Posts Tagged ‘global warming’
I’ve been in a generally foul mood lately. Those that know me know I’ve not been a particularly fun person. And once in a while, I have to let out some rabidity. So, I’ve trolled through the news headlines to fine a list of things at which I can throw bricks.
1. According to Crazy Uncle Joe, Iraq is one of Barack Obama’s greatest achievements. You have got to be kidding me. The guy who campaigned on how much he was opposed to Iraq and everything about it, they guy who believed the surge would actually make Iraq worse, contrary to what happened, now deserves credit for it? I swear, every time Biden opens his pie hole, the complete opposite of common sense comes out, like it’s some sort of anti-language. And what was Obama thinking in making this dork our Vice-President, anyway. Most of the time, the Veep is supposed to not say anything – just do his job. Maybe, once in a while, give a speech at Columbia U. or something. I sorta wish Biden would do neither.
2. Conservatives have been telling people for years – when you give away free money, you essentially are fertilizing corruption. In Polk County, Florida, there was a plan in motion, which got kaboshed for now, to give disabled kids a free iPod Nano, courtesy of Uncle Sam and Presidents Bush and Obama. The idea was interesting on paper, but when the parents filed to get the nifty device, the parent would keep it for themselves, rather than giving it to their kid. Since it was a foregone that these kids wouldn’t have any idea that the Porkulus bill had a little somethin-somethin for them, well, no harm, no foul, and mom or dad get a new iPod player out of it. Like we didn’t see THAT one, eh? Nancy Woolcock, the assistant super at Polk County Schools thinks these kids deserve a free iPod, on our nickel. So where’s MY free iPod?
3. Once again, Obama is “playing the middle” regarding tax increases. I’m sure he realizes they are a completely bad idea in a recession, and he even campaigned on not raising taxes “not one penny”. But now, he’s “agnostic”about sticking it to the middle class to reign in the federal budget. Seems we’re closer now to seeing the middle class have to pay for the bloated spending of the government – their only crime was electing a collection of idiots who were effectively responsible for jacking up the bill.
4. I used to like Bill Nye, the Science Guy. He was hip, for being an egg-headed scientist. He helped make science cool for kids. However, today, he’s just another political hack liberal doofus. Turns out, Nye now believes that if a person denies climate change, that somehow, the person is ‘unpatriotic’. Lately, the ‘unpatriotic’ card has been thrown around a lot, saying that if one person doesn’t do this or that, that somehow, they don’t love their country enough. To me, it’s like that high-maintenance girlfriend that says, “if you don’t buy me that $2000 purse or take me to the Caribbean, even if it breaks your bank account, then you don’t love your me”. There is only one way to deal with a high maintenance girlfriend – kick her sorry rear to the curb and let her be someone else’s parasite. Same solution here.
Nye also said that it’s easier to sell the theory of anthropogenic global warming to younger generations since ‘older people’ have a harder time with the concept. Hey Bill Nye, I’ve got something for you – it’s called SCIENCE – maybe you’ve heard of it. Science doesn’t need to be ‘sold’, just told. We put it all on the table, not just the stuff we wanna hear, like that sideshow in Copenhagen a few months ago. Older people don’t have a problem with the concept; it’s the lack of real proof and discourse that they don’t like. Younger people can be more easily fooled by Al Gore’s carbon credit Snake Oil.
Silly rabbit. Tricks are for kids. (yeah, I meant to spell it that way)
5. Finally, more big brother stuff. Turns out that the Obama Administration is opting to track cell phones, citing the point that tracking cell phones does not violate the intents of the Fourth Amendment protections. I sorta think it does, given that the Fourth Amendment was intended to protect people in their persons, homes, papers, and effects. Since cellular phones have become a very personal device, it would seem very much so that they would be protected. In fact, in 2008, the Electronic Frontier Foundation successfully argued before the federal court in Western Pennsylvania that the Government would require a warrant before a cell company would be required to release tracking records. Of course, this amuses me because members within Obama Administration have gone through great lengths to express their displeasure with the Patriot Act, a number of provisions which have ventured dangerously close to the Fourth Amendment line.
I wonder if Big Sis Napolitano wants to use warrantless cell phone tracking to keep an eye on all of us conservatives, which, according to her, deserve to be on government watch lists.
Sigh – and just as I get this rabidity out, there are more things on which to comment. Onwards and upwards, eh?
I’ve made up my mind; don’t confuse me with the facts. – Unknown
Recently, I became aware of a project that analyzes the US Historical Climatological Network and the Global Historical Climatological Network, taking a physical site survey of all the monitoring stations out there that track temperature trends over the course of years. The USHCN has about 1200 of them out there, which the GHCN has about 30-ish.
The survey found that nearly nine out of ten of these stations were positioned in such a way where there temperature data could be corrupted by things like radiating or reflecting heat from buildings, exhausts or other shadow producing objects. As a matter of fact, government regulation that manages these sensors require their placement where they could not be biased.
Many of these sensors were put in place and later, their surroundings encroached upon by development. These encroachments and biases for the sensors, under the control of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS), are generally undocumented. But the biggest problem here is that the sensors are being relied upon by NCDC and GISS to report on rises in global temperature, part of the body of evidence used to advance the case for global warming and climate change.
Simply put, government climate scientists are relying on data from sensors that are being biased by things like air conditioner exhausts, parked vehicles nearby, and radiating heat from stone and brick walls. Maybe they are unaware of this, but the study at Surface Stations.org represents a serious problem with provided data. Commentator Anthony Watts put up this website which is using a grassroots effort to catalog and photograph all the monitoring stations through photographic survey – putting them into a database.
But it would seem that Watts’ research is being largely ignored, with climate change people calling him a crock.
Recently, we were all made aware of scientists in the climatology world who knowingly tried to tamper with data in order to present supportive evidence for man-made climate change, rather than actually reviewing that the data shows a falloff as of late. But rather than come clean on the data and, more importantly, their reasoning for wanting to tamper with the data, the guy at the center of this, University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit director Phil Jones is stepping down. Penn State professor Michael Mann is also under the microscope. Investigators are looking into the matter, but it seems to me that Jones and Mann will get flushed so as to turn the spotlight away from one of the biggest hoaxes in the last 20 years.
And then, there is the unfair handling of evolution scientists in the entire Intelligent Design debate. These scientists ignore the body of creation-based science, because it requires the involvement of a supernatural God. While God goes unmentioned in much of the creation-based evidence, the evolutionist argument outright dismisses anything coming from I.D. simply because it involves God.
And I always thought the purpose of science was to observe and record everything, not just the things that were convenient for the ones recording the results. But as of late, that is suspect.
My post though isn’t necessarily to beat up on the global warming alarmists, yet again, since I’ve already done that on a few occasions. My point here today is to make note that there seems to be something very wrong with the scientific community today. It seems that the body of minds that we’re counting on to provide us insight to what the truth is, win, lose, or draw, is being affected (and subsequently polluted) by people who are concerned by agenda.
We saw this before, all throughout history. Perhaps the most poignant example that comes to my mind is when the Church (and then the public) ostracized Galileo when he noted that earth was round and not in the center of the known universe. It’s one of lifes great ironies that Galileo was a man of very deep faith who believed that the mysteries of nature can never contradict with the Holy Writ (scripture) and yet was persecuted by the Inquisition and confined to house arrest; his only crime: being a scientist that was true to his conviction of the truth. (oh and calling Urban VIII a "thick-headed" man)
I wonder how Galileo would accept how humans have taken to science. Perhaps in the same way as Cardinal Bellarmine and Pope Urban VIII received his views. The saddest thing is that it took over 150 years after Galileo died before the Church was forced to conclude he was right and then nearly 350 years before he would get anything close to an apology from the Church.
Not like anyone is really apologizing for having an science-interfering opinion these days.
People don’t care enough to understand what’s really going on, who’s doing what, and why it’s happening to be able to talk about it. They don’t have the inclination or the time and unfortunately, the liberals are getting away with intellectual murder.
"Doctor… Venkman. The purpose of science is to serve mankind. You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge… or hustle. Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman! " – Dean Yeager, Ghostbusters 1984
Holy moley, people. Just when we thought we heard everything, some pinhead steps up and starts blaming…worms…for the causes of global warming. Burping worms.
Just when we thought we’ve heard it all.
Turns out, since worms excrete nitrous-oxide (laughing gas) as they munch on the microbes that hide out in the soil. The night crawlers munch soil and the soil becomes more nitrogen rich (btw, something that helps stimulate growth!)
Last year, though, the discussion wasn’t regarding earthworms, but cow flatulence. That’s right, the Left was blaming farting cows for causing CO2 emissions, which resonated with the Greens and the PETA-folks who seem to believe that we should all swear off Whoppers and go back to eating lemon grass and berries. With all the ranching and the thousands of bovine, the tons of methane and CO2 being emitted was going to ensure we all vaporize in the sun’s radiant heat.
But since the cow thing is about as stable as…well, a fart in the wind, people are now blaming earthworms (aside with all those greedy capitalist factories burping tons of waste gas into the atmosphere so we can line the pockets of Wall Street fat-rats.) Never mind the concept of cyclic weather patterns which have been written in the Farmer’s Almanac since the 19th century, the atmospheric pollution from one volcano erupting, or the evidence that the amount of sea ice in the Arctic was underestimated by the so-called experts.
So why the heck do we listen to these so-called scientists? To we trust them because they they "know so much more than we do"? I mean, the average joe doesn’t have the wherewithal to challenge their *theories* so, it would seem, we’re simply made to accept whatever tripe they think up.
For example, Stephen Hawking, for years, yammered on about how black holes completely absorb all energy and information that collects within them. But in July 2004, he made headlines by backpedalling on his black hole theory, conceding that black holes can release information. I guess for him, losing that bet meant eating some serious crow, but to us, it’s irrelevant in the great scheme of things.
Yes, Hawking lives on a completely different wavelength than us common folk with average IQ’s. But even if you rank among the gods in intellect, you can still be wrong.
This is the reason why Christians don’t drink the kool-aid of evolution. And this is why global warming (now called climate change – more politically friendly, in case the temps go the other way), is also a *theory*. No one has yet proven definitively, the case for global warming. Al Gore’s dumbkopf movie has already been debunked as unscientific (by real climate scientists – not some idiot, grandstanding, washed-up politician) with the polar bear scenes courtesy of PhotoShop. And in more hilarious, all the high-profile global warming conferences have been either poorly attended or cancelled – due to heavy snow and/or very cold temperatures.
Why are people still swallowing it up?
I’ve come to understand here recently that most of the people in the country don’t care for politics. Well, I knew that, but the issue is that they associate topics like global warming into politics. They associate law and rulemaking into politics. When you discuss the idea of teaching intelligent design in public school as a competing theory to evolution, people don’t want to talk about that because it’s politics. Politics has seem to become this catchall for everything non-religious that we don’t want to talk about, mostly because of a lack of prep study by the masses to be conversant in the topic. In other words, people don’t care enough to understand what’s really going on, who’s doing what, and why it’s happening to be able to talk about it. They don’t have the inclination or the time and unfortunately, the liberals are getting away with intellectual murder.
So, some scientist posts a theory and the world slurps it up because people don’t care to find out the truth. Instead, they say, "well, he’s a scientist; he should know how it all works.
The thing is, science is a process by which theories are tested and proven, not a conduit through which political policy is made. The way it’s supposed to work is the people make the policy, based on recommendations from science. But rather than take the time to educate us ‘ignorant masses’ on what’s going on, liberal macro-heads who are more like activist judges rather than objective scientists feed these ‘hair-on-fire’ theories to liberal policy makers who, in turn, make law based on theory, not objective facts.
And in the end, the rest of us just stand there, wondering what happened, like the ‘sucker’ in a Three-Card Monte.
Sort of like how that $787 billion porkulus package got ram-rodded through Congress without a single Senator or Representative even reading the thing.
By the way – I’ve got a better way to deal with the worm issue…go fishing. Or we can hook a billion of them up to a dragster car for that little extra added kick.
Late-Break Note: The Heartland Institute is hosting The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change, which is going on in New York this week. On the bill are some of the global warming theory’s most harsh and notable critics, most are scientists who have disproven many of the theories of climate change. There’s also a link there for the 2008 conference remarks.