American Voices: What are American's Really Saying?
Let experts debate science of global warming
Don Hoffman, Fort Collins, CO November 20, 2008 It didn't take long for J.K. Peterson (Soapbox, Nov. 18) to attack William Gray, Ph.D., about his beliefs on global warming. I wish that Peterson would stick to facts rather than questioning Gray's credentials and labeling him as a political puppet. There are reputable scientists on both sides of this issue that should be heard without ridicule. Peterson fails to mention that scientists from multiple disciplines seriously doubt the validity of CO2-based global warming citing reasons such as: Advertisement > During repeated geologic cycles in Earth's history, CO2 concentrations have fluctuated to levels more than 10 times the 380 PPM level that Peterson claims to be so dangerous today. > Studies show that CO2 and Earth temperatures are correlated, but fluctuations in CO2 concentrations actually lag behind temperature changes by decades. This makes it impossible for CO2 fluctuations to "cause" temperature changes. > More than 90 percent of the exchange of CO2 between Earth and our atmosphere takes place at our ocean surfaces, meaning that all other natural and manmade CO2 production accounts for less than 10 percent. > During periods as recent as the past 1,000 years, Earth has undergone rapid climate swings that surpass change rates today, all in the absence of industrialization. > Arctic Sea ice extent "increased" nearly 20 percent from October 2007 to October 2008, the largest jump since 1979 when "global cooling" was the rage. A huge problem in this issue is that politicians/activists on both sides blow things out of proportion rather than letting experts debate the actual science. Freeman Dyson Debunks Dire Forecasts on Global Warming and Other Tenets
Freeman Dyson gets around. Last Wednesday, for example, the 85-year-old “retired” physicist regaled a lunchtime audience at the Nassau Club with his “heretical” ideas about global warming. Just a few hours later he could be found once again sharing his thoughts on global warming, as well as on intelligent design, nuclear warfare, extraterrestrial life, and HAR-1 (a DNA component that distinguishes human beings from other animals) with a standing-room-only crowd at Labyrinth Books. Mr. Dyson’s credentials are venerable: the British-born scholar received a BA from the University of Cambridge in 1945, and was, from 1953 until his retirement in 1994, a physics professor at the Institute for Advanced Study. The absence of a PhD in his resume has been more than compensated for by the 21 honorary degrees he has received over the years. He seems happiest, however, when he is working at being the rebel, and indeed, one of his books, a compilation of essays published earlier in The New York Review of Books, is called The Scientist as Rebel. Wearing an effusively-colored tie that set off his gray suit, Mr. Dyson began his talk at the Nassau Club by encouraging the audience to interrupt him as he spoke, since, he declared, “it’s much more fun to have an argument than do a monologue.” In the absence of audience interruptions, Mr. Dyson had an argument anyway with the scores of people (like Al Gore) who weren’t present to defend their belief in the dire consequences of global warming. (“There’s no accounting for human folly,” Mr. Dyson said when asked about Mr. Gore’s Nobel Prize.) Saying that on a recent trip he and his wife found Greenlanders to be delighted with their warmer climate and increased tourism, Mr. Dyson suggested that representing “local warming by a global average is misleading.” In his comments at both the Nassau Club and Labyrinth, he decried the use of computer modeling to make “tremendously dogmatic” predictions about worldwide trends, without acknowledging the “messy, muddy real world” and the non-climatic effects of increased carbon dioxide. “There is no substitute for widely-conducted field operations over a long time,” he told the Nassau Club audience, citing the “enormous gaps in knowledge and sparseness of observation” that characterize the work of global warming experts. Mr. Dyson’s fearless commentary continued later at Labyrinth, where, standing for over an hour and without a microphone, he delighted a full house by declaring the existence of 10,000 string theorists to be “sociologically dangerous” (“one thousand would be enough”), and balked at an audience member’s query about what he would do with a $700 billion grant. “When science gets rich it becomes political,” he observed. As an example of the most expensive efforts not necessarily being the most worthwhile, he pointed to CERN’s Large Hadron Collider in Geneva, the subject of much recent attention, noting that it was designed to identify only certain particles, losing much potentially interesting information in the process. “The important things are the ones you don’t expect,” he noted. Just Another Day in Alarmist Land
Chris Horner November 12, 2008 If ever there were two items fairly capturing much of the theme of Red Hot Lies — cruising up the charts nicely here in its first few days off the press, thanks to all — these are the two. First, establishment scientists attack heretics, then refuse to release the data they claim supports their alleged debunking of what, in this case, increasingly appears to be a fatal flaw in the alarmist thesis: the alleged “fingerprint” of greenhouse warming continues to not exist. As I detail in RHL, the global warming industry have a long and unhappy history of making claims they apparently cannot back up and, when challenged, clinging to their data like grim death, claiming it was lost, apparently fabricating data, having journals publish helpful conclusions without ever asking to see the numbers, and so on. When the data are released, things don’t end well for the alarmists — as the Hockey Team’s original and now latest flailing bears out. Second, Australia’s ABC news nicely embodies the media’s now ritual double standard of selective curiosity and umbrage in their efforts to dismiss those who refuse to accept the faith, and elevate those who have found salvation. As Andrew Bolt writes, the ABC reporter “rings the leper’s bell” in introducing a mere professor for his sin of being a skeptic, while spinning alarmists into authorities to whom all must defer. This shows once again what I explore with example after example in RHL: climate scientists know where the path of least resistance lies; and, conversely, they have seen the excommunication that awaits if they dare to follow the research rather than the research dollars. The same reality holds true for politicians. Should one choose to infer relative legitimacy of the various positions from those facts, so be it. Corrected NASA GISTEMP data has been posted
November 12, 2008 After GISS’s embarrasing error with replicating September temperatures in the October analysis, the NASA GISTEMP website was down for awhile today (at least for me). This evening, the new gridded data was posted, and I generated a world temperature anomaly map with the new data. It clearly has some changes in it from the previous erroneous version. When comparing the maps, note the bottom scale, the top end on the erroneous one was 13.7°C, while the corrected one tops out at 8°C. That alone should have set off alarm bells at GISS. Personally, I don’t believe the 8°C anomaly either, since much of the Russian weather data is suspect to start with, and the data distribution is sparse. So far, no mention of the new data beyond this yesterday at the NASA GISS news page: 2008-11-11: Most data posted yesterday were replaced by the data posted last month since it looks like some mishap might have occurred when NOAA updated their GHCN data. We will postpone updating this web site until we get confirmation from NOAA that their updating programs worked properly. Because today is a Federal Holiday, some pages are still showing yesterday’s data. We live in interesting times. THIS EXPENSIVE DECEPTION WILL HURT THE POOR
Posted by: Dawneyr 07.11.08 Although the manmade hydrocarbon hysteria has the potential to greatly increase the wealth of a select relatively small group, it is gravely harmful to the poorest people in the world. I was at a hair show last year, and the very talkative Canadian stylist strayed from the topic of hair trends to pass along her L.A. guru's warnings of global warming. She started off with the usual fear-based, earth melting mantra, but ended with her suggestion that we, like she, buy up as much of our overpopulated, scarce land as possible. Isn't that like trying to sell rumbling fault-line front property at an inflated price? Although her message made little scientific sense and no economic sense, she summarized in insinuating that those in the audience who believe and follow her statements are loving and give love. When a coercive money based scheme hurts the poor, it has nothing to do with love. Her partner revealed that their special new product was mere water in a fancy bottle. Interestingly enough, he called it moisturizer. He winked and quipped that the product sells better than trying to sell water as water. Those who create and facilitate the manmade climate change hysteria, are also selling an expensive deception. When the celebrities got together to hyper-market "Live Earth" they failed to mention that it means little about live people. If globally enacted, this deceptive strategy will hurt and possibly destroy, the most vulnerable of people. Global warming may not be complete fault of humans Posted by jblethen November 3, 2008 There was a time no so long ago when the consensus among physicians was that bloodletting was the preferred treatment for many ills. The theory was that "bad humors" lurked in the blood and must be purged from the body. Any physician who disagreed with the consensus was marginalized as a denier. Substitute climate scientists for physicians, CO2 for bad humors, and the atmosphere for the body and we have the same consensus today. We may have progressed technologically since those days, but humans themselves haven't changed much, have they? A Global Warming Skeptic Speaks His Mind
by John Corby (BSc, Applied Physics) As a global warming skeptic, I am of the "scientifically skeptical" category. Here is why. The Earth is several billion years old and has been subject to numerous severe climate changes throughout its history. It is rather presumptuous of mankind to conclude that our 250 years of industrial activity is the main cause of any current change in climate. If that were true whatever happened to the factors that caused even more severe climate changes over the last several billion years - have they miraculously ceased to exist? Proponents of anthropogenic climate change claim the science is settled in their favour. Scientists rarely take the view that anything is beyond question. The history of science suggests that scientific theories are refined and improved upon as new studies are published. If we blindly accept that mankind is responsible for climate change without continuing to question the science we may completely miss other factors that could turn out to have an important influence. I am deeply suspicious of the rancour surrounding any dissent from the politically correct explanation of climate change. Dissenters are labeled as "deniers" and lambasted in the media (especially the CBC in Canada). There is no balance of scientific argument allowed in the media even though there are published works offering plausible alternative explanations for climate change. I am no climatologist, but I did earn a scientific degree in another discipline so I cannot offer a qualified opinion on climate matters. However, my scientific training did teach me to examine the evidence and form an independent opinion rather than blindly follow the opinions of the masses. On that basis I am inclined to remain scientifically skeptical of the accuracy of current climate change forecasts, their claimed anthropogenic cause and of the motives of those who support such theories. Carbon Caps Will Be a Heavy Tax
Barack Obama is bent on creating Environmental Protection Agency rules that would classify carbon as a dangerous pollutant under clean air laws, thereby strong-arming Congress to fall in line with the unaffordable consequences ("Obama's Carbon Ultimatum," Review & Outlook, Oct. 20). The result would be to artificially increase the cost of energy, which is the same as a huge tax increase on everyone who uses energy. The recent pain caused by the spike in gasoline prices may then seem pale in comparison. Yet Sen. Obama is not forthcoming regarding the tremendous cost that his energy plan would surely entail. Maybe Sen. Obama is setting up voters in the lower- and middle-economic classes with his income redistribution tax credits so that they will then at least have a small portion of the money needed to pay for his artificially increased energy costs. Don't Americans have enough problems to deal with without the government continually creating new ones? Chip Peters Atlanta Why are U.S. businesses so willing to meekly comply with the eco-totalitarians in a possible Obama administration? Why aren't more of our so-called business leaders willing to actually act like leaders and stand up to the Democratic Party, which is attempting to seize a huge share of the private sector? When the socialists succeed in driving the cost of energy up, thereby driving more business out of our country, they will claim that the resulting poverty can only be alleviated by more government and more taxes. With the Republicans a minority in Congress we won't be able to rely on the GOP to prevent an economic disaster. We desperately need some leadership from the business community. Where is the leadership? Eric Dalton Little Rock, Ark. Global warming, uh, cooling, uh warming, uh, cooling …
by Mark Landsbaum October 31st, 2008 Well it looks like they’ve definitely cleared this up. Trees are warming the planet. Uh, make that trees are cooling the planet. Uh. Well, you can see for yourself: “Scientists in the UK and Germany have discovered that trees release a chemical that thickens clouds above them, which reflects more sunlight and so cools the Earth,” according to the Institute for Climate and Atmospheric Science at Leeds University. “Forests on certain parts of the planet may actually warm the Earth, according to researchers from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in a study released today.” With anything as cut and dry as this, why would anyone hesitate to cripple the economy to save us from global warming?
Look out! It’s the greenies versus the even greener greenies
by Mark Landsbaum October 31st, 2008 It seems there’s a feud brewing among the greenies. “Environmental groups delivered a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency today calling on it to meet its responsibility under the law and reject a biofuel industry attempt to weaken global warming standards for ethanol,” reports MULCH, a web site that “comments on agriculture, conservation and biofuels.” Gee, we thought ethanol was one of those favored, green solutions. You know, global-warming friendly and all. Alternative fuelish, and so forth. Turns out ethanol’s apparently not green enough for warming alarmists. It seems in coming days the EPA will release what it has calculated to be the greenhouse gas emissions created by using biofuel. Who knew? There’s a segment out there that thinks the biofuel industry wants the EPA “to break the law and ignore congressionally mandated guidelines for how such emissions should be calculated.” Can’t be green enough, it seems. Or emission-free enough, no doubt. Or cool enough, we guess. The alarmists aren’t likely to be happy until we all huddle in caves wrapped in fur. Well, maybe artificial fur. Oh wait. Wouldn’t manufacturing faux fur generate greenhouse gas emissions too? Darn. Maybe we can each snuggle up to a polar bear, if they can be saved from this dangerous 1-degree-per-century increase in soaring temperature we’re suffering from. The Day The Earth Stood Still
October 28, 2008 Today, I received an e-mail from Al Gore on behalf of MoveOn.org. In the midst of his plea for Obama volunteers was this gem: But the stakes this year are too great for any of us to sit it out. We're facing two wars and an economic meltdown. The climate crisis, in particular, is worsening more quickly than predicted and without strong leadership from the next president, we could face consequences right out of a science fiction movie.
No one knows science fiction movies like Al Gore. UPDATE-- At the Ranting Room, Bruce wonders which sci-fi movies Gore had in mind: Perhaps so, but the all-important and thus far unasked question is: which science fiction movie? Silent Running? Soylent Green? Lord of the Flies? Godzilla vs The Smog Monster? Personally, my money is on The Manchurian Candidate. Which is the real party of change?
October 27, 2008. To The Editor: Let me get this right. The Democrats claim to be the “change” party? They, with the media, have been the people running government for years! Republicans haven’t been allowed to change much at all. It took the catastrophe of 9/11 to change the previous policy of sending lawyers instead of SEALs to deal with terrorists. Democrats ran Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac like Ponzi schemes, while Republicans like Liddy Dole sponsored reform legislation that was blocked. Now we have economic disaster. Education has long been run by liberals that make it more a sociological experiment than about basic learning requirements. Now, they say it’s not right to “teach to the test.” Well, OK, who makes the curriculums and the tests, and who could make them cohesive? It’s not the White House. No Child Left Behind lets professional education administrators decide on what gets taught and tested, and just requires demonstrated improvement. Republicans want to have a “common sense” energy policy, but the Democrats have prevented drilling in ANWR and offshore. Building new refineries hasn’t been banned completely, simply legislated into impracticality. Nuclear power is blocked similarly. Alternative fuels, great. How about we develop them before depending on them? Change who? Douglas Hespelt Flat Rock Global Cooling continues
October 22, 2008, 3:47 pm This graph shows average global temperature records for the last five years from two of the world’s most respected meteorological institutes, the UK’s Hadley Centre, and the University of Alabama in the US. Both show a clear downward trend, and the graph contrasts that trend explicitly with the rising trend of atmospheric CO2. So we have two conclusions: first of all, Al Gore’s alarmist predictions of rapidly accelerating temperatures, run-away warming and imminent Armageddon are just plain wrong, with each year that passes adding more nails to the coffin of his disaster movie. Second, the supposed correlation between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature just does not exist. For years, temperatures have been falling while CO2 levels have risen. The alarmists will try to explain this by calling on short-term effects which temporarily disrupt a long-term cooling trend. But some scientists who accept the alarmist position are now suggesting that these “short-term effects” could continue for another ten years. How many decades have to pass before they recognise that they got it wrong, and that our climate mitigation policies represent a worse economic disaster than the current financial crisis? Oh Al Gore, Where Art Thou?
We haven't heard much from the other Messiah lately...Al Gore. Maybe it's because more scientists keep finding evidence that his global warming theory is cooling off. The following graph shows that, due to reduced solar activity, rises in global temperatures since 1979 have disappeared in the last four years.  Lorne Gunter from National Post writes about more scientists finding evidence that global temperatures are decreasing due to periods of solar inactivity. A Brazilian meteorologist "scoffed at the notion that manmade carbon emissions had more impact than the sun and oceans on global climate." In September, American scientist Craig Loehle, who "conducts computer modelling on global climate change, confirmed his earlier findings that the so-called Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of about 1,000 years ago did in fact exist and was even warmer than 20th-century temperatures." Last month there was a paper co-written by the scientist who, for the last 30 years, has been "in charge of NASA's eight weather satellites that take more than 300,000 temperature readings daily around the globe." While the paper doesn't deny that manmade emissions may be having a slight impact, it also concludes that "variations in global temperatures since 1978 ... cannot be attributed to carbon dioxide." The graph above was created using their data. I'm wondering if it's finally about time for Al Gore to return the Oscar and the Nobel. Seriously, is there a recall process? Jim Cooper and Global Warming
POLITCAL INSOMNIAC by Dan Cleary In today's Tennessean, reader Donald Plunk demands to know where Congressman Jim Cooper stands on global warming - "the greatest issue of our time": In the recent article, “Greenpeace lands in Nashville to woo Rep. Cooper,” our representative said he was “flattered” voters want to know his position on global warming. It’s not just Greenpeace who wants answers on this.
I am a native Tennessean, I vote in Nashville and I am one of thousands of who want to know where he stands on the issue. He’s taken a strong stance on many environmental issues I care about — but there’s nothing on his Web site about the greatest issue of our time. In 2007, the average temperature soared to 3.0°F or more above normal in six cities in Tennessee. This August was the hottest year on record. It’s undeniable we’re already feeling the impacts here in Tennessee. I’m doing what I can to address global warming in my life — it’s time that our Rep. in Congress does his. I want answers. Where is Rep. Cooper on energy, green jobs and global warming? Now, if I had to rank the top 1,000 greatest issues of our time, global warming wouldn't even make the list. So, please Mr. Plunk - shut off An Inconvenient Truth, put down the Environment California pamphlet, and consider this fact: 2007 was actually the Year of Global Cooling. Yes, August 2007 was unusually hot in Tennessee - but record high temperatures and record low temperatures are set every single year in various places around the globe. You cannot just cherry-pick six cities in Tennessee, or "x" number of cities in the U.S. and cite that as "evidence" of global warming. Furthermore, there is absolutely no scientific consensus whatsoever on what causes climate change of either kind - warming or cooling. By saying nothing on his website about global warming, Jim Cooper is actually taking the right approach. He could improve on that by making a serious push for expanded domestic drilling, which would address our energy needs, create "green jobs" (that's right - drilling and environmentalism are not mutually exclusive), and appropriately shun the trumped-up issue of global warming. 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. Dr. Hackbart also pointed out that periods of solar inactivity known as “solar minimums” magnify cold spells on his continent. So, given that August was the first month since 1913 in which no sunspot activity was recorded — none — and during which solar winds were at a 50-year low, he was not surprised that Brazilians were suffering (for them) a brutal cold snap. “This is no coincidence,” he said as he scoffed at the notion that manmade carbon emissions had more impact than the sun and oceans on global climate. Also in September, American Craig Loehle, a scientist who conducts computer modelling on global climate change, confirmed his earlier findings that the so-called Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of about 1,000 years ago did in fact exist and was even warmer than 20th-century temperatures. Wal-Mart environmentalism
Posted: October 17, 2008 Lawrence Solomon, environmentalism The next commodity to collapse will be mass-marketed environmentalism, which will come to be disdained Comment by mama146, Oct 21 2008 You may be underestimating the zealotry. This [environmentalism] isn't just a marketing campaign, it is a religion based on irrational fear and the notion of "saving the world". Slap a green label on anything at all and people will buy it because it make them feel like a good person. Facts and reason don't play a part in this. The Gore Effect will be on full display for Gore's visit to Harvard,
but the hot cider will keep him warm and toasty 10/22/2008 Via The Reference Frame, the Gore Effect is in full bloom today as Al Gore visits Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Average high temperature for this date in Cambridge is 60° F., but much to Al Gore's chagrin the National Weather Service is predicting a high temperature today of only 48° F. The committee hosting Gore attempts to provide cover (the hot cider ought to keep Al warm): Dear Members of the Harvard Community, Although today's weather will hardly remind us of the serious problem that is global warming, today's event - the Harvard Sustainability Celebration, with a keynote address by former Vice President Al Gore - will go on, as scheduled, in Tercentenary Theatre with a program beginning at 4 p.m. We very much hope that you will attend and enjoy the festivities. Starting at 3 p.m., we will be serving hot cider and soup to keep everyone warm; please dress for our changeable New England weather. Henry Longfellow, onetime Harvard professor and longtime Cantabrigian, once remarked, "The best thing one can do when it's raining is to let it rain." We sincerely hope that, this afternoon, it won't rain. But even if it does, Harvard celebrates Sustainability with spirits undampened. Sincerely, The Sustainability Celebration Committee Office of the President http://www.green.harvard.edu/ Global Cooling
Marty Duren Are we about to enter a protracted period of falling temperatures? There are a growing number of scientists who think so. Responses: Art Rogers: October 21st, 2008 at 7:05 am I’ve been hearing this for a year and the sun spot thing for at least 6 mos. Sure enough, Tulsa had one of the mildest summers on record. Of course this is anecdotal. Still, I wonder if they can take back the Oscar from Al Gore if the movie turns out to be as ridiculous - “junk science” - as these people say it is. Probably just as well to let him keep it and never speak of it again. And enjoy the snowfall. On the other hand, hard winters will be hard on the American economy, which is still based heavily on agriculture. This is not to mention the third world agriculture of the people to whom we are reaching out. This is a picture of a water buffalo that died in the harsh winter of of northern Vietnam last year. The cold was crushing and killed a lot of livestock they couldn’t afford to lose, but they did the only thing they could: They brought in the carcass - it was frozen and so preserved, more or less - and smoked it, then ate on it all winter long. The picture in the link was taken in March of this year. How are they going to handle the cold and what can we do to help? Steve H: October 21st, 2008 at 7:42 am Not really much on the global warming debate, but Google -growing glaciers- and see if you get a slightly different picture of the current environmental developments than presented by the “liberal, elite media” or the “liberal, regular media” (to quote from a Palin sketch on SNL). I will not pretend to KNOW why some glaciers are melting rapidly and some are growing (all over the world), but I also wish Al Gore and others would stop pretending to KNOW, as well. Far too many glaciers are growing in areas close-by those that they site as melting. Freakish weather only reflects Mother Nature’s temperament. It has nothing to do with global warming!
Posted by Anthony L. Hall Record-hot temperatures throughout the Northeast of America have excited sunbathers in New York enjoying, but frustrated snowskiers in Vermont lamenting, what they all claim are the effects of global warming. Meanwhile, record-cold temperatures out West - in places like Colorado - have people wondering if the globe is entering another ice age. Clearly, you’re a fool to question Mother Nature…. NOTE: Don’t mind the polar bears, they’ve been coping with these weather phenomena for centuries. The Disappearing Ice and Al Gore
TRANS-ENVIRONMENT October 13, 2008 Well maybe Mother Nature does not like ice in Greenland because it is melting and it may not even caused by manmade gases. A warm spot has turned up under the ice sheet in Green land. Now granted there still should be concern over the pollution that is being put up in the atmosphere and the ocean. Why? Because countries like China, India and Russia keep polluting the planet with their uncontrolled factories. Another interesting factor about the icecap in the melting arctic icecap is because of volcanoes that started erupting in 1999 about the same time that the temperatures were noticed to start rising. The tremendous amount of carbon dioxide released into the ocean along with heat may be one of the major contributing factors to the disappearing icecaps. By the way Al Gore claimed that all the ice will melt on the earth and raise water levels by 20 feet in the next seven years. One would have to ask a simple question if most of the ice is 90 percent under water how would it raise the water level that high. Now the ice on the Antarctic would cause some concern if the temperature could rise above an average of minus forty degrees. Some so called scientist claim that the earth’s temperature will rise by 3-6 degrees Celsius excuse me but that is not even close to above freezing. Now the hot air from Al Gore seems to have cooled a lot recently. He has not been stomping around claiming the world is coming to an end. In fact some real scientists believe the warming trend is ending. It snowed over 12 inches of snow in the Ogden, Utah area on October 12, 2008. Yes, some will say the weather is in a changing pattern so is Mother Nature. The Green bubble has busted and Al Gore cannot be found. He must have taken his millions of dollars and run. That is the only reason Al Gore was on board with his lies. Now they can call him Mister Green Moneybags. Al Gore is Snowing Us Again
Posted by redsatellite October 11, 2008 Meanwhile….up in Idaho…it’s SNOWING. Yah, looks like all that Global Warming has denizens of the great northwest dreaming of a white- uhh- HALLOWEEN! Boise gets earliest snow on record Valley shivers as winter weather makes a premature appearance Big snow flakes fell early Friday evening, turning Downtown Boise into a giant snow globe for people on their way home from work. The snow caught many people off guard, including this bicyclist heading down Idaho Street between 8th and 9th around 5:45 p.m. Across the Treasure Valley, tree branches heavy with wet, snow-covered leaves fell on power lines, causing scattered power outages. This is the earliest measurable snowfall in Boise since recordkeeping began in 1898, according to the National Weather Service. 1898? ….Heavens to Bing Crosby! Why knock me over with a snowball. Remind me to thank Al…I may have to make that trip to Sun Valley afterall….hmmm…maybe I’ll go- this FRIDAY. Anchorage Shivers as Global Warming Gives Way to Cooling
Aleks Karnick 10/09/2008 The Heartland Institute Anchorage, Alaska is experiencing one of its coldest years on record, defying assertions that humans are creating a global warming crisis, especially in the Arctic. Temperatures were particularly cool during the summer. The average daily high temperature at Anchorage International Airport from June 1 to August 5 was 59.3 degrees Fahrenheit, making it the second coldest summer since 1952. “What is most striking is the lack of warm days this summer. There have been only two days when the daytime high has gone above 70ºF. The normal is three for June and five for July,” said Martha Shulski, Ph.D., a service and research climatologist for the Alaska Climate Research Center. “High temperatures over the summer to date have averaged only 59.6ºF, the coldest on record.” Natural Cycles the Cause Scientists attribute the cooling trend to a reduction in solar radiance, which had reached a 1,000-year high at the end of the twentieth century, and a shift in the El Niño/Southern Oscillation, during which Pacific Ocean currents since 1977 had set up in a pattern conducive to regional and global warming. “When the Great Pacific Climate Shift—when the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) went from cold (negative) to warm (positive)—occurred in 1977-79, there was a sudden stepladder warming in temperatures across Alaska, reflecting the shift from cold to warm water offshore and the strengthening of the Aleutian low [atmospheric pressure area] that goes with the warm PDO,” observed Joe D’Aleo, executive director of the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project and the first director of meteorology for the cable TV Weather Channel. “The shift back to cold of the PDO in a big way this past year not surprisingly has led to a sudden cooling in Alaska, reversing the warming of 1979,” explained D’Aleo. “The Northeast Pacific water offshore has turned cold. The normal cycle lasts 20 to 30 years, so the state might expect much more of the same in most years for a long time to come.” “Alaska will not be alone,” D’Aleo added. “The cool PDO means more La Niñas, which means more colder years for the globe.” Al Gore Thinks Corporate Global Warming Skeptics Should Be Charged with Fraud!
By Tom DeWeese Friday, October 3, 2008 When brainwashing the general public on global warming didn’t work, Al Gore and the Global Warming crowd called for Nuremburg-type trials to silence global warming skeptics charging that they were guilty of heresy against “globally-acceptable truth”. Again, that didn’t stop people from questioning the science of global warming and the economic restructuring behind the carbon tax. So Al Gore again got petulant and is now calling for civil disobedience ” to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration." Already knowing that while it will get the disaffected and reason-deficient mobs out to have their fun breaking things, this won’t be enough to get movement toward his global carbon use taxation. He is now encouraging state attorneys general around the country to investigate a group of energy companies that he, Al Gore, has singled out for punishment. Read that last sentence I just wrote again. Yes, American business leaders are the focus of Gore’s latest foot-stomping rampage. You ask why. Here is the explanation from the horse’s own mouth, "I believe for a carbon company to spend money convincing the stock-buying public that the risk from the global climate crisis is not that great represents a form of stock fraud because they are misrepresenting a material fact." Yep, you read it correctly, the freedom of speech is no longer allowed according to Gore. If you are a business owner and speak out to your own stockholders, Gore wants the full force of the government to go after you. How the $810B Bailout Connects to Global Warming
Posted By Skeptic October 6, 2008 You thought the new bailout bill was designed to only save Wall Street and not Green Street. Think again. According to this [1] NewsBusters article, the global warming activists have had their input into the new $810 billion bailout package. So let’s dive into the details to see just how the climate change crowd has infiltrated a bill that was, for all intents and purposes, designed to keep the economy afloat by rescuing big financial institutions from failure. One provision in the bill provides preferential tax treatment to publicly-traded institutions that engage in the trading of carbon offsets. So no matter if your company is green or not, you can receive tax incentives from participating in the carbon trading market if your organization is publicly traded. But how did it stay in the bill? Henry Paulson didn’t ask for the carbon credit incentive in the bill, but after reviewing his stance on global warming during his tenure at Goldman Sachs, it’s obvious that he wouldn’t have opposed the addition. Paulson believed that participation in the carbon market would spur the development of technologies that would lead to a less carbon-based economy. The Washington Post reported in 2006 that Goldman Sachs believed in the scientific consensus of global warming. Shocker. Does this lay the foundation for a carbon tax here in the United States? While the bill doesn’t specifically reference a new tax on carbon emissions for general application, it does nothing to stop the global warming agenda from advancing. With American companies set to receive government-backed tax incentives for merely trading carbon offsets, one can only imagine that this is the first step in institutionalizing a full-blown carbon tax on the citizens of the United States. And with little mainstream media coverage of this little-known provision of the bailout package, it appears that unless you read the entire bill or explicitly search out news bits on the subject, the global warming alarmists will have their way with America and we won’t know until it’s too late. The cold truth about global warming
By Dr. William Campbell Douglass 9/5/2008 If you're staying up nights worrying about your carbon footprint or how climate change is leaving polar bears adrift at sea, I've got the best advice you've heard in a while - get some sleep. Al Gore and his global warming flunkies have half the world brainwashed into thinking our ice caps are melting, our seas are on the verge of boiling, and that everywhere from Miami to Juneau, Alaska is about to be ravaged by tropical diseases from malaria to Dengue Fever. Well, I've studied the science and I've got an "inconvenient truth" for Gore and company - the only hot air that's threatening the planet is coming out of their mouths. Global warming has benefited from one of the greatest public relations and marketing efforts in recent history. You'll hear plenty from environmentalists about carbon emissions, clean energy, and the disappearing arctic, but here's what you will NEVER hear them admit: Scientists have reaped MILLIONS from their global warming "research." They've turned supporting global warming - despite what the science really says - into a cash cow! In fact, these same scientists were trying to convince us the world was cooling just a few decades ago, when that's where the grant money was. There's plenty of bad science and good marketing surrounding the global warming debate, but I'm here to give you the straight scoop. Just enter your e-mail address and you'll gain access to my FREE report, The Cold Truth About Global Warming. And who am I? I'm Dr. William Campbell Douglass, and I've been called the greatest mythbuster in modern medicine. I'm taking on global warming because I'm sick of these pseudo-scientists trying to turn their pet theory into a health scare. They've got good folks running scared, thinking a rash of climate-related diseases are going to invade the planet if they don't buy hybrid cars and solar panels. Well, malaria isn't coming to Maine any time soon. Al Gore is a self-serving idiot
buttahbean October 1, 2008 I wish I could take credit for that title, but I stole it from a commenter on this CNN article in which Al Gore encourages young people to protest against new coal-fired power plants that don’t use carbon capture and storage technology. This man seriously makes me twitch — and not in a good way. I’ll admit to voting for him back in 2000 because for realz, he couldn’t have been a worse president than the guy who cheated — erm, beat him — in that election. And despite my sincere belief that we should all do our parts to make this planet cleaner and healthier, I just can’t buy into Gore’s global warming rhetoric. Let us not forget that this man is a politician. Since when do people in this country throw their trust into a politician? Do we need to do something about sustaining and protecting this planet? Yeeesssssssss. But the right way is not through scare tactics and unrealistic demands. Gore claims that the technology that could help this country switch from a dependence on coal-generated electricity to renewable energy already exists. Ok, then, where is it? What’s the delay? I’m inclined to think that if the technology existed in the magnitude Gore insists it is, that someone, somewhere would be taking advantage of the huge revenue potential it creates. Everybody’s “going green,” so I think it’s probably safe to assume that there would be a tremendous market for renewable energy. So far I haven’t seen it. Sure, there are many people and companies who are working toward energy self-sufficiency and reducing their carbon emissions. Many manufacturing companies are developing ways to turn their own waste into energy to run their plants. The coal-fired plant that generates power for the electric company I work for is well on its way to becoming one of the cleanest in the world. And tons of ordinary citizens are examining ways to conserve energy and make their homes and lives more efficient. But for some reason that isn’t enough for Al Gore. He wants an instant change, and he wants those who do not comply to be immediately punished. Do you know what will happen if power companies are forced to reduce their carbon emissions within unrealistic time frames? Our electric bills will increase, that’s what. They’re going to pass that cost onto us, the consumers. The air we breathe will be pristine, great! But we won’t be around to enjoy it because we’ll all freeze and starve to death because we won’t be able to afford food or heat. Al, Al, Al. Perhaps your urges would be taken more seriously if you didn’t personally use enough energy to power a residential block in my hometown. Or if you donated some of your millions toward helping our country reduce carbon emissions. What are you doing will all the money you’re collecting on your travels around this doomed world? Are you investing it in clean-coal technology? Are you contributing toward research on how to store wind and solar power? Do you plan to assist Americans in paying their energy bills when your plan forces costs to skyrocket? Mr. Gore, I’ll continue to recycle my aluminum cans and use compact fluorescent light bulbs. I’ll turn off lights when I leave the room, shut my computer down at night and only drive my car when necessary. But only because it’s the right thing to do for my planet and my checkbook. Not because you told me to. A slight problem with Windpower Eleanor Duckwell Ocober 10, 2008 Someone should push this under the door for Nancy Pelosi and Barak Obama: You hear a lot of people pushing "alternative" sources of energy. The big one being pushed on the campaign trail is wind power which has a lot of very expensive problems. Some Concerns * A concern about wind power is the limited amount of high wind speed areas that are suitable for wind farms. * Electromagnetic interference has been a worry, but by placing the fields out of the range of communication lines this can easily be avoided. * Despite great advancements, the devises are still cause moderate noise. With consideration of the nearest population surrounding the farms the noise can be put out of hearing range of people. * Although the visual impact was at first thou |
Books Energy Keepers Energy Killers by Roy InnisThis powerful book documents the destruction planned in every community in the United States by the assault of the Energy Killers invading the world. Al Gore Wants This Book Banned! Fox News' Sean Hannity says if you read it and act on its message, "You will change the world." Change the world - Buy this Book LatestAds combat Senate climate billA conservative, free-market advocacy group, The Club for Growth, is airing radio and television ads to counter a Senate bill on climate change. The purpose of the ads is to explain to the public the extent to which the legislation could damage the economy, should it pass. "The number of jobs that will be lost, the rise in price in gasoline and electricity, the loss in GDP -- it's all astronomical. And we think it's important for people to know what's going on ..." The legislation is a "massive redistribution of wealth," and the organization is asking concerned citizens to call their senators and urge them to oppose the measure. Press SMARTGREENUSA LAUNCHES GLOBAL WARMING ATTACKEXPOSING ECO-HYSTERIA AND STOPPING GREEN GENOCIDE WASHINGtTON, DC - SmartGreenUSA is exposing ‘Eco Hysteria;’ the Eco Hysteria ignited by climatologists, politicians and government commissions that ignore good science and create laws that kill people and the economy.   Al Gore Wants This Book Banned!Energy Keepers, Energy Killers By - Roy Innis This powerful book documents the destruction planned in every community in the United States by the assault of the Energy Killers invading the world. Fox News' Sean Hannity says if you read it and act on its message, "You will change the world." Change the world - Buy this Book
gas tax  SmartGreenUSA is committed to continuing environmental progress and Smart-Green initiatives. We are dedicated to pursuing the best science available, to evaluate the costs and economic impact associated with the ideas, products and policies proposed as “green” and to be your voice to remind the government that they are elected to serve the people, not to rule over us. We fought a battle to ensure the right to be governed over 200 year ago. With your help we will continue to fight for your rights. DONATE to SmartGreenUSA Thank you for your generous support to help SmartGreenUSA protect America. "A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins."
Benjamin Franklin "The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men." Samuel Adams Exposing the truth - Making a difference in this world while I am here. ~ Patrick Hughes ~ SmartGreenUSA |
