Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Butler on Business, April 9, 2014

My discussion with Alan Butler about my recent trip to the Smithsonian National Natural History Museum, the recipient of the almost-complete T. Rex fossil and all the global warming propaganda I found there. I come on at the 43 minute mark.

Friday, February 28, 2014

Profitable Global Warming Enterprise and Man-Made Drought

“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”

-          Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace

Another co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, a Canadian ecologist who was a member from 1971-1986, told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, “After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective. Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.” He said that environmental groups use “faulty computer models and scare tactics in promoting claims man-made gases are heating up the planet.”

“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years.” (Patrick Moore)

A UN report in September 2013 said that global surface temperatures have not increased for the past 15 years.

David Frame, climate modeler at Oxford University once said, “The [computer] models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.” What do these often faulty computer models provide? They provide power, control, and a whole lot of cash, Green cash, via the fear constantly drilled in people’s minds that anthropogenic global warming and climate change are something that we humans are responsible for and, if we pay a lot of carbon taxes, engage in carbon swaps, and line the pockets of crony capitalists with grants for expensive and job-killing renewable energy projects, Mother Earth will be safe, the planet will be clean, humans will suffer, and animals will reign supreme.

Reality does not seem to fit the environmentalist dogma. Princeton physics professor William Happer said, “It is important to distinguish between what the climate is actually doing and what computer models predict.” It is also important to make the distinction between climate and weather.

During the 20th century, Sir James Lovelock, in his “Revenge of Gaia,” said, “By the end of this century climate change will reduce the human population to a few breeding pairs surviving near the Arctic.” This Malthusian prediction is laughable except for the fact that people like him have cost humanity trillions of wasted money, unnecessary suffering, fear, delusion, and forced redistribution of wealth. Millionaires and billionaires were created by this hoax and they are still reaping the benefits of an irrational fear created by irresponsible lies and indoctrination from academia and the MSM.

Those who promote the Science of the Green Scam are engaging in social science paraded as “consensus” science deemed “settled” by government bureaucrats and opinionated Hollywood stars. “Consensus” means that you and I agree on a particular issue and it is not necessarily a fact. Real scientists know that real science is not static, it is constantly revised, rigorously tested, retested to disprove the theory, and outside criticism is welcomed in order to augment the theory.

Dr. Charles Krauthammer calls the white-coated scientists who claim to know exactly what will happen 50 years from now “white-coated propagandists.” (The Myth of Settled Science, Washington Post, February 20, 2014)

People like Kari Norgaard who compared global warming skepticism to “racism,” believes that “cultural resistance” to man-made caused global warming “must be recognized and treated as an aberrant sociological behavior.” Dictators treated their critics in very gruesome ways.

Sandra Korn, a Harvard University student in Women’s Studies wrote that free speech threatens liberalism and must be destroyed, and professors with dissenting views fired. (Robby Soave, Daily Caller, February 23, 2014)  “Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice,” Korn wrote.

What are some of the results of the inflexible global warming/climate change dogma established by political advocacy? For starters, there is a deliberate corruption of climate science and of good research in general. Researchers/professors tailor their studies and grant-writing based on the expected results of those who are awarding the grants, and to ensure that the results confirm global warming.

Government establishments of Green environmental programs at every level, an outrageous display of power through regulatory agencies, have resulted in man-made disasters such as the drought caused by the water use policy in California’s Central Valley where saving a bait fish called the Delta smelt was more important than giving water to thousands of farmers that have produced $45 billion worth of food annually. House Bill 3964 that would have restored water to the area is still held in the Senate by Democrats who have no intention of passing it.

Folsom Lake Dam
Photo credit: KTVU, Channel 2
NASA released images of Folsom lake, north of Sacramento, showing the water level dropping 80% over the past two and half years. Can the unwise release of water in order to make room for potential flooding rain be a possible reason? How can the passing of a $687 million drought plan for immediate relief to drought-stricken communities redress the long-term Democrat water use policy?

The federal government’s solution in California’s Central Valley is a “relief” package of $2 billion, including an insulting “summer meal plan” for those farmers put out of business by environmental activists. Adding to the potential food shortage, a real drought in South America has forced 142 Brazilian cities to ration water. Brazil is a leading exporter in a number of food categories thus affecting global food supply. The potential fear of starvation will certainly make people “behave.”

Science Czar Dr. John Holdren told reporters that “virtually all weather is being impacted by climate change and that droughts were getting more frequent, they’re getting longer and they’re getting dryer.”

Dr. Roy Spencer, former NASA scientist calls Dr. Holdren’s statement “pseudo-science.” Dr. Spencer said, “The idea that any of the weather we are seeing is in any significant way due to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions verges on irrationality.”

Even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “the repository of the global warming hoax,” said Rush Limbaugh, found that “there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought.”

The journal Nature published a paper in 2012, Vol. 491, pp. 435-438 by J. Sheffield that found “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.”

Dr. Spencer believes that weather is affected by energy imbalances “between the solar heated surface of the Earth and the atmosphere above it, and between different geographic regions. On a local basis, those imbalances can be tens or even hundreds of watts per square meter.”

The ocean and the atmosphere tend to reduce these imbalances of energy.  The climate is affected by such energy imbalances. Dr. Spencer continued, “Our best estimate of how much the climate system has been perturbed from energy imbalance comes from the slow warming of the oceans, which, since the 1950s equates to a 1 part in 1,000 energy imbalance. Now, how exactly can a 1 part in 1,000 energy imbalance lead Holdren to state, ‘Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change?’ Well, all I can think of is that his statement is not based on science.”

EPA’s Director Gina McCarthy says that all U.S. goals on climate change “will not have an impact globally. You don’t make good, sustainable laws when you make them on unproven sciences.”

Dams release waters to flow “naturally” as demanded by environmental NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and the courts, even though such dam-emptying can cause severe water shortages and droughts in the process.  

In spite of claims to the contrary, the Dust Bowl was not created by global warming, it was created by a combination of natural drought and agricultural practices.

No matter how we look at issues, global warming is a very profitable enterprise driven by environmental political advocacy. Some droughts in the U.S. are man-made, caused by Democrat-controlled water use policies.  “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” (Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment)



Thursday, February 20, 2014

"Engineering" Climate Change

Ice formations. Photo: Jeremy Smith, 2014



Our omniscient government is going to spend $1 billion in addition to the billions already wasted so far in order to attempt the impossible, “engineering” climate change to satisfy the Green agenda.

What is the scientific, measurable definition of a “normal” climate change and what is the measuring stick used to determine acceptable variability?  What are the parameters of deciding “normal” and what makes the global warming crowd the soothsayers of climate, especially since they’ve been wrong in their predictions in the last fifty years? Can the Green Agendders describe a “normal” climate change?

The global warming scheme became a very profitable enterprise, a veritable cash cow, until people started asking questions, and Mother Nature froze in thick Arctic ice the scientists’ vessel on their global warming ice-melting fact-finding mission, or dumped unusual amounts of snow every time environmentalists gathered to protest global warming. Returning to the drawing boards, the liberal euphemists came up with a different explanation, Polar Vortex, and the profitable enterprise called global warming became climate change.

It is the same climate change our planet has been experiencing for millions of years called seasons. The seasons caused by the yearly revolution of the earth around the Sun and tilt of the Earth’s axis relative to the plane of revolution.

Singling out oil and coal companies, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told a crowd in Jakarta on February 16, 2014 that “In a sense, climate change can now be considered the world’s largest weapon of mass destruction, perhaps even, the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.”  He called climate change skeptics adherents to shoddy science and Flat Earthers. “We don’t have time for a meeting anywhere of the Flat Earth Society.”

The solution he proposes is a “new global energy policy that shifts reliance from fossil fuels to cleaner technologies” like the one championed by President Barak Obama recently in California.

The problem is not that people deny the existence of climate change. Most people agree that there is a climate change but they deny that it is man-made. There are now over 1,000 real scientists and climatologists that agree that global warming is a hoax. The scientific evidence provided from the left to support global warming is based on “consensus.”  Consensus does not constitute scientific fact. It just means that a group of people are in agreement on a particular issue. The MSM is not interested in hearing or airing any opposing views, marginalizing, intimidating, and suing anybody who disagrees with them. They have decided that it is settled science and that is the end of the conversation, case closed.

The “engineering” of climate change by government fiat, executive orders, taxation, and EPA regulations reminds me of Don Quixote de la Mancha “tilting at the windmills,” an English idiom sometimes used to mean jousting  (the windmills), “attacking an imaginary enemy.”

The consensus argument is that “climate change is real and human activity is playing a major role in an increasingly volatile climate.” The hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming that humans are producing more CO2 is just a hypothesis that has been debunked. Even EPA Director Gina McCarthy said that reaching all U.S. goals for climate change compliance, “will not have an impact globally. You don’t make good, sustainable laws when you make them on unproven sciences.”

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the “repository of the global warming hoax.” Consensus scientists engage in political advocacy and economic restructuring of the developed world.

As the data scandal from the University of East Anglia proved, there has been serious damage done to climate science, real research, and industrial progress by United Nation’s 30-year “green agenda’s” war on fossil fuels and economic development. IPCC, which is not a scientific organization and is not accountable to any nation or group of nations, has influenced the masses to believe that climate change is anthropogenic (man-made).

What could possibly go wrong with the Green Agenda, the War on Coal, EPA strangling industry with costly and unnecessary regulations, and spending billions of taxpayer dollars on expensive renewable energy such as wind and solar?

-          Utilities are struggling to meet the demand for electricity due to cold weather

-          The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule by EPA put such a financial pressure on the coal sector that many plants were retired

-          After billions of dollars were invested in renewable energy resources, there is not enough solar and wind energy generated to replace the electricity that was generated by now closed coal power plants:

37 percent of electricity generated in 2012 came from coal fired plants; in 2008, 49 percent of electricity came from coal fired plants, a sizeable drop of 12 percent; natural gas fired plants replaced some of the electricity; solar power generated only 0.1 percent of electricity needed, and renewable energy, including hydro-electric produced only 5 percent of that total electricity production (U.S. Energy Information Agency or EIA)

EIA reports 3 percent loss in 2012 of coal fired capacity and by 2020 20 percent of electricity generation from coal will be lost due mostly to EPA regulations (Rick Manning, Americans for Limited Government)

-          The world’s largest generating plant (5 square miles) Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, located in the Mojave Desert near the California/Nevada border, scorches, burns, or singes birds flying into the 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit “thermal flux” around the towers. The 350,000 huge mirrors were killing birds even during the construction stage of the facility. Birds also mistaken the mirrors for water and fly directly into them. The mirrors and towers are used to store heat and to keep generating electricity after the sun goes down.

Ivanpah’s electricity cost about four times as much as electricity generated by natural gas-fired plants but produces far less electricity, not to mention the amount of land required to install the mirrors. The much larger cost will be passed on to consumers.   

A kWh of electricity generated at Ivanpah, if you take into account the price tag of the facility ($2.2 billion), cost $5,561. However, since the plant produces electricity 8-10 hours per day, the cost goes up by a factor of three, making the cost per kWh jump to the “bargain” price of $15,000!

-          Wind turbines kill 70 Golden Eagles each year at California’s Altamont Pass deaths/

-          U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Estimated that 440,000 birds per year were killed by U.S. wind turbines

-          Study showed 600,000 bats killed by wind turbines in 2012,000-bats-killed-by-wind-turbines-in-2012-study-shows/

-          President Obama issued executive order to triple government’s renewable energy use by 2020

-          Department of Energy gave Green Energy loans to President Obama backers

-          Department of Interior explores expansion of permits to kill Bald Eagles in order to accommodate wind energy

-          The administration excuses wind farms on Bald Eagle deaths but prosecutes oil companies

-          US gives permits to kill Bald Eagles to wind power providers

-          Wind farms killed 67 Bald Eagles in 5 years, a slaughter by any measure

-          Fifty administration-backed Green Energy companies went bankrupt or were failing

The Green Agenda cost many California farmers their livelihood and American consumers a large supply of food when the government shut off the water in St. Joaquin Valley to save the Delta smelt, a bait fish that nobody really cared to save. It was not climate change that caused the drought in California – the drought was “exacerbated by federal and state regulations,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca), which positioned “the well-being of fish… ahead of the well-being of communities.”

While blaming this man-made drought on climate change, President Obama promised $160 million in federal aid, $100 million to livestock farmers, $60 million to California food banks, and $15 million to the hardest hit areas. For the past five years, environmental groups were successful in diverting water from farmers in order to save the Delta smelt, flushing into the ocean 3 million acre-feet of water slated for the Central Valley.

The House Bill 3964 to restore water to the area passed by 229-191 votes. The Democrats are holding up the bill in the Senate because the administration is not really interested in passing it. Instead, they are giving more “pork to environmental activists and their victims, offering the farmers they’ve put out of work, a “summer meal plan.”

Preaching global warming and the climate change agenda are more important than a long-term solution for the man-made water shortages that are affecting the $45 billion agricultural industry. These water shortages could be easily resolved, but the government’s solution is to spend $2 billion in a temporary “relief” package that will not solve the long-term problem.

At the end of the day, crony capitalism and environmental interest groups drive the climate change agenda. Their “consensus” political groups and scientists are pressured to tailor climate models to ensure the desired results that confirm man-made global warming. The solar flares, the sun’s orbit, its tilt, the cosmic radiation, the oceanic currents, the fast dissipating cloud cover, volcanic activity, and other natural causes are not considered as variables in the climate change models.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Global Warming, EPA, and Exploding Toilets

ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson posed an interesting question in support of the idea that we should not worry about cutting carbon emissions, “What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers?”

The upcoming state of the union will address global warming in the coldest day of SOU address in history.  (Steven Goddard/Real Science)

The presidential memo of January 9, 2014 announced the establishment of a Quadrennial Energy Review which will concentrate on implementing a new energy policy for our country’s “infrastructure for transporting, transmitting, and delivering energy.” This review will explore “additional executive or legislative actions to address the energy challenges and opportunities facing the nation.”

This review will seek input from “nongovernmental, environmental, faith-based, labor, and other social organizations and contributions from the academic and non-profit sectors.” Mark Pryor (D-Ark) introduced the Quadrennial Energy Review Act of 2013 but the bill had a low chance of passing even though the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology made the Quadrennial Energy Review recommendations in March 2013. Plans are underway to push and finance local “clean energy” projects around the nation.

The global warming “explorers” from Australia who got stuck in miles and miles of Arctic ice and had to rescued, at great expense to many countries who used boats and helicopters powered by fossil fuels, were on a mission to capture footage and evidence of imagined melting polar ice caps.

The lives of billions of humans are rearranged for the worse at great expense and inconvenience to suit the globalist agenda of global warming in the summer and climate change agenda in the winter.

Global warming has become a very profitable business which generates billions and billions of dollars annually. The success of global “green growth” and “clean energy” plans comes after decades of brainwashing in school, with teachers and TV touting the man-made (anthropogenic) hoax and the worship of Gaia, mother Earth.

The talking heads who advocate social justice, climate justice, environmental justice, and equality, bike riding to work and school, saving animals at the expense of humans by re-wilding millions of acres of private and government land, living in 200 square ft. apartments the size of shipping containers, riding in dangerous tin cans, installing bird-chopping, health endangering wind mills, expensive solar panels who fry thousands of birds, using bio fuels with more ethanol that destroys car engines, have not given up their lavish lifestyles or their entire wealth. They still fly in jets with huge carbon “footprints,” own numerous cars, boats, and yachts, live in huge mansions on beaches that are supposed to be underwater when the ice melts.

Aaron Dykes of the ACTIVISTPOST.COM reported that in the Agenda 21 friendly Austin, Texas, in the name of Smart Growth, small high-rise apartments and condos are built, “driving is discouraged, cars are made to back-in angle park, pay to park, and even bicycles are rented out at an absurd rate - $12 for an hour, and up to $75 per day.”

A picture is worth a thousand words. It is interesting to see the regionalism map, proposed Emerging Megaregions for 2050 America.

How would the state and federal government confiscate/purchase private property so quickly? One way is through eminent domain and environmental conservation. Another method is by property seizures through ObamaCare. 

In more than half the states, ObamaCare comes with an expansion of Medicaid. A 1993 federal law gives the states the right to recoup the costs of Medicaid by seizing the property of Medicaid recipients who have passed away. 

The Washington Post believes the enforcement of this 1993 law under ObamaCare expanded Medicaid “scary but improbable.” This option was rarely used before the Medicaid expansion and national data is scarce. However, the state of Oregon confiscated $41 million assets from 8,900 people from July 2011 to June 2013.

Some well-informed people are now afraid to sign up for ObamaCare Medicaid expansion – they want to be able to pass their private property on to their heirs.

EPA regulations, EPA is arguably one of the most powerful agencies in America today, are suffocating private citizens and industries alike, destroying jobs and the economy, changing the face of America forever in the process.   

After wasting billions on “environmental justice” for minority communities in the U.S., the EPA is going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to help towns in Mexico like Nogales and Ensenada to “go green.”
Everyone is familiar with the low-flow flushing commodes mandated by the EPA in order to save the planet. These commodes do not save water because users must flush several times in order to get rid of waste. Sewer pipes get clogged and homeowners must spend thousands of dollars to dig up and replace the narrow sewer pipes, clean the mess, and replace damaged/smelly/wet/mildewed furniture, walls, and carpet. Water departments spend millions each year flushing their sewer systems that also become clogged from low-flush toilets.

A high-pressure flushing system was developed to help with this problem. Unfortunately this part causes commodes to explode. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Flushmate, the maker of Pressure Assist, recalled 351,000 units in the U.S. and 9,400 in Canada, made between March 2008 and June 2009. In June 2012, 2.3 million units of the same system made between October 1997 and February 2008 were recalled. Do they manufacture a high-pressure flushing Bidet?

If you are familiar with the miles per gallon requirement for cars ( making them smaller, lighter, and less safe in the process), you will understand the new rating for homes that the Department of Energy is imposing in order to reduce the nation’s energy consumption.

The Home Energy Scoring Tool will be voluntary at first for homeowners looking to “renovate or remodel homes, lower utility bills, improve the comfort of their homes, or reduce energy usage.”

In time, the score derived will be a mandatory to document improvements in compliance with DOE standards when you sell your home. The DOE recommends getting the Home Energy Score “as soon as the program becomes available in your area.” The scoring program started in 2012.

To arrive at such Home Energy Score, a “qualified assessor” comes to your house and collects 40 measurements of your home’s walls, windows, cooling, heating, lighting, etc. The assessors are only available through DOE’s participating partners, state and local governments, utilities, and non-profit organizations (environmental groups).

The scoring fees range from $25-125 and there are more than 25 participating partners and 175 qualified assessors. DOE stated that 8,500 homes have been scored so far.

The software is based on “typical homeowner behavior” (who decides what is typical behavior and how?), with a 1-10 point scale accounting for zip codes assigned to over 1,000 weather stations.

No matter how many times the global warming hoax has been debunked, it remains a very profitable business for global elites aided by government fiat and crony capitalism, while the masses are harmed economically through heavier taxation, loss of property, loss of wealth, loss of freedom, and loss of mobility.


Sunday, January 5, 2014

The Ship of Global Warming Folly

Das Narrenschiff - Albrecht Durer
I ponder the 1549 German woodcut, “Ship of Fools,” Albrecht Durer’s illustrations, and even Hieronymus Bosch’s artistic allegory of humanity’s folly sailing aboard a ship without a pilot, a stark reflection of what humans do, sometimes ignorant of their own direction, pursuing untrue and unattainable objectives.

The January 2, 2014 article in The Australian, “Stuck on a ship of (cold) fools,” talks about the Australasian Antarctic Expedition from the University of New South Wales, led by Professor Chris Turney, on a mission to trace the Antarctic expedition of 1911 when Douglas Mawson’s ship was not icebound. Since then, the sea ice has been increasing despite United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) faulty forecasts based on its global warming modeling.

The global warming scientists, journalists, and concerned individuals, stuck aboard a ship in 15 ft. thick ice, have set out to prove that “the East Antarctic ice sheet is melting.” The University of New South Wales website describes in alarming tones “an increasing body of evidence” that proves “melting and collapse from ocean warming.”

The irony of the mission which had to be rescued by the icebreaker Aurora Australis, plucking scientists from the stuck Russian MV Akademik Schokalskiy, is that helicopters and other fossil fuel-driven, carbon-emitting machines and ships were used; there is no green energy, wind or solar vessel yet that could perform such a rescue job – the scientists would have been stuck until the ice melted. A second ship, the Chinese icebreaker Snow Dragon, sent in to help, called off the mission about 6.7 nautical miles from the Russian ship.

According to Fox News, when the ship was trapped, it was 2 miles from open water. The rapidly expanding ice placed it 13 miles from open water. It was so bitter cold, the extreme low temperatures coupled with the chill factor, were unforgiving to unprotected human skin.

Does the overwhelming evidence that temperatures around the globe have been cooler in the last 17 years and polar ice caps have increased in size in 2013 by 65 percent deter the global warming scientists and their alarmist Gaia worshippers from imposing their insane agenda? The answer is a resounding no. Controlling how we live is more important than reality and fact. As a savvy person said, “You might be a climate denier if… You get your ship trapped in ice that you denied was there.”

The same scientists from the University of New South Wales where the ill-fated cruise ship to the Antarctic originated are doubling down on global warming/climate change agenda, saying that the “world’s climate is warming faster than feared because predictions were too ‘optimistic’ and overestimated the cooling impact of clouds.” Professor Steven Sherwood from the University of New South Wales told The Sydney Morning Herald that “The net effect of [climate change] is you have less cloud cover.” (Jonathan Pearlman, Telegraph, Jan. 2014,

Meanwhile, the blizzard dubbed Hercules is slamming northeastern United States, dumping so much snow that nearly 2,300 flights had to be cancelled, JFK airport was shut down, highways were closed, and the governor of New York declared a state of emergency. It is so bitter cold, exposed skin can freeze in 15 minutes.

“Consensus” scientists have been successful in convincing the EPA under the Bush administration to remove the inexpensive Edison bulbs on account that they used up too much electricity, causing global warming through the use of “dirty” coal that generates the said electricity (Thomas Edison must be rolling in his grave), and replace them with expensive and toxic CFL bulbs that contain mercury, a potent neurotoxin too dangerous for thermometers. “When a CFL breaks in your home, it releases mercury vapor.” To clean up the mess, the EPA instructions are:

1.      Seal off the room and turn off the air condition system (HVAC).

2.      Don’t vacuum because the mercury will spread.

3.      Follow 3 pages of detailed instructions (

You might as well wear a Hazmat suit to protect yourself when removing a broken CFL bulb. Don’t you feel protected and secure in our home, a safe haven for you and your children, compliments of environmental zealots who know what is best for you?









Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Now It's "Biotic" and "Fossil" Carbon

Global warming/climate change proponents are a hardy, determined, one-track mind group. They were brainwashed by the elitist powers that, unless we fundamentally alter our way of life and de-develop to subsistence level economies of the Middle Ages, the planet will perish. “We can’t keep developing infinitely on a finite world,” said one of the organizers of a recent protest in Canada.

A group of 50 anti-oil pipeline and oil sands activists showed up in Calgary in a snow storm to protest man-made global warming.  I love it when God sends a snow or ice storm every time these scare mongers gather. One of the participants was quoted as saying, “We’re seeing the effects of global warming and we can’t keep denying it because obviously something is happening.” (Renato Gandia, Calgary Sun, November 16, 2013)

I agree that something is happening; our climate is changing every day and has been changing for millions of years alternating between seasons, mini ice ages, severe ice ages, and very warm periods. And it had nothing to do with human activity on the planet.

The sun flares and oceanic currents are important variables accountable for seasonal or unusual weather events but are conveniently left out from the alarmists’ talking points.

Global warming alarmists even use dead people to propagandize climate change. The journal Nature printed an article, “Did climate change cause typhoon Haiyan?” while at the same time indicating in a sub-heading that “there is limited evidence that warming oceans could make super storms more likely.”

The global warming crowd, particularly those who gain financially from advancing this notion, tried to blame hurricane Sandy on global warming even though it was caused by “a clash of three separate weather systems over a heavily populated area.” (Lord Monckton, Exploiting the dead to hype climate change, November 2013)

IPCC’s 2012 “Special Report on Extreme Weather,” which found scarce connection between warmer weather and worsening storms, stated that there were “no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over past century.”

The sad truth is that most scientific findings are well within the range of normal variability of climate. Yet it did not stop the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to release for review a 29-page summary to member governments.

Chris Field, co-chair of the group writing the report said, “We see a wide range of impacts that have already occurred… on people, ecosystems and economies. Looking into the future, we see increasing risks that are more pervasive and more severe with greater amounts of climate change.”

IPCC sees a planet in peril due to buildup of greenhouse gases, the nutrient for plant life, and glaciers shrinking; plants and animals will be extinct; marine life will move to the poles; seawater will be more acidic; by 2100 hundreds of millions of people in coastal areas will be flooded and displaced by rising sea levels; arid subtropics will have less fresh water; the global food supply will be at risk; wheat, corn, rice reduced by as much as 2 percent; and extreme heat waves, deadly in urban areas.

If we look at the gloom and doom predictions of the last 50 years, we should have already been flooded, frozen, or burned to death, depending on which “scientific” prediction you read.  Never mind that genetically modified organisms and the use of crops for biofuels as dictated by government agencies will affect our food supply more in the future.

It does not matter to the global warming crowd that the ice surface at the polar caps has grown this year by 60 percent. It does not matter that temperatures have cooled for the last 16 years around the globe. These are people who cannot accurately predict weather from day to day much less climate 100 years from now.

Reuters reported on November 11, 2013 that IPCC revised their numbers on greenhouse gas emissions. IPCC said the world “emitted half of the estimated 1 trillion tons of carbon seen as the maximum allowed to keep temperatures within safe limits.” It did not say how the author made such gross miscalculations. (Alister Doyle)

Meanwhile, the Global Climate and Health Alliance held its 2013 Climate and Health Summit in Warsaw, Poland on November 16. Some of the topics presented included:

-          Expanding renewable electricity via the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for “climate finance flows from industrialized to developing countries” because many developing countries do not have Renewable Energy Feed-in Tariffs (REFIT). This is of course, more redistribution of wealth from the west to the rest of the world in order to satisfy the environmentalist agenda.

-          An environmentalist from Ecuador introduced the notion of “biotic carbon” from living things and “fossil carbon” from things which have died. “Carbon from biotic pools is acceptable because carbon dioxide emanating from the forest or other ecosystem destruction can be compensated by planting trees but carbon dioxide released from burning fossil fuels is not acceptable. Really? Trees and plants can actually discern where the CO2 is coming from and thus only use CO2 released by living things?

-          World leaders should have “commodified carbon” because “the on-going Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) indicated anthropogenic climate change is as good as irrefutable,” said Felix von Geyer, sustainable development journalist.  I had no idea that “as good as irrefutable” constituted proper scientific evidence of global warming.

-          Non-profits believe GDP to be a poor measure of economic well-being; instead Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) should be used, accounting for social factors and environmental costs. Apparently, “our ecological footprint began in 1978 to exceed the capacity to produce resources and absorb waste.” How the non-profit author arrived at this pronouncement is not clear. She suggested the phasing out of energy sources such as fossil fuels and radioactive fuels and replacing them with renewable energy.

-          Micro-hydro installations in Africa to provide energy when connection to the grid is not feasible

-          The burning of coal causes climate change and it pollutes the air we breathe, affecting hearts and lungs

-          IPCC found that “the burning of fossil fuels is the main reason behind a 40 percent increase in CO2 concentration since the industrial revolution.” It is unclear how they determined this with such definite accuracy.

-          The fact that the public and private sectors, from national to local governments, from companies and business associations to communities have jumped on the global warming/climate change bandwagon to adopt widespread policies and implement plans to adapt to climate change is NOT convincing evidence that climate change is man-made – it is just evidence that lobbying with taxpayer dollars and dollars from rich donors, fooling low information people into believing false narratives has been quite aggressive.

-          “Rapidly growing slums could be the key to sustainable urban energy system transformation,” said Mukesh Gupta.

-          The youth non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were indoctrinated into the UN Agenda 21’s “intergenerational equity,” socialist redistributive wealth under the guise of protecting the planet from man-made destruction.



Monday, July 15, 2013

Liberal Doom and Gloom 90 Years Ago

If you told me in 1922 that global warming was going to drown the planet because of melting icebergs, or that “at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared,” replaced by moraines of earth and stones, or that seals vanished, I might have believed you. 

“The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot,” said the Washington Post on November 2, 1922, citing a report to the Commerce Department received from Bergen, Norway. This report was based on statements by fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers; “soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.” Additionally, the report said that “scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.” As a logical thinker, if this were true, I would have definitely considered the Gulf Stream a possible cause of the alleged warming, not the greenhouse gases, or the currently maligned CO2.
The Washington Post continued in its 1922 article, “Within a few years, it is predicted that due to the ice melt, the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.”

John Lockwood, who found the above-mentioned article said, “This was one of several such articles I have found at the Library of Congress for the 1920s and 1930s. I had read of the just-released NASA estimates that four of the 10 hottest years in the U.S. were actually in the 1930s, with 1934 the hottest of all.” (
If you told me in 1977 that the earth was in danger of freezing, and, after seeing the Time Magazine cover picture of a penguin surrounded by solid ice with the caption, How to Survive The Coming Ice Age, I might have believed you.

After Time magazine told us again in 2006 that we should “Be Worried, Be VERY Worried,” with the picture of a lone polar bear walking through water, presumably the melted ice, I would have thought twice before I believed the special report on global warming. I would have seen a pattern of misinformation emerging.
When Al Gore, the authority who narrated the 2006 documentary titled, “An Inconvenient Truth,” with questionable data for which he subsequently received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, I definitely considered it global alarmism, an agenda pushed by environmentalists who were and are interested in making money on renewable energy and on the newly emerged market of carbon taxes, swaps, and credits.

The 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Agenda 21 arm of the United Nations and Al Gore Jr. "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"
By now, if the doom and gloom alarmists were right, we should have either drowned in melted ice or should have frozen to death. They must have missed the science class experiment with ice cubes floating in a full glass of water - when the cubes melt, water does not overflow the glass, it simply replaces the mass of the ice cubes.

The “science” of global warming is not settled at all, it is just a media publicized “consensus.”  Yet the coal-generated energy which produces 49% of our electricity is under attack by environmentalists, the EPA, and policy-makers alike, a deliberate and concerted effort to bankrupt those who use coal instead of its clean, renewable, and expensive cousins, solar, wind, and biofuels to generate energy.

There is a vast effort to minimize the size of cars and the type of fuel used,  by replacing gasoline-driven and hybrid cars with electric cars although the electricity generated to recharge these electric cars still comes mostly from coal.

President Obama’s moratorium on domestic drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, scarce new drilling permits on land, and the blocking of the XL Keystone pipeline are evidence of the war on oil and coal, the war on American economic prosperity.

There is an abundance of oil, the earth keeps generating it. “The idea that petroleum is formed from dead organic matter is known as the ‘biogenic theory’ of petroleum formation and was first proposed by a Russian scientist almost 250 years ago.  In the 1950's, however, a few Russian scientists began questioning this traditional view,” postulating that petroleum could form naturally deep inside the Earth” and not necessarily from fossils. (

OPEC should be worried because vast reserves of new oil have been discovered in tar sands. If extraction is allowed and perfected to minimize ecological damage, there is enough oil to change the dynamic of the crude oil market. North Dakota’s economy is already booming.

The emissions of the much maligned CO2, the cause of the alleged man-made global warming/climate change must be reduced, according to the EPA new rules, to no more than 1,000 pounds per megawatt-hour of production from new fossil-fuel plants with a capacity of 25 megawatts or larger. (Congressional Report Service, R42496, June 10, 2013)

According to Peter Folger, the new rule proposed under Section 11 of the Clean Air Act, should be easy to satisfy by new natural gas-fired combined-cycle power plants without additional costs. However, new coal-fired plants would only be able to meet the standards by installing carbon capture sequestration (CCS) technology.

Although Congress appropriated $3.4 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for research, development, and demonstration of CCS large-scale deployment by 2020, “to date, there are no commercial ventures in the United States that capture, transport, and inject industrial-scale quantities of CO2 solely for the purposes of carbon sequestration.” (Peter Folger, June 10, 2013, CRS R 42496, Carbon Capture and Sequestration: Research, Development, and Demonstration at the U.S. Department of Energy)

A Department of Energy Inspector General audit found that only a small fraction of the $3.4 billion appropriated for research and development of carbon capture sequestration (CCS) has actually been used so far.

The EPA has missed its April 2013 deadline to issue the final rule on fossil fuel power plants because it has to review more than 2 million comments received from the public.

To modify or block the EPA’s proposed new rule, Congress can use legislation such as H.R. 2127, prohibiting the EPA from issuing any rule limiting the emissions of CO2 from any existing or new source utility that uses fossil-fuels to generate electricity until carbon capture sequestration (CCS) becomes economically and technologically possible.

EPA’s new rule considers CCS the only “essential technology” if new coal-fired power plants are to be approved and built in the U.S. However, there are other important factors that are not taken into account: costs of competing fuel sources such as natural gas, electricity demand, regulatory costs, infrastructure, rail, and electric grid development.

According to Dr. David Sponseller, “Some sequestration occurs in the oil industry, which injects CO2 down hole in order to enhance the flow of oil from some wells. They cannot inject air because the 21% oxygen in the air would burn with the oil and/or gas due to the high temperatures below. But with CO2 the oxygen is already fully combined with carbon and can no longer react when it encounters the hydrocarbons down hole.”

On June 6, 2013, Oklahoma’s Burbank oil field started carbon dioxide injection. Chaparral Energy, Inc. is moving CO2 from a fertilizer plant in Coffeyville, Kansas, to Burbank through an 8-inch, 68-mile pipeline. A 23,500-hp compressor station in Coffeyville feeds the CO2 to Burbank, Oklahoma. (Oil and Gas Journal, July 1, 2013)

From the alarmists worrying about the imminent flooding of coastal cities in 1922, flooding that never occurred, to the “ice-age” doom and gloom predictions of 1977, which also never happened, and back to the unfounded fear of rising oceans today, the main stream media seem all too eager to scare the public into accepting draconian policy measures that implement the latest expensive fad, costing billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and higher energy costs passed on to consumers.

Dr. David Sponseller stated that “Only 130 ppm CO2 have been added to our atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution. This increase is dwarfed by the 210,000 ppm of life-giving oxygen.”

It would be far wiser to admit that man’s activity on earth has little influence on natural temperature cycles or on calamitous weather events. Big government and its expanding bureaucracy should leave its citizens alone to live their lives without oppressive and costly control of energy production.