually much better than expected.

Likewise, and arguably much more importantly, the heat content of the world's oceans has been dropping for the past four years where we have measurements. Whereas energy in terms of temperature can disappear relatively easily from the light atmosphere, it is unclear where the heat from global warming should have gone – and certainly this is again much better than expected.

We hear constantly about how the Arctic sea ice is disappearing faster than expected, and this is true. But most serious scientists also allow that global warming is only part of the explanation. Another part is that the so-called Arctic oscillation of wind patterns over the Arctic Ocean is now in a state that it does not allow build-up of old ice, but immediately flushes most ice into the North Atlantic.

More importantly, we rarely hear that the Antarctic sea ice is not only not declining, but is above average for the past year. IPCC models would expect declining sea ice in both hemispheres but, whereas the Arctic is doing worse than expected, Antarctica is doing better.

Ironically, the Associated Press, along with many other news outlets, told us in 2007 that the "Arctic is screaming," and that the Northwest Passage was open "for the first time in recorded history." Yet the BBC reported in 2000 that the fabled Northwest Passage was already without ice.

We are constantly inundated with stories of how sea levels will rise, and how one study after another finds that it will be much worse than what the IPCC predicts. But most models find results within the IPCC range of a sea-level increase of 18-59cm (7-23in) this century. This is of course why the thousands of IPCC scientists projected that range. Yet studies claiming one metre or more obviously make for better headlines.

Since 1992, we have had satellites measuring the rise in global sea levels, and they have shown a stable increase of 3.2mm per year (1/8 of an inch) – spot on compared to the IPCC projection. Moreover, over the last two years, sea levels have not increased at all – actually, they show a slight drop. Should we not be told that this is much better than expected?

Hurricanes were the stock image of Al Gore's famous film on climate change, and certainly the United States was battered in 2004 and 2005, leading to wild claims of ever stronger and costlier storms in the future. But in the two years since, the costs have been well below average, virtually disappearing in 2006. That is definitely better than expected.

Gore quoted MIT hurricane researcher Kerry Emmanuel to support an alleged scientific consensus that global warming is making hurricanes much more damaging. But Emmanuel has now published a new study showing that even in a dramatically warming world, hurricane frequency and intensity may not substantially rise during the next two centuries. That conclusion did not get much exposure in the media.

Of course, not all things are less bad than we thought. But one-sided exaggeration is not the way forward. We urgently need balance if we are to make sensible choices.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2008.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Throw the Baby Out With the Bath Water

Hey, let's close the hospitals and let people die so we can stop global warming? Sound far fetched? Well, see this AGW blog post from Reuters. Unbelievable.

September 30th, 2008

Does global warming trump all hot-button ethical issues?

Posted by: Tom Heneghan
Tags: FaithWorld, , , , , , ,

Imagine you go to a conference on major bioethical questions — controversial issues like abortion, embryonic stem cells, assisted reproduction and euthanasia — and a keynote speaker uses all his allotted time warning about global warming. Is this the wrong issue to discuss — or the only one worth talking about?

The question arose at the annual conference of the European Association of Centres of Medical Ethics (EACME) that ended at the weekend in Prague. Dr. Richard Nicholson, editor of the Bulletin of Medical Ethics, told the assembled bioethicists they had to look beyond their usual issues to consider the far larger ecological threat he said could soon end up destroying mankind.

The issue is urgent for bioethicists, he said, because the healthcare industry in the rich OECD countries is a major source of carbon dioxide emissions. It also spends vast amounts to prolong patients’ lives, about half of it in the final months before death. “The more effort we put into saving individual lives, the more likely we are to doom the human race to extinction,” he said.

“Just being a little bit more green isn’t the answer,” he insisted. Rich countries will have to find ways to cut their carbon emissions almost completely within the next few years. His outlook for the healthcare industry was summarised in a bleak PowerPoint slide:

Possible changes in medicine

  • close most hospitals and concentrate on good-quality primary care
  • reverse the brain drain and send redundant health workers to developing countries
  • outlaw assisted reproduction
  • stop medical research undertaken for utopian or financial reasons.

If western countries closed all their hospitals, he said, life expectancy there would drop by only eight months.

“What is more important,” he asked, “maintaining our wealth and economies for 20-30 years until climate change wipes them out, or trying to ensure that as much as possible of the human race survives?”

Friday, October 10, 2008

Shameless Bald Faced Hyprocrisy

I found this over at FOX News Junk Science. These WWF jamokes must have balls of steel to try and get away with this. Its highly unlikely you'll see coverage of this in Time, NewsWeek, NYT or any TV or cable outlets. That's because we're not supposed to notice that the Green Team is in this for political power and the money. Remember this the next time you see that little movie start kid lamenting the poor polar bears in the arctic who by the way are increasing in population. Its enough to make one puke.

Five-Star Green Hypocrisy

Thursday, October 09, 2008

Move over Al Gore. Swankier carbon charlatanism has come to town in the form of the World Wildlife Fund’s luxury getaway called "Around the World: A Private Jet Expedition."

"Join us on a remarkable 25-day journey by luxury private jet," invites the WWF in a brochure for its voyage to "some of the most astonishing places on the planet to see top wildlife, including gorillas, orangutans, rhinos, lemurs and toucans."

For a price tag that starts at $64,950 per person, travelers will meet at the Ritz-Carlton in Orlando, Fla. on April 6, 2009 and then fly to “remote corners” of the world on a “specially outfitted jet that carries just 88 passengers in business-class comfort.” “World class experts — including WWF’s director of species conservation — will provide lectures en route, and a professional staff will be devoted to making your global adventure seamless and memorable.” Travelers will visit the Amazon Rain Forest in Brazil, Easter Island, Samoa, Borneo, Laos, Nepal, Madagascar, Namibia, Uganda or Rwanda, and finish up at the luxury Dorchester Hotel in London.

This is the very same WWF that says “the current growth in [carbon dioxide] emissions must be stopped as soon as possible” and that blames Americans for emitting 21 percent of global CO2 emissions even though the U.S. accounts for only 5 percent of the global population. In December 2007, the WWF launched its “Earth Hour” campaign, a global initiative in which cities and communities simultaneously turn out their lights for one hour “to symbolize their leadership and commitment to finding solutions for climate change.”

So how does this fantasy trip square with the WWF’s alarmist rhetoric?

Using the carbon footprint calculator on the WWF’s own web site, the 36,800-mile trip in a Boeing 757 jet will burn about 100,000 gallons of jet fuel to produce roughly 1,231 tons of CO2 in 25 days — that’s the equivalent of putting about 1,560 SUVs on the road during those three-plus weeks and that doesn’t even include emissions related to local air, ground and water transport and other amenities.

The WWF laments on its web site that the average American produces 19.6 tons of CO2 annually, which is nearly five times the world average of 3.9 tons per person. But during the WWF’s posh excursion, travelers will produce 14 tons of CO2 per person. That’s 71 percent of the average American carbon footprint and 360 percent of the average global footprint in a mere three-and-one-half weeks. But who’s counting — especially when you’re in “19 rows of spacious leather seats with full ergonomic support” enjoying “gourmet meals, chilled champagne [and] your own chef.”

I guess those are the rules when you’re one of WWF’s wealthy donors, but now contrast this with the how the WWF says the rest of us should live our lives. The group’s web site states that “It clearly is time for all Americans to roll up their sleeves, to take steps to reduce emissions, to prepare for climate change, and to encourage others to do the same.”

We, the masses, should — nay, must — use compact fluorescent light bulbs, reduce hot water use, turn thermostats down in the winter and up in the summer and use low-flow shower heads and faucets. We should pledge to commute by car pool or mass transit, switch to “green power,” and get more fuel efficient cars. We should make our lives more expensive and less convenient so that the Green elites don’t feel too guilty while jet-setting to exotic locales.

Maybe, you’re thinking, the WWF plans to makes its trip “carbon neutral” by purchasing carbon offsets — after all, the group does offer a carbon offset calculator on its web site under the heading “Join WWF in our mission to save life on Earth.” But neither the trip brochure nor the WWF web site mentions that any offsets will be purchased — and there seems to be good reason for that.

According to the WWF’s calculator, it would cost in excess of $44,000 to offset the carbon emissions from the jet travel alone. Then there’s the September 2008 report from the General Accounting Office which concluded that the carbon offset market lacked credibility. The Republican leader of the congressional committee requesting the report commented that “that the lack of standardization of offsets and fundamental problems assessing and verifying credibility, leave consumers in the dark and exposed to waste, fraud, and abuse.” Former Clinton official Joseph Romm wrote on his blog that, “the vast majority of offsets are, at some level, just rip-offsets.”

The Greens are apparently reluctant to fall for their own scams.

If you can’t make the WWF’s private jet expedition, the group offers a wide variety of other pricey, carbon-spewing tours. You might be interested in the WWF trip to the Galapagos or Fiji Islands, where you’re less likely to run into pesky downscale local tourists. The WWF has called for limitations on local tourism in the Galapagos and Fiji Islands saying that it causes greater environmental damage than “larger tourist operations” — like the WWF’s.

I’ve been thinking that WWF’s bandit-like panda bear was an appropriate logo given the group’s promotion of “rip-offsets.” But now, I think that a new logo may be in order — perhaps a hippo-crite?

More climate drivel from New Scientist. This time it reads like a paid advertisement from the Goracle and the green team. Not only can he save the world, he can now save the economy at the same time! Pretty soon he'll be curing the common cold and cancer by cap and trade schemes too.

US climate fix could help solve financial crisis

  • 11:36 10 October 2008
  • news service
  • New Scientist staff and Reuters

If the US focused on curbing climate change as soon as a new president took office – or sooner – it could help pull the world from the financial brink, according to environmental policy experts.

"Skyrocketing energy prices and the financial crisis have been a wake-up call that something's got to change," says Cathy Zoi, chief executive officer of the Alliance for Climate Protection, which is chaired by former US vice president Al Gore.

"My very strong belief is that we need to reorient our investments toward this transition to a clean energy economy, and it will be the engine of growth for getting us out of the doldrums that we've gotten in right now," says Zoi.

The reorientation must include limits on emissions of climate-warming carbon in the US, she said: "Unless we take action at home, we're not going to be able to have much influence in the international arena about what gets done."

The Bush administration accepts that human-spurred climate change is a reality, but rejects mandatory across-the-board caps on carbon as a disadvantage when competing with fast-growing, big-emitting countries like China and India.

The US is alone among the major developed countries in staying out of the carbon-capping Kyoto protocol, but is part of international discussions on new targets to fight climate change, due to be finalised in Copenhagen at the end of 2009.

Both major US presidential candidates– Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain – favour requiring reductions in greenhouse emissions, and environmental activists says whoever wins the White House in the 4 November elections will be an improvement over president George W Bush.

"There is an urgent need for whichever party wins the US election to give an early signal [of an intent to do more to combat global warming], or there cannot be a credible reason for 190 nations to come together in Copenhagen," says Achim Steiner, head of the UN Development Programme.

Rajendra Pachauri, who shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Price with Gore and who chairs the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says an Obama presidency would probably be more favourable to the fight against climate change.

But he adds: "Even if McCain wins, he has been very committed."

There is little chance of passing a US law to mandate a programme to cap and trade carbon emissions before Bush leaves office in January.

However, the first draft of a cap-and-trade bill was released this week by US Democratic representatives John Dingell of Michigan – home of the Big Three auto manufacturers – and Rick Boucher of Virginia – coal-mining country – that is likely to frame debate next year.

The draft legislation drew measured applause from environmental activists, who noted it contains options that could substantially weaken controls on greenhouse emissions from some sectors.

But the fact that these two law makers are crafting legislation aimed at curbing climate change indicates a possible change in tone in Washington.

Under Obama, Unions Could Do To Rest of Economy What They Did to GM: Will MSM Notice?

This is an interesting post from on the current troubles GM has competing with Japanese carmakers and the costs of union labor. They make the point that this will only get worse if JoBama gets into office. Read the entire piece here.

By Mark Finkelstein | October 10, 2008 - 07:18

Labor costs the Detroit Three substantially more per vehicle than it does the Japanese. Health care is the biggest chunk. GM, for instance spends $1,635 per vehicle on health care for active and retired workers in the U.S. Toyota pays nothing for retired workers - it has very few - and only $215 for active ones . . . Contract issues like work rules, line relief and holiday pay amount to $630 per vehicle - costs that the Japanese don't have. And paying UAW members for not working when plants are shut costs another $350 per vehicle. -- Fortune magazine, January 26, 2007
Obama and Biden will strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions. He will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. Obama and Biden will ensure that his labor appointees support workers' rights and will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. -- Official Obama website statement on labor [emphasis added].

Thursday, October 9, 2008

HUD: Five Million Fraudulent Mortgages Held by Illegals

Courtesy of KFYI radio in Arizona. More corruption to lay at the feet of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Franklin Raines and the other Obama cronies. Makes me sick to see our money going to subsidize the illegals in this country. They are a drain on our public services (health services, schools & prison systems etc.) along with this mess. But McCain wants to see these illegals keep their homes? Give me a break. Can't we just build the fence already?

HUD: Five Million Fraudulent Mortgages Held by Illegals

One illegal alien was arrested this year in Tucson after allegedly using a stolen social security number to buy two homes and rack up over $780,000 in bad debt.

Some five million fraudulent home mortgages are in the hands of illegal aliens, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

It's not known how many of those have contributed to the subprime housing mortgage meltdown, but it has affected every state, including Arizona.

The problem began years ago when banks were forced to give mortgages without confirming social security numbers or borrower identification. As a result, illegal immigrants were able to obtain home mortgages which they could not afford.

One illegal alien was arrested this year in Tucson after allegedly using a stolen social security number to buy two homes and rack up over $780,000 in bad debt.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Shaping the Truth - Debate Misstatements

Some fact checking from Fact We all know that the candidates bend or outright break the truth. Here are some inaccuracies from last night's debate.

McCain and Obama debated for the second time, in Nashville. We noted some misleading statements and mangled facts:
  • McCain proposed to write down the amount owed by over-mortgaged homeowners and claimed the idea as his own: “It’s my proposal, it's not Sen. Obama's proposal, it's not President Bush's proposal.” But the idea isn’t new. Obama had endorsed something similar two weeks earlier, and authority for the treasury secretary to grant such relief was included in the recently passed $700 billion financial rescue package.
  • Both candidates oversimplified the causes of the financial crisis. McCain blamed it on Democrats who resisted tighter regulation of federal mortgage agencies. Obama blamed it on financial deregulation backed by Republicans. We find both are right, with plenty of blame left over for others, from home buyers to the chairman of the Federal Reserve.
  • Obama said his health care plan would lower insurance premiums by up to $2,500 a year. Experts we’ve consulted see little evidence such savings would materialize.
  • McCain misstated his own health care plan, saying he’d give a $5,000 tax credit to “every American” His plan actually would provide only $2,500 per individual, or $5,000 for couples and families. He also misstated Obama’s health care plan, claiming it would levy fines on “small businesses” that fail to provide health insurance. Actually, Obama’s plan exempts “small businesses.”
  • McCain lamented that the U.S. was forced to “withdraw in humiliation” from Somalia in 1994, but he failed to note that he once proposed to cut off funding for troops to force a faster withdrawal.
  • Obama said, “I favor nuclear power.” That’s a stronger statement than we've heard him make before. As recently as last December, he said, “I am not a nuclear energy proponent.”
  • McCain claimed “1.3 million people in America make their living off eBay.” Actually, only 724,000 persons in the U.S. have income from eBay, and only some of them rely on it as their primary source.

Oh No!!! Say it Ain't So

This is tragic news! One more casualty of the dreaded scourge of our times. Al Gore was right all along. We should have listened to him and we wouldn't be in this mess. Is there some kind of bailout that will get us out of this mess?

Haggis at risk from global warming

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:01pm BST 08/10/2008

Haggis is at risk of dying out due to of global warming.

Haggis: A shortage of sheep's lungs has been caused by the lungworm parasite due to global warming
Haggis: A shortage of sheep's lungs has been caused by the lungworm parasite

The meat pudding is known to children as a rare tartan creature found only in the Highlands but the rise of the common parasite lung worm, which is thriving due to global warming, is putting it at risk.

Haggis is made from a sheep's stomach, which is stuffed with oatmeal and minced intestines. But butchers are finding it more and more difficult to get hold of the principle ingredient of sheep's lung, as so many are infected with lung worm.

Dr Sandy Clark, the vetinary centre manager at the Scottish Agricultural College in Thurso, said the parasite was thriving because it is able to survive in grazing all year round in the warmer climate.

Although lung worm will not necessarily show up in a healthy sheep or affect all the meat, it will make the lungs of the animal unfit for human consumption.

"Lung worm has been at a very low level and did not cause serious problems in sheep but with the changing climate and availability of the parasite it is becoming a problem," he said.

He also said lung worm has increased because new technologies mean farmers are only medicating animals that are shown to have traces of other diseases, rather than treating all animals on a regular basis.

"The sad fact is that the disease is causing the lungs to be condemned for human consumption because of the lung worm damage," he added.

Joe Findlay, owner of Findlay's Butcher in Edinburgh, said it was a struggle to source lung from Scottish farms so butchers are turning to Ireland instead.

The award-winning butcher said that the growing demand for haggis across the world was because of the fashion for societies dedicated to Scottish poet Robert Burns and the fact that the Scottish diaspora was also making it more difficult to source the ingredients.

"It could well get worse, we are just keeping our fingers crossed," he added.

Political Correctness Watch

Here are some interesting posts from Political Correctness Watch. Its one of my favorite topics along with Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). If you get a chance, drop by PCWatch and get your fill of PC goodies. Here are a few samples.

California brings back 'bride' and 'groom' on marriage licences after gender neutral drive fails

Marvellous what publicity does. It's just about the only defence against arrogant bureaucrats

The bride and groom are back in California. State health officials say the traditional words "bride" and "groom" will reappear on all marriage license applications issued in California starting next month. The change is being made because many couples still wanted the option of identifying themselves in such terms - even after same-sex marriages were legalised in the state, the California Department of Public Health said.

When same-sex marriage became legal on June 16, the health department issued new gender-neutral marriage forms with the words "Party A" and "Party B" where "bride" and "groom" used to be. The latest paperwork, which county clerks will be required to use starting November 17, will have blank spaces for applicants' names and personal information next to the words "First Person Data" and "Second Person Data" and boxes for checking "bride" or "groom." Because "bride" and "groom" appear in both sections, couples could check the same title twice to reflect a union between two men or two women.

Eliminating "bride" and "groom" from marriage certificates was a step the department thought it had to take to comply with the California Supreme Court decision in June that legalised same-sex marriage, spokeswoman Suanne Buggy said yesterday. But in the time since, state officials have looked for alternatives to satisfy couples who did not like the ring of "Party A" and "Party B," she said.

California and Massachusetts are the only U.S. states that allow gay marriages. Some other states let same-sex couples enter into civil unions offering some of marriage's legal advantages. California has an initiative on the November ballot that would ban same-sex marriage


Poll: Young Voters in CA opposing homosexual "marriage"

A new CBS 5 poll finds that California's Proposition 8 has picked up support in the wake of a television ad campaign that features footage of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proclaiming same-sex marriage is here to stay "whether you like it or not." The poll conducted for CBS 5 by SurveyUSA indicates that support for the measure to ban gay marriage has grown among voters in the state over an eleven day period -- most especially among young voters.

According to the poll, likely California voters overall now favor passage of Proposition 8 by a five-point margin, 47 percent to 42 percent. Ironically, a CBS 5 poll eleven days prior found a five-point margin in favor of the measure's opponents. The only demographic group to significantly change their views during this period were younger voters -- considered the hardest to poll and the most unpredictable voters -- who now support the measure after previously opposing it.

It should be noted that the poll, conducted statewide Oct. 4 and 5 among 670 likely voters, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percent, and the pollster continued to label the race too close to call -- just as it did eleven days ago. "Polling on ballot measures in general is an inexact science, and polling on homosexuality in general is a tricky business. So, not too much should be made of the 5 points that separates 'Yes' and 'No' today," concluded a summary of the results prepared by SurveyUSA.

Unchanged from the two recent polls: Those in the Inland Empire and the Central Valley continue to back Proposition 8, while those in the Bay Area remain opposed. Those in the greater Los Angeles area also remained largely split.

Not surprisingly, support for a gay marriage ban was strongest among those who considered themselves conservatives and identified themselves as regular churchgoers. Opposition was strongest amongst liberals and those who are less religious.


Britain's heartless and rigid socialist bureaucracy again

Not a hint of any human kindness, decency or fellow-feeling: Politicized police refuse to allow mother to lay flowers at death scene of her young sons

The mother of two young children killed in a fire at their family home has been marched away by police after trying to lay flowers on her own doorstep. Denise Goldsmith, 29, said she wanted to pay tribute to her sons Lewis, seven, and Taylor, five, who died when a blaze broke out at their house in the coastal town of Eastbourne, Sussex. The mother was locked out of the property on Saturday afternoon while her children were trapped inside as the flames tore through the house.

She returned to the scene yesterday, and witnesses said that she became hysterical when police told her she could not pass a cordon while forensics teams worked at the property. She pleaded: "Let me in, I need to leave these flowers for my boys. I need to get through, this is my home."

Mrs Goldsmith and members of her family then hit out at officers, according to witnesses, and were led back to their car and advised to leave. A forensic investigator finally retrieved the bunch of flowers, which had been dropped on the road, and placed it on the doorstep behind the cordon.

Jason Maynard, 35, who attempted to save the children, revealed their "devastating" last moments. He said that Mrs Goldsmith had run out of the house to seek help tackling the fire - leaving the children inside - but had locked herself out when the front door slammed behind her. The boys were left trapped inside. Mr Maynard, who was in a neighbouring house when he heard shouting and went outside, said: "The mother was outside on the path, just screaming the place down. She couldn't get back in. "She told me her kids were playing inside, under the stairs. She was screaming, please save my kids, get them out, my kids, my kids, my kids. "The kids wouldn't have been able to reach the door latch to let themselves out. They were just trapped."

The witness said that attempts to break into the house were futile. "The kitchen had already caught fire. The house was just full of flames and there was a huge amount of smoke. "There was nothing we could do. When the fire brigade turned up they battered the door down and went inside, then brought the kids' bodies out and laid them on the pavement. "It's absolutely heartbreaking."

Linda Carey, a friend of the children's father, Stuart Jenkins, said: "Both Stuart and Denise absolutely doted on those boys. I have no idea how she must be feeling right now. "Doctors have put her on sedatives to calm her down. But she must be absolutely torn apart."