(When our children grow up they will want to ask today’s Democrats about 2006):
How come while claiming to love our country and support our military you did everything possible to undermine our war effort? Instead of presenting a united front to our enemies and letting politics end at the water’s edge (an American tradition), you gave encouragement for them to continue in their efforts to destroy us. For cheap political gain you made them realize they didn’t need to defeat our military because with your help all they had to do was defeat our resolve. You made certain we could never again be victorious in any conflict lasting more than a couple of weeks.
How come while marching in the 1970’s to successfully abolish an unfair and unjust military draft, you then wanted to re-impose it on our young people? While at first purporting that this would help the under-staffed military (whose size had been cut by Democrats), you revealed the real purpose was to breed dissent among society to undermine the war effort. You wanted to impose your will on our young people only to gain a political end. I thought you said you supported the military?
How come you blamed Bush and Republicans for the increasing national debt when everyone saw the federal treasury as a bottomless pit to fund all their pet projects and programs? How come you opposed letting people keep more of their own money through tax cuts that actually increased revenues to the treasury? How come you opposed Social Security reform that would’ve given me a chance to prepare for my retirement instead of adding deficits that dwarfed the national debt? Now you expect me to pay ever higher taxes to fund your Social Security while I have no company pension and Social Security won’t be there for me! I thought you said you cared about the children?
If you cared about children, how come you killed 43 million of them through your party’s sacrament of abortion? How come you were worried about the non-existent torture of terrorists but you proudly supported the partial birth abortion which ripped children to pieces moments before their birth? I’m confused, but I do feel lucky you allowed me to be born.
When I look at all the misery Democrat policies have caused I don’t understand how anyone could’ve ever voted for them.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Clinton's Meltdown
President Clinton’s meltdown on Fox News indicates ABC’s “Path to 9/11” hit a sore spot while understating his incompetence regarding national security.
After his election he celebrated the “Peace Dividend” by slashing one-third of our military personnel and transferring that spending to social programs – now he blames Bush for insufficient troop strength. Clinton claimed on FNC he did more to take out bin Laden than anyone else. Not true. Yemen and Sudan separately offered bin Laden on a silver platter but Clinton refused to take him. Clinton denies this despite the account of Mansoor Ijaz who brokered the deals. Clinton was also recorded on tape claiming he refused these deals because he had no legal justification to hold bin Laden.
If you read “Dereliction of Duty” by Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson you will be aghast at Clinton’s neglect while entrusted with safeguarding our security. This first hand account by a man who carried the Nuclear Football details egregious behavior by Clinton. He recounts how our forces had bin Laden in their sights and were seeking Clinton’s authorization to take him out. Patterson was the conduit between the military command and Clinton who was attending a PGA golf tournament. Clinton kept avoiding making a decision despite Patterson’s urgent pleading. By the time Clinton found his nerve the opportunity had passed. On another occasion, Clinton lost the card containing the secret codes required to launch our nuclear weapons while he was out in public.
Clinton’s administration failed us miserably. Jaime Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General and inexplicable member of the 9/11 Commission, built the wall preventing law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing information. This enabled the 9/11 terrorists in this country to evade detection. Following the bombings of the 1993 WTC, the Kenyan and Tanzanian embassies, the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, and the USS Cole, Clinton did nothing but lob a couple of cruise missiles hitting a deserted terrorist training camp in Afghanistan and an aspirin factory in Sudan.
Evidently, Clinton was more interested in chasing female subordinates than the enemies threatening our country. Now, he and his fellow Democrats are more interested in fighting global warming than Islamofacism. Democrats apparently think hiding under the bed waiting for the monster to disappear is an effective strategy for fighting terrorism. Maybe the monster will be gone in the morning when we get up. Do you want to wait to find out?
After his election he celebrated the “Peace Dividend” by slashing one-third of our military personnel and transferring that spending to social programs – now he blames Bush for insufficient troop strength. Clinton claimed on FNC he did more to take out bin Laden than anyone else. Not true. Yemen and Sudan separately offered bin Laden on a silver platter but Clinton refused to take him. Clinton denies this despite the account of Mansoor Ijaz who brokered the deals. Clinton was also recorded on tape claiming he refused these deals because he had no legal justification to hold bin Laden.
If you read “Dereliction of Duty” by Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson you will be aghast at Clinton’s neglect while entrusted with safeguarding our security. This first hand account by a man who carried the Nuclear Football details egregious behavior by Clinton. He recounts how our forces had bin Laden in their sights and were seeking Clinton’s authorization to take him out. Patterson was the conduit between the military command and Clinton who was attending a PGA golf tournament. Clinton kept avoiding making a decision despite Patterson’s urgent pleading. By the time Clinton found his nerve the opportunity had passed. On another occasion, Clinton lost the card containing the secret codes required to launch our nuclear weapons while he was out in public.
Clinton’s administration failed us miserably. Jaime Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General and inexplicable member of the 9/11 Commission, built the wall preventing law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing information. This enabled the 9/11 terrorists in this country to evade detection. Following the bombings of the 1993 WTC, the Kenyan and Tanzanian embassies, the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, and the USS Cole, Clinton did nothing but lob a couple of cruise missiles hitting a deserted terrorist training camp in Afghanistan and an aspirin factory in Sudan.
Evidently, Clinton was more interested in chasing female subordinates than the enemies threatening our country. Now, he and his fellow Democrats are more interested in fighting global warming than Islamofacism. Democrats apparently think hiding under the bed waiting for the monster to disappear is an effective strategy for fighting terrorism. Maybe the monster will be gone in the morning when we get up. Do you want to wait to find out?
Monday, September 18, 2006
North to Alaska
Having just returned from a two week trip to Alaska, I’ve been catching up with the past few Rivereasts. Boy, my ears should’ve been burning as I’ve stirred up the Church of the Holy Warmers.
Alaska serves as a poster child for the Warmer faithful. “The permafrost is melting and glaciers are retreating” are common refrains from the Book of Common Talking Points. While exploring Glacier Bay I found as many advancing glaciers as retreating ones. Wonder why we don’t hear about that? The National Park Ranger said she believed the entire area would once again be covered by ice within 300 years.
Close to Fairbanks I learned of someone who tried to establish a farm by thawing the nutrition-rich permafrost. His attempt failed because the permafrost kept re-freezing. Fall came two weeks early this year. Shops were closing for the season and summer workers were heading south as quickly as possible. The river levels in Fairbanks were dropping because the glaciers providing the water were freezing.
I had dinner with a scientist whose work in meteorology and climatology has spanned over 40 years. He still works as a climate scientist for the federal government. I asked him point blank if he subscribed to the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Taken aback by my question, after looking left and right, he sheepishly whispered, “What a bunch of nonsense, it’s all political.” He went on to explain how variable climate is and always has been. As a meteorologist, he also expressed his extreme skepticism about the utility and veracity of computer models as tools for predicting future climate.
Space doesn’t allow a point by point refutation of the responses to my letters. I am disappointed by the lack of robust debate and critical thinking demonstrated in most of the responses. Those who want to pursue and discover truth need to break away from their groupthink and start perusing diverse and alternative sources for their information. Otherwise, they will be stuck in the party line only to serve in the role of useful idiots.
Enjoy the echo chamber you’ve built while you can with its concomitant doctrines of settled science and disappearing skeptics. The new science and empirical evidence emerging almost daily will soon cause this myth to collapse of its own weight.
Alaska serves as a poster child for the Warmer faithful. “The permafrost is melting and glaciers are retreating” are common refrains from the Book of Common Talking Points. While exploring Glacier Bay I found as many advancing glaciers as retreating ones. Wonder why we don’t hear about that? The National Park Ranger said she believed the entire area would once again be covered by ice within 300 years.
Close to Fairbanks I learned of someone who tried to establish a farm by thawing the nutrition-rich permafrost. His attempt failed because the permafrost kept re-freezing. Fall came two weeks early this year. Shops were closing for the season and summer workers were heading south as quickly as possible. The river levels in Fairbanks were dropping because the glaciers providing the water were freezing.
I had dinner with a scientist whose work in meteorology and climatology has spanned over 40 years. He still works as a climate scientist for the federal government. I asked him point blank if he subscribed to the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Taken aback by my question, after looking left and right, he sheepishly whispered, “What a bunch of nonsense, it’s all political.” He went on to explain how variable climate is and always has been. As a meteorologist, he also expressed his extreme skepticism about the utility and veracity of computer models as tools for predicting future climate.
Space doesn’t allow a point by point refutation of the responses to my letters. I am disappointed by the lack of robust debate and critical thinking demonstrated in most of the responses. Those who want to pursue and discover truth need to break away from their groupthink and start perusing diverse and alternative sources for their information. Otherwise, they will be stuck in the party line only to serve in the role of useful idiots.
Enjoy the echo chamber you’ve built while you can with its concomitant doctrines of settled science and disappearing skeptics. The new science and empirical evidence emerging almost daily will soon cause this myth to collapse of its own weight.
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
The Real Inconvenient Truth
Confronting Warmers with facts forces them into intellectual contortions. First they claim last month’s heat wave was caused by human activity. When told the warmest July occurred 70 years ago before humans could’ve been a factor, they respond (correctly) that a heat wave is not a trend. In the next breath they try to claim hurricane activity during a two year period not only represents a trend, but proves that humans caused them.
This year’s lack of hurricanes is not mentioned, but it’s guaranteed any occurring in September or October will be our fault. Record numbers of tornadoes two years ago in Kansas and Nebraska were blamed on humans while the complete absence of any this year was ignored. Warmers seize upon any event that fits their paradigm and ignore everything else that doesn’t.
The Warmer’s worldview is closer to religion than science. In some respects it resembles Puritanism where man’s original sin against the earth is provoking the wrath of nature. We are being punished for our transgressions and must repent. On the other hand it is much more primitive in nature and brings to mind the image of al-Gore and his fellow Warmers dancing around the fire in grass skirts. They are preparing to sacrifice the virgin to appease the volcano gods. Unfortunately, in this case the virgin is our capitalist economy.
CO2 is a trace gas accounting for only 3.6% of the greenhouse effect (water vapor accounts for >90%). Man contributes 3.2% of the CO2 entering the atmosphere every year with nature providing the rest. Reducing the one-tenth of 1% that humans contribute to the greenhouse effect will have absolutely no impact on temperature. Why do Warmers regard this life-sustaining element as public enemy #1?
Warmers champion so-called “clean” energy because they despise the individual freedom and capitalism fueled by oil. Their seething rage blinds them to the paradox that more fossil fuel is required in the use of “clean” energy than if the fossil fuel was used alone. For instance, solar voltaic cells require twice as much fossil fuel to produce than they will replace in their useful lives!
“Clean” energy is supposed to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Only in the tortured logic of Warmers could using MORE fossil fuel to generate less energy and more pollution at greater cost be considered “clean.” Obviously, purposes other than the environment are the real objective.
This year’s lack of hurricanes is not mentioned, but it’s guaranteed any occurring in September or October will be our fault. Record numbers of tornadoes two years ago in Kansas and Nebraska were blamed on humans while the complete absence of any this year was ignored. Warmers seize upon any event that fits their paradigm and ignore everything else that doesn’t.
The Warmer’s worldview is closer to religion than science. In some respects it resembles Puritanism where man’s original sin against the earth is provoking the wrath of nature. We are being punished for our transgressions and must repent. On the other hand it is much more primitive in nature and brings to mind the image of al-Gore and his fellow Warmers dancing around the fire in grass skirts. They are preparing to sacrifice the virgin to appease the volcano gods. Unfortunately, in this case the virgin is our capitalist economy.
CO2 is a trace gas accounting for only 3.6% of the greenhouse effect (water vapor accounts for >90%). Man contributes 3.2% of the CO2 entering the atmosphere every year with nature providing the rest. Reducing the one-tenth of 1% that humans contribute to the greenhouse effect will have absolutely no impact on temperature. Why do Warmers regard this life-sustaining element as public enemy #1?
Warmers champion so-called “clean” energy because they despise the individual freedom and capitalism fueled by oil. Their seething rage blinds them to the paradox that more fossil fuel is required in the use of “clean” energy than if the fossil fuel was used alone. For instance, solar voltaic cells require twice as much fossil fuel to produce than they will replace in their useful lives!
“Clean” energy is supposed to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Only in the tortured logic of Warmers could using MORE fossil fuel to generate less energy and more pollution at greater cost be considered “clean.” Obviously, purposes other than the environment are the real objective.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Heat Wave
While alarmists blame this summer’s heat wave on global warming, the warmest July on record was 1936. How could this have happened before significant increases in CO2 took place?
Only 12 states have set all-time record highs during the last 30 years while 16 set record lows. Thirty-three states set their all-time highs during and prior to the 1930’s with fourteen setting their record high in 1936 alone.
Keep these facts in mind the next time you hear claims of unprecedented warming and of untold heat waves yet to come. Did you know the average global temperature has not increased since 1998 and has actually demonstrated a very slight cooling trend? Of course you didn’t because this unpleasant fact doesn’t fit the agenda of the global warming industry.
These people have huge financial stakes in selling this lie to an unwitting public. Legions of scientists have their livelihoods and careers dependent on getting shares of the billions doled out by government every year for climate change research. The funding goes to those who present the direst scenarios. There is also a burgeoning carbon cap and trading industry fashioned from the Kyoto Protocol that essentially does nothing more than sell hot air.
While these same charlatans accuse their skeptical opponents of being owned by the oil industry, clearly it is they who are the paid shills. Industry funding is an infinitesimal fraction of that spewing from the government with their unbridled use of our tax dollars. Most of the skeptics are actually retired scientists who are immune to the blacklisting taking place against those active scientists who are apostates from the theology of global warming. When the alarmists cry they are being censored, their claims ring hollow. This really is the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. As they say, follow the money.
The rhetoric is heating up because alarmists know time is running out. They claim we’re near a tipping point, but for an entirely different reason. The sun, which is the real driver of climate, is forecast by NASA to hit a low point in 2020 not seen in several hundred years. This decline in sunspot activity will bring about a cooling which really is a cause for worry. We cannot alter this fact. We must adapt to the changes that come. Following the current alarmist prescription of higher-priced energy is not a viable approach.
Only 12 states have set all-time record highs during the last 30 years while 16 set record lows. Thirty-three states set their all-time highs during and prior to the 1930’s with fourteen setting their record high in 1936 alone.
Keep these facts in mind the next time you hear claims of unprecedented warming and of untold heat waves yet to come. Did you know the average global temperature has not increased since 1998 and has actually demonstrated a very slight cooling trend? Of course you didn’t because this unpleasant fact doesn’t fit the agenda of the global warming industry.
These people have huge financial stakes in selling this lie to an unwitting public. Legions of scientists have their livelihoods and careers dependent on getting shares of the billions doled out by government every year for climate change research. The funding goes to those who present the direst scenarios. There is also a burgeoning carbon cap and trading industry fashioned from the Kyoto Protocol that essentially does nothing more than sell hot air.
While these same charlatans accuse their skeptical opponents of being owned by the oil industry, clearly it is they who are the paid shills. Industry funding is an infinitesimal fraction of that spewing from the government with their unbridled use of our tax dollars. Most of the skeptics are actually retired scientists who are immune to the blacklisting taking place against those active scientists who are apostates from the theology of global warming. When the alarmists cry they are being censored, their claims ring hollow. This really is the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. As they say, follow the money.
The rhetoric is heating up because alarmists know time is running out. They claim we’re near a tipping point, but for an entirely different reason. The sun, which is the real driver of climate, is forecast by NASA to hit a low point in 2020 not seen in several hundred years. This decline in sunspot activity will bring about a cooling which really is a cause for worry. We cannot alter this fact. We must adapt to the changes that come. Following the current alarmist prescription of higher-priced energy is not a viable approach.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
How To Win
Israel’s response to Hezbollah has been called disproportionate. Inexplicably, George Bush has said Israel must exercise restraint against an enemy sworn to her destruction.
Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, declared war on us a long time before attacking Israel. After Jimmy Carter, the worst president in our nation's history, helped to institute radical Islam by collaborating in the ouster of the Shah, his treachery was repaid by the taking and holding hostage of our embassy for over a year. Carter impressed the Islamofascists with our impotence by failing to offer any response to their act of war. Succeeding presidents followed this same pattern of inaction with their lack of response to the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon (using the largest conventional explosion in world history to kill 241 Marines), the hijacking of TWA Flight 847, kidnapping and torturing Americans in Lebanon, kidnapping and hanging the Marine officer who was commander of UN peacekeeping forces, and killing 19 Americans while bombing the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
We should join Israel in destroying these fascists. Imagine when Hezbollah rockets are armed with nuclear warheads. While Bush’s tactics and execution of the terror war are legitimate targets for criticism, the undermining of our war efforts here at home is sedition. Many in this Fifth Column call this “Bush’s War”, making light of this struggle and fight for our survival.
People forget we won WWII by targeting civilians. While most people know about the atomic bombs dropped on Japan, very few know this paled in comparison with the napalm bombing of 15 Japanese cities that generated a much higher death toll. This broke the back and spirit of the Bushido warriors who were prepared to fight to the last man and effectively ended the war.
When Winston Churchill was criticized for immoral action in the firebombing of Dresden, his chief military planner responded with the challenge, “What is moral in war? What is moral about one soldier sticking a bayonet into the stomach of another soldier?” The only thing moral in war is waging it with overwhelming force bringing about the decisive situation where the beaten side knows it has been defeated. Ending it as quickly as possible is the only possible thing that is moral, using any and all means to bring this about. We better recall this lesson if we want to preserve this country for our grandchildren.
Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, declared war on us a long time before attacking Israel. After Jimmy Carter, the worst president in our nation's history, helped to institute radical Islam by collaborating in the ouster of the Shah, his treachery was repaid by the taking and holding hostage of our embassy for over a year. Carter impressed the Islamofascists with our impotence by failing to offer any response to their act of war. Succeeding presidents followed this same pattern of inaction with their lack of response to the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon (using the largest conventional explosion in world history to kill 241 Marines), the hijacking of TWA Flight 847, kidnapping and torturing Americans in Lebanon, kidnapping and hanging the Marine officer who was commander of UN peacekeeping forces, and killing 19 Americans while bombing the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
We should join Israel in destroying these fascists. Imagine when Hezbollah rockets are armed with nuclear warheads. While Bush’s tactics and execution of the terror war are legitimate targets for criticism, the undermining of our war efforts here at home is sedition. Many in this Fifth Column call this “Bush’s War”, making light of this struggle and fight for our survival.
People forget we won WWII by targeting civilians. While most people know about the atomic bombs dropped on Japan, very few know this paled in comparison with the napalm bombing of 15 Japanese cities that generated a much higher death toll. This broke the back and spirit of the Bushido warriors who were prepared to fight to the last man and effectively ended the war.
When Winston Churchill was criticized for immoral action in the firebombing of Dresden, his chief military planner responded with the challenge, “What is moral in war? What is moral about one soldier sticking a bayonet into the stomach of another soldier?” The only thing moral in war is waging it with overwhelming force bringing about the decisive situation where the beaten side knows it has been defeated. Ending it as quickly as possible is the only possible thing that is moral, using any and all means to bring this about. We better recall this lesson if we want to preserve this country for our grandchildren.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Choice
I have been an ardent student of climate change since the 1970’s when many of today’s global warming enthusiasts were using the same rhetoric in scaring us about global cooling. I read all of the information I can find on the subject from both supporters and opponents of human-induced global warming. Because climate is one of the least understood areas in all of science it becomes necessary to make judgments regarding the credibility of the respective antagonist’s arguments.
I arrive at my viewpoints on the basis of the facts and evidence provided by each side. In my opinion, the alarmist side throws out one sensational claim only exceeded by the next, relies on computer simulations while completely ignoring observational evidence, and only chooses to present as fact the outliers from their models that offer up the scariest and most extreme scenarios.
The anti-alarmist side tries to deal with what is actually known. They point out that CO2 is a relatively weak greenhouse gas existing only in trace amounts in the atmosphere. While alarmists claim its volume has hit record levels, cooler heads point out this claim could be made for each of the past 150 years where CO2 has increased from .028% to .037% of atmospheric volume. The physical properties of CO2 enable it to only absorb 3 very small bandwidths of the infrared energy radiated from the earth. The vast majority of infrared energy still easily escapes into outer space. We are already almost one-third of the way to the doubling of CO2 volume ominously threatened by alarmists, and yet the earth’s temperature has only increased by 1 degree F. CO2 is incapable of generating the 11 degrees of warming threatened by proponents of this theory.
The alarmists point to the ice melting in coastal Greenland and the Western Peninsula of Antarctica. They conveniently ignore that the vast interiors making up the majority of these regions are expanding in ice mass and consequently exerting a negative impact on sea level.
The alarmist side is saying that the debate is over and the science is settled. I don’t dispute the climate is apparently in a warming trend. My issue is with the claim that it is primarily caused by humans rather than natural variation. The planet is rebounding from the “Little Ice Age” where temperatures declined from those existing 1000 years ago. A few years ago, 17,000 scientists signed the Oregon Petition stating their disagreement with the premise that human activities were leading to catastrophic climate change.
Greenhouse theory can’t explain that seven-tenths of the one degree warming occurred by 1940, well before significant human CO2 emissions went into the atmosphere. When these human-induced emissions started to dramatically increase from 1940 to 1970, the climate COOLED by .4 degree. We then saw the temperature increase again by .7 degree to the present. There is no linear correlation of CO2 and temperature. Why do alarmists believe that reducing the already miniscule 3% human contribution of CO2 volume will have any effect on the climate? Furthermore, why do they want to sacrifice our economic well-being over a spurious and unproven theory? The burden of proof is clearly on them.
I arrive at my viewpoints on the basis of the facts and evidence provided by each side. In my opinion, the alarmist side throws out one sensational claim only exceeded by the next, relies on computer simulations while completely ignoring observational evidence, and only chooses to present as fact the outliers from their models that offer up the scariest and most extreme scenarios.
The anti-alarmist side tries to deal with what is actually known. They point out that CO2 is a relatively weak greenhouse gas existing only in trace amounts in the atmosphere. While alarmists claim its volume has hit record levels, cooler heads point out this claim could be made for each of the past 150 years where CO2 has increased from .028% to .037% of atmospheric volume. The physical properties of CO2 enable it to only absorb 3 very small bandwidths of the infrared energy radiated from the earth. The vast majority of infrared energy still easily escapes into outer space. We are already almost one-third of the way to the doubling of CO2 volume ominously threatened by alarmists, and yet the earth’s temperature has only increased by 1 degree F. CO2 is incapable of generating the 11 degrees of warming threatened by proponents of this theory.
The alarmists point to the ice melting in coastal Greenland and the Western Peninsula of Antarctica. They conveniently ignore that the vast interiors making up the majority of these regions are expanding in ice mass and consequently exerting a negative impact on sea level.
The alarmist side is saying that the debate is over and the science is settled. I don’t dispute the climate is apparently in a warming trend. My issue is with the claim that it is primarily caused by humans rather than natural variation. The planet is rebounding from the “Little Ice Age” where temperatures declined from those existing 1000 years ago. A few years ago, 17,000 scientists signed the Oregon Petition stating their disagreement with the premise that human activities were leading to catastrophic climate change.
Greenhouse theory can’t explain that seven-tenths of the one degree warming occurred by 1940, well before significant human CO2 emissions went into the atmosphere. When these human-induced emissions started to dramatically increase from 1940 to 1970, the climate COOLED by .4 degree. We then saw the temperature increase again by .7 degree to the present. There is no linear correlation of CO2 and temperature. Why do alarmists believe that reducing the already miniscule 3% human contribution of CO2 volume will have any effect on the climate? Furthermore, why do they want to sacrifice our economic well-being over a spurious and unproven theory? The burden of proof is clearly on them.
Environmentalists
If only we had listened to environmentalists 30 years ago how much better off we would be. Claiming that polar sea ice was at record levels and spring was coming two weeks late, they warned that urgent action was required to avoid another ice age. (Isn’t it funny how they now claim polar sea ice is at its lowest level, spring is two weeks early, and the planet is on the verge of burning up.)
Paul Ehrlich was making millions off his book “The Population Bomb” which stated mankind didn’t have enough food and resources to care for its exploding numbers. He claimed millions of people would starve to death in America by 1990. (He is now an active global warming enthusiast and still regarded as a visionary even though he’s never been right.)
Remember acid rain, nuclear winter, and other assorted looming disasters the environmentalist Left taunted us with. None of these events ever happened and now we no longer hear anything about them.
Regrettably, we did listen to them about DDT. Listening to the junkscience of Rachel Carson, and completely disregarding the scientific evidence compiled by his agency, EPA Administrator William Ruckleshaus banned the use of DDT. The result was a disaster that really did occur and is an ongoing calamity. Over 100 million people, mostly women and children, have died of malaria as a direct consequence of environmentalist lunacy. This massacre, the greatest from any cause in human history, was completely preventable.
The brutality of this eco-imperialism is ongoing. These misanthropists oppose any efforts to allow people in underdeveloped countries to improve the quality of their lives. They protest and threaten economic damage against any financial institutions that would lend money to help these poor nations build the dams or power plants that could provide electricity and clean water. This economic terrorism sentences poor people to drink contaminated water and use animal dung for heating and cooking. “Environmentalist compassion” traps these people in misery and prohibits them from changing the conditions of their impoverishment.
Meanwhile, these same environmental bishops think nothing of flying in jets several times a year to attend climate conferences in all corners of the earth. That’s okay because they care and know so much more than the rest of us. After all, they’re trying to save the planet. Conservation, sacrifice, and economic denial is a duty only to be borne by everyone else.
The modern environmentalist Left has been wrong in just about everything they’ve ever said and yet we’re supposed to do their bidding? I, for one, have heard quite enough from them. In the last century life spans have doubled, food production has quintupled, and the quality of life for ever-increasing numbers of people has never been greater. I trust in the individual freedom, capitalism, and technological development that makes all this possible.
Paul Ehrlich was making millions off his book “The Population Bomb” which stated mankind didn’t have enough food and resources to care for its exploding numbers. He claimed millions of people would starve to death in America by 1990. (He is now an active global warming enthusiast and still regarded as a visionary even though he’s never been right.)
Remember acid rain, nuclear winter, and other assorted looming disasters the environmentalist Left taunted us with. None of these events ever happened and now we no longer hear anything about them.
Regrettably, we did listen to them about DDT. Listening to the junkscience of Rachel Carson, and completely disregarding the scientific evidence compiled by his agency, EPA Administrator William Ruckleshaus banned the use of DDT. The result was a disaster that really did occur and is an ongoing calamity. Over 100 million people, mostly women and children, have died of malaria as a direct consequence of environmentalist lunacy. This massacre, the greatest from any cause in human history, was completely preventable.
The brutality of this eco-imperialism is ongoing. These misanthropists oppose any efforts to allow people in underdeveloped countries to improve the quality of their lives. They protest and threaten economic damage against any financial institutions that would lend money to help these poor nations build the dams or power plants that could provide electricity and clean water. This economic terrorism sentences poor people to drink contaminated water and use animal dung for heating and cooking. “Environmentalist compassion” traps these people in misery and prohibits them from changing the conditions of their impoverishment.
Meanwhile, these same environmental bishops think nothing of flying in jets several times a year to attend climate conferences in all corners of the earth. That’s okay because they care and know so much more than the rest of us. After all, they’re trying to save the planet. Conservation, sacrifice, and economic denial is a duty only to be borne by everyone else.
The modern environmentalist Left has been wrong in just about everything they’ve ever said and yet we’re supposed to do their bidding? I, for one, have heard quite enough from them. In the last century life spans have doubled, food production has quintupled, and the quality of life for ever-increasing numbers of people has never been greater. I trust in the individual freedom, capitalism, and technological development that makes all this possible.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Global Warbling
Recent weeks have brought a media barrage of alarm about global warming. This coordinated campaign has attacked from all directions. First, “60 Minutes” presented James Hansen, the NASA scientist purportedly censored by Bush who hasn’t had much difficulty getting his chicken-little message out despite the alleged political pressures. This Executive branch employee received a grant of $250,000 from a Teresa Heinz-Kerry foundation not long before he endorsed John Kerry for President in the week prior to the 2004 election.
Next came Time Magazine’s featured fear-mongering issue entitled “Be Worried – Be Very Worried” warning us of the inevitable approaching global warming apocalypse. Those of you with a memory may recall that Time also warned us of the approaching Ice Age back in 1974. The dire warnings they present are eerily similar in wording then and now, only differing in “degree.”
Then came the Ad Council, in concert with the Natural Resources Foundation, warning us of our responsibility to prevent global warming for our children. These ads are strikingly similar to 1964 Democrat political commercials warning the public not to vote for Barry Goldwater with a mushroom cloud looming in the background.
Finally, the coup de grace is a film by Al Gore called “An Inconvenient Truth” warning us that we’re near the tipping point of incontrovertible climate change. This animated spectacular, featuring Homer Simpson as Al Gore, provides lucid instructions of what is required to prevent climatic Armageddon. (Sorry – just kidding!)
Similar themes redound in all of these fantastical assaults. Inevitably, we hear that the science is settled, ALL serious scientists agree, and the teeny, tiny minority of scientists who dare to oppose are all in the pay of Big Oil and Coal – end of story. “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!”
The alarmists are chagrined that their efforts to engage the public over the past 20 years have come to naught. Their new rationale de jour is that the media has been unduly balanced in “allowing” those skeptical of human-caused global warming to be heard. Their new approach is that these dissenting voices should be silenced, ironically at the same time as they decry the supposed censoring by the Bush administration. Talk about cognitive dissonance!
Please understand that despite the repeated claims of the certainty of human-induced climate change, no empirical evidence from observation has been presented. Everything served up to us as “science” is nothing more than the virtual world of computer models. The scary results projected by these computer models are less than the precision of the measuring instruments. This means the projected result is smaller than the stated margin of error. For instance, when alarmists threaten that temperatures could rise 2 degrees over the next 50 years, the 3 degree margin of error means we have an equal chance of seeing a 1 degree cooling! So much for their claimed certainty!
These charlatans want you to believe that fractionally reducing the 3% human contribution to annual CO2 volumes can create a stable climate. Truly, these people are the anacondas of snake oil salesmen.
Next came Time Magazine’s featured fear-mongering issue entitled “Be Worried – Be Very Worried” warning us of the inevitable approaching global warming apocalypse. Those of you with a memory may recall that Time also warned us of the approaching Ice Age back in 1974. The dire warnings they present are eerily similar in wording then and now, only differing in “degree.”
Then came the Ad Council, in concert with the Natural Resources Foundation, warning us of our responsibility to prevent global warming for our children. These ads are strikingly similar to 1964 Democrat political commercials warning the public not to vote for Barry Goldwater with a mushroom cloud looming in the background.
Finally, the coup de grace is a film by Al Gore called “An Inconvenient Truth” warning us that we’re near the tipping point of incontrovertible climate change. This animated spectacular, featuring Homer Simpson as Al Gore, provides lucid instructions of what is required to prevent climatic Armageddon. (Sorry – just kidding!)
Similar themes redound in all of these fantastical assaults. Inevitably, we hear that the science is settled, ALL serious scientists agree, and the teeny, tiny minority of scientists who dare to oppose are all in the pay of Big Oil and Coal – end of story. “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!”
The alarmists are chagrined that their efforts to engage the public over the past 20 years have come to naught. Their new rationale de jour is that the media has been unduly balanced in “allowing” those skeptical of human-caused global warming to be heard. Their new approach is that these dissenting voices should be silenced, ironically at the same time as they decry the supposed censoring by the Bush administration. Talk about cognitive dissonance!
Please understand that despite the repeated claims of the certainty of human-induced climate change, no empirical evidence from observation has been presented. Everything served up to us as “science” is nothing more than the virtual world of computer models. The scary results projected by these computer models are less than the precision of the measuring instruments. This means the projected result is smaller than the stated margin of error. For instance, when alarmists threaten that temperatures could rise 2 degrees over the next 50 years, the 3 degree margin of error means we have an equal chance of seeing a 1 degree cooling! So much for their claimed certainty!
These charlatans want you to believe that fractionally reducing the 3% human contribution to annual CO2 volumes can create a stable climate. Truly, these people are the anacondas of snake oil salesmen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)