Roman Around

combating liberalism and other childish notions

Posts Tagged ‘climate change’

THE FOOL ON THE HILL AND HOLOCAUST DENIAL

Posted by Andrew Roman on June 25, 2010

On the inside of the gatefold of the Beatles American LP “Songs, Pictures And Stories Of The Fabulous Beatles,” the narrative of the band’s young 21-year old bassist, Paul McCartney, starts this way:

Paul is sometimes called the “Nut Beatle” or “Beatle Nut” because he is the zaniest of the group.

Whether that was actually true or not is a matter for Beatleologists.

What is for certain, forty-six years later, is that the “Nut Beatle” isn’t zany at all. Rather, the ever-wrinkling “cute one” is a bona fide “shut up and sing” archaic hippie moron with a disgusting and warped sense of values. He is not only reaffirming to the world that even the greatest of musical geniuses can have the emptiest of heads, he is further showing himself to be an insensitive mental oaf in his (almost) old age. That he also worships the most incompetent American President since James Earl Carter only emphasizes his oblivion.

The crotchety old songsmith from Liverpool – who once wrote a song called “Freedom” in response to the 9/11 attacks (a song that was harshly ridiculed by left and has all but been banished from the face of the earth since then) – has already disgraced himself in recent weeks by insulting a former American President on American soil while receiving an award from the American government.

Such class.

Well the “Beatle Nut” has brilliantly advanced his own cause toward immortalized irrepressible idiocy by comparing those who don’t buy into the global warming myth to those who deny the Holocaust.

Yes, the fool on the hill is saying that to deny the unproven, unsubstantiated, ever-crumbling claims that the world is in danger from rising temperatures due to human activity is akin to denying the most well-documented atrocity in human history.

To this day, there is not a stitch of proof – only agenda-driven theory, scattered supposition, wishful leftist thinking and fear-mongering – that human beings are not only causing the planet’s temperature to rise, but that we are putting the planet in danger by doing so. Yet, proof of the Holocaust exists in abundance. To deny it would be like denying the existence of the sun.

From Fox News:

Sir Paul McCartney just can’t let it be.

The former Beatle predicted in an interview that the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico might expedite a move to cleaner, renewable energy sources in the world.

Sir Paul could have stopped while he was ahead, but McCartney went on to compare people who don’t believe in global warming to “those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.”

“Sadly we need disasters like this to show people,” McCartney said in an exclusive interview with The Sun. “Some people don’t believe in climate warning — like those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.”

McCartney continued, “But the facts indicate that there’s something going on and we’ve got to be aware of it if we want our kids to inherit a decent world, not a complete nightmare of a planet — clean, renewable energy is for starters.”

Sir Paul is obviously among the many deep thinking hysterics on the left who believe that temperatures are naturally static, with little fluctuation. I would ask him: What temperature should it be right now, Sir Paul? And how would he explain the melting of all the Ice Age ice thousands of years before the advent of the Hummer?

To begin with, the planet is not in a warming cycle.

Even Phil Jones – the Maharishi of the man-made global warming hoax – admitted that during the last fifteen years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

As I wrote in February:

There is not one scintilla of data (i.e., evidence) showing that CO2 causes temperatures to rise, as asserted by the likes of King Hysteric, Al Gore. In fact, a closer look at King Gore’s famous hockey stick charts purportedly showing that increased CO2 levels trigger temperature boosts actually suggests that the opposite may be the case.

There is not a neutron’s worth of scientific evidence that human activity is causing temperatures to go up, nor is there anything to back up the claims that the planet is in danger. Every so-called bit of proof put forth by the enviro-fascists is either inconclusive, irrelevant, anecdotal or an outright misrepresentation. There is nothing – repeat nothing – scientific about the so-called causes of global warming and the so-called effects of such warming, nor is there anything of any kind proving that human beings are contributing anything to such phenomena.

It’s all nonsense

But even if there was some sort of warming trend, so what?

Temperatures fluctuate all the time. There have been plenty of warming periods in this planet’s history as well as plenty of cooling trends. It is the height of arrogance – and ignorance – to think that human beings can have such a major impact on global temperatures. If we so desired – if the very existence of humanity depended on it – no matter how we might try, we do not have the ability to raise the earth’s temperature in any significant way.

But the bigger issue here is equating the denial of something that is, at best, scientifically questionable – a left-wing movement riddled with scandal, manipulation and outright deceit – with the denial of something as provable (and abhorrent) as the Holocaust.

To deny the greatest documented evil of all – the Holocaust – is itself evil.

Thus, to equate the denial of man-made global warming to Holocaust denial is to say that disagreeing with the likes of Al Gore, Ed Begley Jr. and Paul McCartney is evil.

It not only trivializes Holocaust denial, it is the ultimate insult to those whose lives were impacted by the Holocaust.

It is shameless.

Not that anyone is paying much attention, mind you.

Rest assured, however, had McCartney compared the denial of God to denial of the Holocaust, he certainly would have gotten play in the lamestream media.

McCartney without a guitar or piano is much like Barack Obama without a teleprompter.

Incidentally, the lyrics to the now extinct song Freedom are:

This is my right
A right given by God
To live a free life
To live in freedom

Talkin’ about freedom
I’m talkin’ ’bout freedom
I will fight
For the right
To live in freedom

The left hated that song.
wordpress statistics

Advertisements

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming, Music, Pop Culture | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

SO, IS WARMING GOOD OR NOT?

Posted by Andrew Roman on June 22, 2010

hot-day

Temperatures in and around New York City, over the past several days, had been almost August-like. A couple of days ago, in fact,, the mercury was aggressively flirting with the dreaded 90 degree plateau. I say “dreaded” because I freely admit to being in the minority when it comes to warm weather. I simply hate the heat. Summer – outside of baseball, vacations and longer days – is my least favorite season, followed closely by winter (although I make concessions for Christmas when I actually hope for winter-like weather).

I am a spring and autumn man, with leanings toward the fall.

I’m one of those who will gladly take 60 degrees over 80 degrees any day.

While in the car over the past several days, with 80-plus degree temps becoming the norm, I’ve been hearing the local DJs and weather experts make exuberant comments like, “A gorgeous day in New York City!” and “As beautiful as it gets!”

One weather guy actually said, “If it were like this year round, there’d never be anything to be sad about!”

Obviously, he didn’t mean it literally (seeing as there are plenty of grumpy people in warmer climates), but his sentiment was universal among the radio personalities in New York I had the chance to sample over the past few days: heat is good!

“It’s gonna feel like paradise today!”

“Get out there and love it while it lasts!”

Blah-blah-blah …

Setting aside my personal animus for any temperature above 80 degrees, I couldn’t help but shake my head and laugh while listening to these people sing the praises of the unseasonable heat wave.

How ironic, I thought.

These radio folks were the very same ones who, a couple of months earlier, were positively crazed with Earth Day and the potentially horrific effects of global warming. These same hot-weather cheerleaders were only a couple of short months ago warning everyone within earshot of the impending doom awaiting all earthlings if conscientious enviro-friendly anti-warming action wasn’t taken immediately. I couldn’t as much as spit at a radio that day without hearing something about Earth Day, the environment, the climate and anything “green.”

It was all-Earth Day all day.

In fact, it received more play than National Holocaust Remembrance Day and Washington’s Birthday combined – times ten. These summer-loving microphone jockeys spent every possible moment sharing “green” tips, planet-saving helpful hints, environmentally gracious suggestions and overall climate-protecting measures. Indeed, if I had a dollar for every time one of these retro-hippie DJs and hippy-dippy weathermen went on about climate change and global warming, I could almost afford a McDonald’s Value Meal in Manhattan.

How … discerning.

Can I then assume – with global warming and climate change as one of humanity’s most pressing and critical issues – that hot can be selectively good? Like, for instance, after a long, cold winter of being cooped up in the house reading The Daily Cos?

And if there are sun tans still to be worked on, bikinis to be worn, sand castles to be built and boardwalk concessions yet to be patronized, are rising temperatures then acceptable to the greenies? At least some of the time?

And if the environmentalists truly believe that a cooler planet is better, why ask us to be “green” of all things? Doesn’t “green” imply growth, warmth and prosperity? Don’t trees, plants, shrubs, leaves and grass generally thrive in warm weather? Isn’t that when they are at their “greenest?”

Leaves actually fall off and die in cooler weather.

Most trees become bare when the cold sets in.

Grass often turns brown in the winter.

Shouldn’t the color of environmentalism be brown? Or gray?
wordpress statistics

Posted in environmentalism, Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

HOAX UPDATE – NOT YOUR FATHER’S WEATHER

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 3, 2010

I know that the study of climate is a tricky science. I am also aware that, often times, things aren’t quite as they seem.

We now know, for instance, that global warming triggers global cooling that induces global moderation that leads to all-encompassing global climate change.

And even though nothing may actually be changing, things change all the time, even when they don’t.  And even though it may not necessarily be a global thing, it is taking place all over the world, even if it’s not.

This isn’t your father’s weather.

Last week, for example, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said that the last ten years have been the hottest decade since temperature records have been kept, although Professor Phil Jones – the former chief of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit who was forced to step down due to the ClimateGate scandal – finally admitted there has been no global warming in 15 years.

Nuance, baby.

Last week, Professor Neville Nicholls, of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, said that the three month span from November 2009-January 2010 has been “the hottest November-January the world has seen.”

Yet, in Great Britain, it has been the coldest winter in three decades.

Go figure.

Adam Gabbatt from the Guardian.UK writes:

After suffering snow, sleet, rain and consistently freezing temperatures, the knowledge that the Met Office has officially recognised winter 2009-10 as the coldest in 31 years brings with it a certain grim satisfaction.

Provisional figures from the forecaster show the UK winter – which in forecasting terms lasts from the start of December until the end of February – has been the harshest, in temperature terms, since 1978-79.

According to the Met Office the mean temperature in the UK was 1.51C this winter, compared to a long-term average winter temperature – calculated from data collected between 1971 and 2000 – of 3.7C. The mean temperature in 1978-79 was 1.17C.

So much nuance.

I’m out of my league.

Speaking of Professor Phil Jones … he testified on Monday before the British Parliament’s committee on Science and Technology in an attempt to defend himself after the ClimateGate scandal threw the entire manmade global warming farce into a tailspin. Indeed, he admitted to withholding data about global temperatures, but said that it wasn’t standard practice to share that kind of information with other scientists, nor was it common to release computer models so that the “science” could be checked.

Jones said, “I don’t think there is anything in those emails that really supports any view that I, or the CRU, have been trying to pervert the peer review process in any way.”

Wow.

That’s all I can say.

Is he serious?

True, I’m no scientist, but the layman in me can’t help but wonder … what exactly is the “peer review” process if it isn’t allowing fellow scientists to review and challenge research? What is it that peers are supposed to be reviewing if not the methods and data used to arrive at given conclusions? Isn’t that, quite literally, what science is supposed to be all about? Isn’t that what the scientific method is?

Before conclusions can become accepted in the scientific community – let alone “settled science” – other scientists must be allowed to conduct their own research using the data and methods employed by those who have drawn the original conclusions.

Am I wrong?

What am I missing here?

wordpress statistics

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

HOTTEST JANUARY EVER, EVER

Posted by Andrew Roman on February 27, 2010

(blog entry joined in progress)

… and even though the Maharishi of Manmade Global Warming and Climate Change, Professor Phil Jones, recently admitted that there has been no global warming taking place on earth over the past fifteen years – as well as conceding that there is no consensus on the matter in the scientific community – the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says the ten year period from 2000 to 2009 was the hottest decade since records began in 1850.

The WMO, of course, is an agency of the United Nations – an organization whose worth is rivaled only by boar nipples and Joy Behar’s television program.

Keep in mind, another UN body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has already shown that their inscrutable methods of data collection – which include anecdotal tidbits from magazine articles, propaganda literature from environmental pressure groups, and manipulated temperature reading – are not exactly the most scientific.

Did you also know that last month was the hottest January “the world has ever seen.”

Ever.

Donna Bowater from Express.co.uk writes:

The remarkable claim, based on global satellite data, follows Arctic temperatures that brought snow, ice and travel chaos to millions in the UK.

At the height of the big freeze, the entire country was blanketed in snow. But Australian weather expert Professor Neville Nicholls, of Monash University in Melbourne, said yesterday: “January, according to satellite data, was the hottest January we’ve ever seen.

“Last November was the hottest November we’ve ever seen. November-January as a whole is the hottest November-January the world has seen.” Veteran ¬climatologist Professor Nicholls was speaking at an online climate change briefing, added: “It’s not warming the same everywhere but it is really quite challenging to find places that haven’t warmed in the past 50 years.”

It may be hard to believe initially, but why should it? Why should any reasonable thinking human not believe that last month was the hottest January mankind has ever seen?

Considering that all we’ve seen from the enviro-fascists over the years – and even more so since last year’s ClimateGate scandal blew the roof off of the hoax – is manipulation, ommision and deception, why would anyone ever doubt it?

We’ve seen Godless religion. We’ve seen mounting hysteria. We’ve seen the onset of green totalitarianism.

What would lead anyone to think that January wasn’t a cauldron of human activity-driven destruction?

Was it all the snow?

The record-breaking cold temperatures?

The untold amounts of greenhouse gases dancing around the atmosphere from all the limos and planes in Copenhagen during the Climate Change Summit?

Seeing as human activity is supposed to be having such a profound effect on the climate, I can’t help but wonder if we might be deep in the heart of another Ice Age right now if not for our idling pickup trucks and incandescent light bulbs.

wordpress statistics

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

AND THE MYTH KEEPS UNRAVELING – NO GLOBAL WARMING FOR THE PAST 15 YEARS

Posted by Andrew Roman on February 16, 2010

Professor Phil Jones

It’s only the latest kerplunk in a bucket filled with what is already the foulest-smelling lie one could dream up – a collection of untruths that should have long ago put an end to the biggest sham of the last half century, if not longer.

This matters … or it should matter.

That is, it should matter to the American mainstream media, because by any objective standard, this is big news. In fact, the entire arc of this continually unfolding and unraveling lie is tremendously big news.

They seem to understand that in Great Britain.

Their media is all over this.

It’s a big story because this preposterous hoax has infiltrated, poisoned and redefined all conventional wisdom on the matter to the point that to deny it is to deny the Holocaust. It’s a big story because of the unprecedented, industry-crippling, economy-altering changes being proposed to combat it in almost every industrialized country of the world.

It’s a war that needs not be fought because the enemy doesn’t exist.

It’s a fairy tale.

It is the Granddaddy of all flimflams … and it just keeps getting better.

Unfortunately – and predictably – the New York Times, Washington Post and alphabet channels all but ignored the original “ClimateGate” scandal when it broke late last year. It was as damaging as anything could have been to the pseudo-scientific, agenda-driven, enviro-fascist movement that has continued to claim that human beings are ruining the globe by their very existence.

Most ironic is that all of the evidence – yes, genuine evidence – suggests that the man-made global warming crisis is nothing but a hyper-hysterical cartoon, promulgated and promoted by the most unscientific methods, ubiquitous with manipulated (or made-up) data and anecdotal jabber… all for the sake of pursuing a leftist, anti-capitalist agenda.

It has all but been ignored by the American media.

Where is Dateline NBC?

Where is 20/20?

Mark Landsbaum from the Orange County Register – not 60 Minutes – has a devastatingly comprehensive article enumerating the most outstanding of these global warming frauds – a sensational list of the various climate change “-gates“:

ClimateGate, ChinaGate, HimalayaGate, SternGate, PeerReviewGate, RissiaGate, IceGate, and many others.

As he points out: The Himalayan glaciers will not be gone in twenty-five years, as claimed by the doomsdayers. The Amazon rainforests will not be wiped out due to global warming, as professed by the enviro-nutbags. The exclusion of data from cold climate weather stations in Russia has resulted in nearly a half-degree’s shift upward in average temperatures. The fact that nearly 4,500 surface-temperature weather stations in the United States were taken offline between 1970 and 1990 – most of which existed in colder regions – has also skewed averages upward.

There’s much more.

Jonathan Petre from the UK Mail Online writes:

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

If anything bears repeating, it’s this.

The Maharishi of the manmade global warming farce – the man at the epicenter of the ClimateGate scandal – the high-lord and master of the climate-change lie, Professor Phil Jones, has admitted that for the last decade-and-a-half there has been no global warming.

And …

He has conceded that the medieval world – free of fossil-fuel burning SUVs, disposable diapers, CFCs, fireplaces and big screen televisions – may have actually been warmer than it is today.

He doesn’t say …

I may be going out on a limb here – a please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong – but the end of the Ice Age would suggest, to even a layperson as myself, that there had to be some kind of pre-Industrial Revolution warming taking place without the benefit of jet planes and coal burning. After all, that was a lot of ice.

Still, I don’t exactly see a problem for Professor Jones. True, much of the data used to formulate the global warming fraud has been lost, but he’s a clever man.

He can always make up some more.

wordpress statistics

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming, Junk Science, leftism, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

GLOBAL WARMING AND EARTHQUAKES

Posted by Andrew Roman on February 10, 2010

It’s the running gag across the conservative blogosphere, talk radio, and those who revel in common sense – and deservedly so.

“Two more feet of global warming fell on Washington today.”

“Man, I hurt my back shoveling all that global warming off my drive way.”

“Schools were cancelled today because of record global warming.”

This entire enviro-fascist delusion is akin to this exchange:

PERSON ONE: Can you please watch your language? Is it possible for you to carry on a conversation without having to swear?

PERSON TWO: What? What the f— are you talking about? I don’t f—ing swear.

Its absurdity is so blatant, so obvious, so demonstrably moronic, that its advocates will be compared to the World War II-era Japanese soldiers who lived hidden away in the hills for so long, they believed the war was still going on years after it ended. The difference, of course, is that global warming zealots are dopes. Without a stitch of evidence to support their doomsday scenarios, without a scintilla of data to back up their woebegone prognostications, and without regard for those pesky facts that keep getting in the way, they fight a fight that does not need fighting. They wage war when there is no conflict. They rally against bogeymen that aren’t there. They attack invisible monsters and claim those monsters are really everywhere.

It’s like listening to six year olds justify sleeping with the light on because of the evil monkey in the closet.

Everything can be blamed on “global warming” – even though there is no warming.

And yes, sadly, the line that was once the gold standard of parody is now being used by the wacko left as a genuine point of argument: “Global warming causes global cooling.”

It’s hard to write comedy anymore when the Left is on the loose.

As I have asked repeatedly on this blog: If temperatures are not going up across the globe, what better indication is there that global warming is not taking place? If record snowfalls and colder temperatures are not signs that global warming is not taking place, then what is? What should the correct temperature be right now? What should the proper, non-global-warming weather be right now? Theoretically, what would have to be happening right now to prove to an enviro-fascist that there is no man-made global warming going on?

With unheard amounts of snowfall slamming the mid-Atlantic in recent days, and with blizzard conditions expected in New York City later today, the winter time months are somehow miraculously, inexplicably,managing to bring wintertime weather.

Fancy that.

But to the hysterical who hold on to their ideological security blankets and stuffed teddies like grim death, natural occurrences and cycles that have been taking place on this planet for millions and millions of years are now tell-tale signs that man-made global warming is bringing the planet to its doom.

On Joy Behar’s television program, all twelve viewers were treated to an exchange between Behar and creator of the Vagina Monologues, Eve Ensler, on the subject of Sarah Palin and global warming.

Jeff Poor of NewsBusters transcribed a portion of their discussion:

ENSLER: Well, I just think the idea that (Sarah Palin) doesn’t believe in global warming is bizarre.

BEHAR: Every scientist of any note believes in it but Sarah Palin doesn’t believe in it.

ENSLER: And I think we just kind of have to walk around the world at this point and look at what is happening to nature and earthquakes and tsunamis.

BEHAR: Right.

ENSLER: And weather changes to just feel it. But I think that idea that she doesn’t believe in global warming and she could actually run for vice president, and we have a country where that is possible, it seems insane.

BEHAR: It’s unbelievable. It does seem insane and the fact that she has not negated the possibility of running in 2012.

ENSLER: But we have. We have negated the possibility of her winning.

As Poor points out: “According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), earthquakes are a phenomenon of ‘sudden rolling or shaking events caused by movement under the Earth’s surface,’ not the earth’s atmosphere which concerns the theory of anthropogenic global warming.”

Stick to vaginas, lady.

Of course, the notion that “every scientist of any note” believes in the global warming myth is abjectly untrue. I don’t know that there is a statement in all of humanity that is more blazenly wrong.

Some scientists of note who don’t buy into the global warming doomsday lie are:

Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences.
Garth Paltridge, Visiting Fellow ANU and retired Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired Director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre.
George Kukla, retired Professor of Climatology at Columbia University and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.
Hendrik Tennekes, retired Director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University.
William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus and head of The Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University.
William Happer, physicist Princeton University.
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware.
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology.
Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg.
Robert M. Carter, geologist, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia.
Vincent R. Gray, coal chemist, founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.

Ms. Behar, all of these people are distinguished scientists of note (to say the least) … and there are thousands and thousands more who, too, do not buy into the Al Gore fairy tale.

The list continues to grow.

Granted, none of them are Ed Begley, Jr. but they’ll suffice.

Besides, I would ask the Vagina Gal, if warming has an effect on earthquakes, how is it that there is anything still standing in Pheonix, Arizona?

Incidentally, if there’s anything I want to hear less than Joy Behar saying the word “vagina,” I can’t think of it right now.

____

H/T to Weasel Zippers

wordpress statistics

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

AND IT DIDN’T EVEN RHYME

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 17, 2009

It wasn’t exactly an appearance by the Beatles on Ed Sullivan, but CBS’s Harry Smith probably needed to put a towel down, or have an extra change of clothes handy. Not unlike a Frankie-crazed bobbysoxer at the Paramount, or a poodle-skirted Elvis devotee, he was mesmerized, caught in the spell of the hypnotic cadence of Al Gore’s exquisitely haunting  lyrics (or is that hauntingly exquisite?).

True, Smith didn’t scream like a teenaged girl; rather, he seemed almost too anesthetized by Gore’s animal charisma to much more than sigh. It isn’t often that a bona fide journalist (for the want of a better word) has the opportunity to allow himself to succumb to the lilting liquidity of free-verse poetry by a former Vice-President on the air. It was reminiscent of two teenagers sitting at a Denny’s late on a Saturday night – the guy is sitting there, brooding, moody, painfully artistic, reading his poems (or song lyrics) to the girl, who is sitting transfixed, heart fluttering, occassionally finding the composure to mutter an awe-inspired “wow,” thinking how amzingly cute and deep he is.

Such was the case on CBS’s Early Show yesterday when Al Gore sat down with the enchanted Harry Smith and read one of his poems.

Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters writes:

…The 23-year CBS veteran journalist, almost like a teenybopper swooning as she approaches a rock star for an autograph, actually asked the former Vice President to read it to him.

When the Global Warmingist-in-Chief was done, Smith said breathlessly, “Wow. I’m so glad you read that…I’m happy to hear it in your voice.”

Readers are advised that Gore is WAY too busy to discuss climate change with John Stossel, and is WAY too busy to answer questions about ClimateGate.

However, he’s NEVER too busy to read poetry to journalists.

When there are no more arguments to make because the theory of a man-made global warming doomsday has been shot full of holes; when your credibility has disintegrated faster than President Obama’s approval ratings; when you are a laughing stock (even among the scientific community); when the sound most associated with you is that of scornful laughter; when almost no one (outside of the hysterical) wants to hear what you have to say anymore, what can you do?

Go on a TV show and read a poem about how you feel about global warming.

What else?

wordpress statistics

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

IRONY TIMES TWO AT COPENHAGEN

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 15, 2009

The little things in life make it all worthwhile. I find enormous pleasure in things that many would classify as unglamorous, unsophisticated, even banal: sitting on the couch with my wife, doing a jigsaw puzzle, stealing a few precious moments with my ever-active daughters, reading, taking in a Honeymooners marathon, Yodels and Yoo Hoo, so on. I concede that I also get tremendous satisfaction out of seeing the absurdities of life exposed for what they are – particularly when those absurdities have the potential to lead to genuinely destructive actions – like the fraud of a world in danger due to man-made global warming.

As the Climate Change Summit continues in Copenhagen – and the crisis of a globe burning up with fever continue to be championed by the terminally hysterical in attendance – there is something sweetly satisfying and deliciously ironic about seeing a group of journalists standing outside for hours, waiting to get into what is effectively a global warming conference, braving the cold in near-freezing temperatures. It’s fantastically funny to me, not unlike having a line of fat people waiting for free government cheese, or listening to two people screaming over eachother complaining how the other one never listens.

Noel Sheppard at News Busters writes:

A group of journalists stood for many hours in near-freezing temperatures Monday waiting to get into the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen. Marvelously among them was Associated Press science writer Seth Borenstein who regularly reports on the dire consequences of — wait for it! — global warming. Ironically, his articles are so filled with inflammatory hyperbole concerning Nobel Laureate Al Gore’s favorite bogeyman that scientists have denounced him.

But before we get there, the Climate Pool reported at Facebook Monday (h/t Tom Nelson):

With U.N. security letting in only those cleared last week, hundreds of accredited delegates, journalists and NGO representatives were left to stand for hours in near-freezing temperatures before being let through. “It was crazy,” AP’s Seth Borenstein said. “You couldn’t leave the line. You couldn’t go to the bathroom, you couldn’t eat. Then snowflakes started falling. One woman even said, ‘if lightning strikes me, would they take me out of line?'”

Sheppard goes on to say, “As a humorous aside, what Seth [Borenstein] and his fellow journalists could really have used Monday was a little global warming.”

The irony continues tomorrow, incidentally, as Mother Nature herself will be heard from.

Heavy snowfall is predicted for Copenhagen at the Global Warming Conference.

It’s the little things.

wordpress statistics

Posted in global climate change, Global Warming, Junk Science, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

UN SECRETARY GENERAL: IT’S STILL OUR FAULT

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 9, 2009

Ban Ki-moon

In case there was any doubt, denial is alive and well on New York’s east side. It’s where moral cowardice meets intellectual dishonesty. It’s the home of inefficacious propositions, ethically bereft resolutions and unenforceable policies. It’s the home of dashed promises, countless translators and Khrushchev’s shoe.

Ladies and Gentleman, I give you delusion.

I give you the United Nations.

Despite the fact that the world is not getting warmer, the world is still getting warmer … and even though it’s not, it is.

And despite the lack of evidence that carbon dioxide has anything to do with temperature shifts upward, and despite the fact that data has been manipulated to create the desired results, and despite the fact that the overlords of man-made global warming science have purposely excluded dissenting opinion from being peer reviewed, an despite the fact that if mankind had to make the world warmer for the sake of its own survival it could not, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, is undeterred.

Man is still to blame.

Period.

From Reuters:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that emails leaked from a British university have done nothing to undermine the United Nations’ view that climate change is accelerating due to humans.

“Nothing that has come out in the public as a result of the recent email hackings has cast doubt on the basic scientific message on climate change and that message is quite clear — that climate change is happening much, much faster than we realized and we human beings are the primary cause,” he said.

Well, that settles it then.

Ban Ki-moon says that humans are the primary cause of climate change – more so than the sun – so it must be true.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, United Nations | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

BIG THREE NETWORKS: WHAT HACKED E-MAILS?

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 3, 2009

Please raise your hand if you are at all surprised at the big three network’s complete and utter dismissal of the “Climategate” fiasco. (I suspect that if it were possible for me to see all of you, there wouldn’t be a single elevated arm in the room). While Senator Barbara Boxer urges the public to focus on the real evil of Climategate – namely, the “conspiracy” involving criminal hackers who breeched the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit computers – the alphabet wing of the “drive-by” media (as Rush Limbaugh calls them) won’t even get in the car on this story, let alone drive by.

In short, ABC, CBS and NBC are not just short-changing the American public on the ever-unfolding scandal, they are ignoring it completely. While White House gatecrashers snag every headline across the map, the unraveling of arguably the greatest science scandal of all time has warranted nothing. While the extramarital affairs of golf’s greatest hero saturate the morning and evening news programs, there hasn’t been as much as a polar bear’s burp worth of time devoted to the crumbling of the man-made climate change castle.

As I wrote last week in my article, “Mainstream Media: What Global Warming Hoax?“:

Indeed, this is a story that ought to be plastered across every front page of the world. This charade, which has been called the greatest threat facing humanity and has been inculcated into every orifice of western culture for the better part of two decades, should have bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young Bob Woodwards itching to get out there to make their journalistic bones.

Sadly, it doesn’t.

And while all the time in the world is being spent on the “Global Climate Summit” in Copenhagen next week, the fraudulent science behind the summit – and the uncovering of e-mails between the movement’s main players seemingly confirming it – have yet to be acknowledged.

Julia A. Seymour at the Media and Business Institute writes:

It’s been nearly two weeks since a scandal shook many people’s faith in the scientists behind global warming alarmism. The scandal forced the University of East Anglia (UK) to divulge that it threw away raw temperature data and prompted the temporary resignation of Phil Jones of the university’s Climate Research Unit.

Despite that resignation and calls by a U.S. senator to investigate the matter, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news programming has remained silent – not mentioning a word about the scandal since it broke on Nov. 20, even as world leaders including President Barack Obama prepare to meet in Copenhagen, Denmark next week to promote a pact to reduce greenhouse gases.

Other news outlets, including The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and Associated Press have deemed ClimateGate worthy of reporting, but the networks were too busy reporting on celebrity car accidents and the killer whale that ate a great white shark. Instead of airing a broadcast news segment that might inform the public about the science scandal, both ABC and CBS relegated the story to their Web sites. There was one mention of the scandal on ABC’s Sunday talk show: “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

One can only imagine the hullabaloo if, hypothetically, the hacked e-mails of CRU were discovered to be bogus. If it turned out, for example, that the e-mails were created by a band of disgruntled scientists who were angry at not receiving a beaucoup of grant money like the global warming big boys (because, after all, there is no money in denying global warming), the alphabets would be all over it like Joe Biden on dumb. Round the clock coverage of Tiger Woods’ infidelity might even seen a break over that one.

As it is, this may be the biggest story to be ignored since Saddam Hussein’s food-for-oil scandal.

And why is it so big?

Because the religion of man-made global warming is poised to change the way the entire world functions on almost every level of existence. The belief that the earth is in peril because of human activity, and the actions that will be taken by hysterical alarmists to combat it, without a stitch of proof, will literally reshape the entire world’s economy and spawn a plethora of policies that will cripple prosperity and productivity. It is an imposition of blind faith through stringent regulations and free-market killing initiatives. It is a form of tyranny, based on a phantom crisis, that will erode liberty, impede progress, and put countless people out of work while conferring the kind of power on government that would make a totalitarian blush with envy.

Personally, I couldn’t care less if every one of these enviro-fascists believe the world is fixed to come to a horrific end in thirty years (or whatever the latest timetable to doomsday is). It doesn’t matter to me if they believe the planet will die because there are too many SUVs on the roads or because my toilet tissue has too many plys to it – the same way it doesn’t matter to me if there are religious people who believe Judgment Day is three years away.

The difference, however, is that the beliefs of the conventionally religious, as irrational as they may appear to some, will not shatter entire economies. Belief that the world is six-thousand years old, for instance, harms no one else, whereas levying exorbitant taxes on corporations that go over their allotted limit of greenhouse gas emissions because of fraudulent, politically-driven, pseudo-science will do irreparable damage.

The myth of global warming will do more harm than the fairy-tale calamities dreamed up by the global warming scaremongers.

I would like to take this opportunity to tell the enviro-fascists where they can stick their squiggly light-bulbs, but then I might be accused of lobbying for proctologists.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

LOST DATA, PHONY SCIENCE

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 29, 2009

And so it turns out, perhaps not surprisingly, that much of the raw data amassed from weather stations across the globe over the years – the very data which has been used to codify and forecast an impending global warming catastrophe – is forever lost. That means the conclusions drawn by doomsayers based on that now long gone data cannot be checked or “peer reviewed” by other academics. Scientists at University of East Anglia (UEA), the womb from where the current “climategate” scandal was born, announced that the raw numbers were thrown away.

The words “How Convenient” come to mind.

Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor of the Times Online, writes:

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

If nothing else, in the name of “science,” wouldn’t it just make sense to wipe the “Earth-is-in-peril” climactic slate clean and start over? In light of the current scandal, and seeing as the only data available for review are “adjusted” or “revised” figures, isn’t it more reasonable to conclude that dire global warming predictions are, at best, questionable and worthy of a “reset?” Wouldn’t it seem to be appropriate for man-made global warming skeptics (who are willing to admit that they may be wrong) to team up with global warming militants (who believe they cannot possibly be wrong) and try and make heads or tails of all of this “settled science” through credible means?
wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

MAINSTREAM MEDIA: WHAT GLOBAL WARMING HOAX?

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 27, 2009

There can be no doubt whatsoever that if a series of e-mails between high-level government officials was duvulged suggesting that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were an inside job (as many 9/11-truthers religiously believe) the entirety of the media and entertainment complex would be set on its ever-loving ear.

Such a story would consume all means of news dissemination known to mankind. It would devour all broadcast media airtime. The number of trees that would lose their lives in order to accommodate a frantic print media would make Ed Begley, Jr’s skull rupture. There wouldn’t be enough bandwidth available to handle the overload of slavering conspiracists, outraged mouse-clickers and pajama-wearing blog spinsters. The shockwaves of such a capacious deception would be felt in every corner of the world. Every news outlet in possession of at least one stenographer’s pad and ball point pen would dispatch their slimiest, most-aggressive, most-implacable investigative reporters to do as much digging as their insatiable journalistic appetites (or the limits of the law) would allow.

As it should be.

What, then, can be said of the latest – and, by far, the greatest – evidence (outside of the climate itself) that the man-made global warming threat is an indubitable hoax of epic proportion? If the mainstream media of the United States is any indication, not too much. Although the blades of the global warming windmill are falling off the spindle quicker than a polar bear from an Arctic ice chunk, the East Anglia “Climategate” e-mails are still being characterized (if they’re even mentioned at all) by the mainstreamies as no big deal – examples of some unfortunate, inside-baseball stuff taken out of context by a hacker. The significance of the damning e-mails is greatly exaggerated according to those who know, despite every bit of evidence to the contrary, that the Earth faces untold calamities due to global warming – even though it isn’t warming. They are frantically, desperately fighting to save the ship despite the fact that the ship is doing perfectly well, taking on no water and under no threat.

It is surreal.

Indeed, this is a story that ought to be plastered across every front page of the world. This charade, which has been called the greatest threat facing humanity and has been inculcated into every orifice of western culture for the better part of two decades, should have bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young Bob Woodwards itching to get out there to make their journalistic bones. The exposure (and confirmation) of this epic myth should have the world’s press banging at the door of Al Gore demanding to know what the hell is going on. The ferocious push by world leaders, brainwashed bootlickers, frightened backscratchers and brain-dead ideologues over the past two decades to literally change the face of the global economy based on absolutely unproven, unsubstantiated, phony, agenda-driven junk-science is such that this story should be the biggest since 9/11. It should be told at every corner of the globe and be called precisely what it is – the final clincher of the greatest hoax ever to be thrust upon humankind.

But it isn’t.

Not yet.

Maybe soon.

It’s getting there.

I hope.

Gerald Warner of the UK Telegraph has an interesting perspective:

Just a few considerations in addition to previous remarks about the explosion of the East Anglia Climategate e-mails in America. The reaction is growing exponentially there. Fox News, Barack Obama’s Nemesis, is now on the case, trampling all over Al Gore’s organic vegetable patch and breaking the White House windows. It has extracted some of the juiciest quotes from the e-mails and displayed them on-screen, with commentaries. Joe Public, coast-to-coast, now knows, thanks to the clowns at East Anglia’s CRU, just how royally he has been screwed.

At this rate, Copenhagen is going to turn into a comedy convention with the real world laughing at these liars. Now is the time to mount massive resistance to the petty tyrants and hit them where it hurts – in the wallet. Further down the line there may be, in many countries, a question of criminal prosecution of anybody who has falsified data to secure funds and impose potentially disastrous fiscal restraints on the world in deference to a massive hoax. It’s a new world out there, Al [Gore], and, as you may have noticed, the climate is very cold indeed.

It would be quite nice, in a more perfect world – or at least one commandeered by common sense – to believe that this greatest of all swindles could serve to open the eyes of the indoctrinated climate-change zealots heading to Copenhagen in December, but I have no such allusions. Even if the very airplanes bringing some of these doomsayers to Denmark for the Climate Conference wound up being held over because the wings needed to be de-iced, it wouldn’t change the thinking. It is “settled science,” after all. The debate is long since over. Global warming remains mankind’s greatest danger. The science is as certain as ever – even though scientists are baffled as to why the world has been cooling over the last ten years.

And while my local weatherman can’t seem to get the weekend weather forecast quite right, we are to believe these eco-fascists somehow know for certain what will be happening in thirty years.

And although not a single “global warming” computer model predicted the current ten-year cooling trend, we are to believe these enviro-brown shirts can predict the doom of the planet.

From the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal yesterday:

But the furor over these documents is not about tone, colloquialisms or even whether climatologists are nice people in private. The real issue is what the messages say about the way the much-ballyhooed scientific consensus on global warming was arrived at in the first place, and how even now a single view is being enforced. In short, the impression left by the correspondence among Messrs. Mann and Jones and others is that the climate-tracking game has been rigged from the start.

According to this privileged group, only those whose work has been published in select scientific journals, after having gone through the “peer-review” process, can be relied on to critique the science. And sure enough, any challenges that critics have lobbed at climatologists from outside this clique are routinely dismissed and disparaged.

This past September, Mr. Mann told a New York Times reporter in one of the leaked emails that: “Those such as [Stephen] McIntyre who operate almost entirely outside of this system are not to be trusted.” Mr. McIntyre is a retired Canadian businessman who fact-checks the findings of climate scientists and often publishes the mistakes he finds—including some in Mr. Mann’s work—on his Web site, Climateaudit.org. He holds the rare distinction of having forced Mr. Mann to publish a correction to one of his more-famous papers.

An encouraging note:

In Australia yesterday, five Liberal Party frontbenchers resigned their portfolios because they could not, in good conscience, vote for that country’s equivalent of Cap and Trade – the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

Meanwhile, with President Obama preparing for his departure to Copenhagen on December 9th, there are still too few Americans who know the details of this story – if they’ve even heard it at all – or its implications. There are too many in the United States who get their information from lock-step, liberal conventional wisdom conveyed to them through the tentacles of popular culture. Fox News is, indeed, covering the story to a certain extent, but it is otherwise being largely ignored by the rest of the alphabets and sycophants.

Surprise, surprise.

Incidentally, you may recall that not too long ago British Prime Minister Gordon Brown warned us that the world had a mere fifty days to save itself from certain global-warming induced doom.

How time flies.

There are only eleven days left.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

THE EARTH IS NOT COOPERATING, DAMMIT

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 19, 2009

Is there anything more aggravating than having someone you have defended tirelessly turn on you? Is there anything worse than having someone you did your best to protect with every fiber of your being play Judas? Can the words “betrayal” and “disloyalty” even begin to cover it? Can anything be more distressing? More shocking? Sure, we can expect such things from false friends, jealous co-workers, jilted lovers oand angry siblings. We can anticipate such behavior from our elected officials, our bosses, and even, on occassion, our spouses. But from our planet?

Et tu, earth?

How in the world can the impending calamity of a planet ravaged by the effects of man-made global warming be taken seriously if the damn planet won’t even get warm anymore?

Scientists are baffled.

Gerald Traufetter at Speigel Online writes:

Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents.

At least the weather in Copenhagen is likely to be cooperating. The Danish Meteorological Institute predicts that temperatures in December, when the city will host the United Nations Climate Change Conference, will be one degree above the long-term average.

Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium, and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.

Ironically, climate change appears to have stalled in the run-up to the upcoming world summit in the Danish capital, where thousands of politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, business leaders and environmental activists plan to negotiate a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Billions of euros are at stake in the negotiations.

Well, thank goodness Copenhagen has fallen in line.

First of all, I am struck by the incongruity of the third passage of the Speigel article. Traufetter states that the planet’s average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium – which, as far as I can tell means they are no longer going up. That’s what “stopped” means, if I am any judge of the word “stop.” Then, in the next sentence he says, “it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.”

If warming, by definition, means a rise in temperatures, and if temperatures have “stopped” rising since the start of the millennium, how could it look as though global warming might come to a standstill this year? Didn’t it already “stop” getting warmer at the beginning of the millennium? Isn’t “stop” a synonym for “standstill?” And seeing as temperatures haven’t been climbing for almost a decade, is it still possible for the earth to be warming? If so, how?

Poor hysterical doomsdayers. Nothing is working out for them.

Damn the planet for not cooperating!

And it sounds as if this disobliging ball of climactic confusion is breaking the hearts of the ever-loyal enviro-wackos.

Meteorologist Mojib Latif, one of Germany’s best-known climatologists, confirmed that “warming is taking a break.” It’s a clever cover-your-backside kind of thing to say considering the earth’s temperatures have always been cyclical. At some point, warming will always take a break, just like cooling will always take a break. (Think Ice Age, before there were SUVs and CFCs).

On the realization that the world is not getting warmer, as hasn’t for ten years, Latif said, “We have to face that fact.”

He sounded depressed.

“It cannot be denied that this is one of the hottest issues in the scientific community,” says Jochem Marotzke, director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg. “We don’t really know why this stagnation is taking place at this point.”

Not a single computer model predicted this “non-warming” trend, incidentally.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PLANET?

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 16, 2009

71A short one-question quiz.

What significance does the number 71 have in relation to President Barack H. Obama?

Take your time.

It isn’t a trick question.

No, it’s not the number of “trillions” that will comprise the national debt once he’s done bankrupting the nation’s future. No, it’s not the number of times he used the words “I” or “me” during his recent “Fall of the Berlin Wall” pre-recorded speech. It isn’t the number of people turned in by fellow citizens during President Obama’s “Please Snitch on Anyone Who Talks Bad About My Health Care Plan” initiative earlier this year. It isn’t the amount of apologies he’s issued for the sins of his own country. It isn’t the amount of teleprompters he has in tow whenever he speaks. It isn’t the amount of times he has bowed to foreign heads of state. It isn’t even how many states he thinks make up the United States.

It is, in fact, the number of vehicles that made of Barack Obama’s motorcade as he traveled from Beijing airport.

Seventy-one!

Of course, I’m no climactic virtuoso (like, say, Al Gore or Leonardo DiCaprio), but unless those cars were powered by an army of hamsters under the hood, I’m guessing that motorcade must’ve been a veritable orgy of greenhouse gas emissions.

Not that it matters to me, mind you, but isn’t that one hell of a carbon footprint?

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

CAN THE UNITED NATIONS JUST SHUT UP … OR GO AWAY …OR SOMETHING

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 2, 2009

No UNI don’t recall the last the time the United Nations – the organization that puts terrorist nations on its Human Rights Council and condemns Israel with as much regularity as a teleprompter-free Barack Obama says, “uh” – took the moral high road and stood up for anything. I can’t remember when I was able to use the word “strength” and “courage” in the same sentence as the United Nations, other than to praise Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for his magnificent speech there in September. The “body” that was created to prevent such atrocities as the Holocaust from ever happening again has afforded the world’s most dangerous terrorists, murderers, and violators of human rights a forum from which to spew their disgusting lies and hateful rhetoric. It is the Woodstock of moral depravity.

Of course, I say this from the perspective of one who believes it is the moral obligation of human beings to fight and defeat evil.

Others, unfortunately, don’t subscribe to that value system – or if they do, their definition of “evil” is often considerably different than my own.

Thus, if one believes the defining of evil is better approached as a subjective matter (i.e., one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter), then the United Nations really has nothing to stand up for – that is, aside from the universally accepted “evils” that are beyond deliberation, like global warming and climate change.

Those “evils” are given.

Trivialities (and inconveniences) such as ethnic cleansing, missile launches into civilian populations, and gross human rights violations simply don’t ruffle the feathers of the United Nations.

However, if one can somehow squeeze in the words “carbon emissions” or “climate change” into the discussion, there aren’t enough sandbags in all the world to hold back the fury to come.

The United Nation’s Climate Chief – a title that sounds as if it has to be made up – is drawing on his inner George S. Patton, saying that December’s global climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark had not only better yield an agreement that will save the planet from sure destruction, but it had better be enforceable.

Arthur Max of the Associated Press writes:

Developing countries don’t trust wealthy nations’ promises that they will help them meet the challenges of climate change, the U.N.’s top climate official said Monday, adding that means any new global warming deal must have legal force.

The legal status of an agreement and whether nations will be sanctioned for failing to meet their commitments are contentious issues in talks on controlling the world’s emissions of carbon and other heat-raising greenhouse gases.

“We live in a world of broken promises,” said Yvo de Boer, the U.N. climate chief, told The Associated Press. Developing countries are concerned “they will commit to targets and not deliver.”

He spoke as negotiators resumed work Monday on a draft agreement for approval at a major U.N. conference next month in the Danish capital of Copenhagen.

Actually, we live in world of twisted morality and warped value systems, Mr. Climate Chief.

“We expect the United States to be able to deliver on one of the major challenges of our century,” said Danish Environment Minister Connie Hedegaard, who will chair the Copenhagen meeting.

Hedegaard noted that President Barack Obama will be receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in the neighboring country of Norway on Dec. 10 — just as the decisive climate conference is under way.

“It’s very hard to imaging how the American president can receive the Nobel prize for his contributions to hope in the world … and at the same time has sent an empty-handed delegation to Copenhagen,” said the Danish minister.

The bills in Congress would commit the U.S. to reduce emissions of carbon and other greenhouse gases by 17 to 20 percent from 2005 levels.

Ah, yes. The President of the United States did, in fact, win the Nobel Peace Prize. I should have remembered that. As I recall, it had something to do with “hope” and “change” or some other utterly meaningless hyperbole that has literally contributed nothing repeat, nothing – to peace.

lucky charmsI cannot help but wonder if the children of Israel, who had to contend with terrorist missiles raining down on their neighborhoods, managed to summon at least a little bit of that Obama “hope” as the weapons fell from the sky.

If not, what the hell was wrong with them?

And note that Mr. Hedegaard specifically pointed out how difficult it would be to fathom a Nobel Peace Prize winner, like Barack Obama, not bringing back an American-economy crippling, climate saving bill to Copenhagen next month – further proof, that the bogus prize was handed out not because of the impressive accomplishments of the one-time Community Organizer from Chicago, but as a call from leftist Europe as to what is expected of him.

Using history as our guide, take a moment and contemplate this question …

If greenhouse gases actually were a problem, and if they could be personified, would they have anything to worry about at all?

This is, after all, the United Nations we’re talking about.

The Lucky Charms leprechaun is quicker to intimidate than the UN.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, United Nations | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

THE SIGNS ARE EVERYWHERE

Posted by Andrew Roman on October 31, 2009

A week ago today, thousands of people across the globe participated in a “Global Day of Action” to “encourage world leaders to help stop climate change.” (You must have read about it). According to the Toronto Sun, “the events kicked off in Australia, where thousands of people formed a large “350” number with their bodies in front of the famous Sydney opera house and displayed placards with the number on the hotspot Bondi Beach.” (That’s because these events were put together by a group called 350.org, a band of hysterical doomsdayers hell-bent on reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the air to 350 parts per million from the current planet-slaying total of 387. Clever, yes?)

Meanwhile, in Denver, Colorado, the biggest October storm to hit in twelve years is crippling the metropolitan area. As much as two feet of snow is on the ground in some areas.

Also worth mentioning is the fact that Nebraska and Kansas experienced blizzard conditions yesterday as the global warming freight train came barreling through.

Just sayin’.
wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

A WHOLE LOT OF FOOTPRINTS

Posted by Andrew Roman on September 23, 2009

un headquartersIndeed, these are the types of stories that so flow with delectable irony that to comment on them seems almost like cheating.

Still, I haven’t the willpower to resist.

If the ever-worsening condition of the planet due to man-made global warming can be quantified in part by the global footprints we leave behind through our actions, then this week in New York City is helping to assure that there is no hope whatsoever for our ailing globe. As world leaders gather in the Big Apple to address the ever-nauseating, never-relevant United Nations Summit on Climate Change, the carbon footprints these environmental warriors are leaving behind is nothing short of catastrophic – if you are inclined to hysteria.

Mark Knoller at Political Hotsheet writes:

It happens every autumn: midtown Manhattan becomes the motorcade capital of the world. Each foreign leader in town has a convoy of vehicles. Some of them, like President Obama’s motorcade, are 20-to-30 vehicles in length. It’s so long – it seems that when the front of it reaches the U.N., the back end is still back at his hotel.

Exacerbating the annual exercise in diplomatic gridlock are police actions, blocking intersections and closing streets for security to facilitate motorcade movements. It renders countless other vehicles immobile while waiting for motorcades to pass, their engines idling but still blowing exhaust into the midtown air

Does it undermine the goal of the climate change summit and cause the pledges of environmental concern to ring hollow?

Asked about it, White House climate change negotiator Todd Sterns had a suggestion.

“I think the U.N. should make a pledge to electric vehicle motorcades within five years,” he said.

Right. As soon as all U.N. diplomats pay their parking tickets.

Former Vice President Al Gore, purported to be on his private jet heading for a Global Warming symposium, could not be reached for comment.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

CLAY BLOCKS AND SHEEP’S WOOL

Posted by Andrew Roman on September 22, 2009

Do as I say, not as I do

Do as I say, not as I do

If you haven’t done so already, please stop whatever you’re doing, suspend anything and everything you may be involved in – except reading this particular blog entry, of course – and heed the words you are about to ingest. Those of you who choose to waste their focus and concerns on such passe things as the War Against Islamo-Fascism (or other right-wing concoctions) not only directly place the lives of their fellow human beings in imminent peril, but also threaten the very well-being and future of the planet.

There are real issues to tend to.

It isn’t about good versus evil. Rather, it is about green versus brown, cold versus hot, envirnomentalism versus dastardly capitalism.

With our globe hanging in the balance, thanks to the ongoing ravages being inflicted on the planet by humankind, the latest admonishions from Great Britian’s foremost thinker and climatologist, Prince Charles, are as relevant as ever. His warning is racing around the globe like angry greenhouse gas molecules on steroids.

We had best pay attention.

The future King of England is urging humans, wherever they may roam – in the name of reducing crabin emissions – to abandon their motor cars in favor of public transportation and walking.

Andrew Pierce from the Telegraph.UK website writes:

The Prince, who has two Jaguars, two Audis, a Range Rover and still drives an Aston Martin given to him by the Queen on his 21st birthday, said developers had a duty to put public transport and the pedestrian at the heart of their housing schemes.
Speaking about the “domination of the car over the pedestrian”, the future King said: “We must surely be able to organise ourselves… in ways in which we are not dependent on it to such a great extent for our daily needs.”

The Prince said the principle of “elevating the pedestrian above the car” was one of the guiding factors of Poundbury – his model development in Dorset. The importance of “pedestrian friendly public space” is central to the Poundbury ethos.

He said that his architectural charity – the Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment – was creating a “natural house” using green materials such as clay blocks and sheep’s wool for insulation. It is taking shape at the Building Research Establishment’s Innovation Park in Watford.

Did you catch that? Clay blocks and sheep’s wool.

Splendid.

And seeing as nothing quite brings home the point better than leading by example, it is not unreasonable to inquire of the Prince how long the transformation from stone and brick to mud and fur will take at Buckingham Palace?

What, pray tell, oh future King of England, are the electricity bills at Buckingham Palace each month?

Is the bathroom tissue at the Palace (or on your jet, or on your yacht) single-ply, easily-degradable, restaurant-grade paper, oh King-to-be?

And do you use only one square at a time?

As one blogger wrote, “When was the last time this pampered pooch walked anywhere?”

Another wrote, “On your bike, mate!”

Perfect.

In other news, the world is not warming, it has been a very quiet Atlantic hurricane season, and Michael Jackson is still dead.

Posted in environmentalism, Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

CLIMATE CHALLENGE

Posted by Andrew Roman on August 20, 2009

HARDtalk

I would like to take an enormous “attaboy” out of petty cash and present it to Stephen Sackur of the BBC.

Yes, the BBC.

I know this little morsel is currently making its way across the blogosphere, but it was only brought to my attention earlier today, thanks to Dennis Prager’s radio program. (Isn’t it annoying how work can keep one from updating one’s blog?)

A little over a month ago, the activist organization Greenpeace – led by Gerd Leipold – put out a press release saying that the humanity-induced catastrophe of global warming is advancing with such ferocity that in another twenty-one years, Arctic ice will be nothing but a memory.

And since Leipold is the top dog at Greenpeace, it is not unreasonable to presume that he would probably have final approval of (or at the very least be aware of) any official statements put out by the organization – including that one.

Among the other declarations, predictions and recitations of impending doom in the July 15th press release was this one:

As permanent ice decreases, we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030.

Thanks to a brief but voracious outbreak of genuine journalism at the BBC, Stephen Sackur of HARDtalk was able to get Leipold to not only admit that the absurd claim of disappearing Arctic ice was probably not true, but that emotionalizing an issue (or “scare tactics,” as Mr. Sackur suggests) is employed by Greenpeace as a means to an end.

Here was a portion of the exchange:

SACKUR: But when you, in one of your press releases that I read, on July 15th say this – and this Greenpeace’s own press release – “As permanent ice decreases, we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030,” I mean that is just plain misleading, isn’t it?

LEIPOLD: I don’t think that it’s plain misleading. I know that there’s uncertainties. I’m a climate scientist myself.

SACKUR: But the Arctic includes the Greenland ice sheet. I mean, the Greenland ice sheet is in the Arctic. That’s not going to melt by 2030. That’s preposterous.

LEIPOLD: The Greenland ice sheet is already retreating, and the people there can tell it.

SACKUR: Forgive me, the Greenland ice sheet, from where I have just come, is 1.6 square kilometers. It is three kilometers thick in the middle. It’s been there for hundreds of thousands of years. It’s survived previous warming periods much warmer than we see today or will see tomorrow. There is no way that ice sheet is going to disappear.

LEIPOLD: What we have said, by and large, over the last twenty years, I think, was wise and was rational and reasonable to it. And we were confronted with a world, unfortunately, (that) only recently has woken up to it. And we – as a pressure group – have to emotionalize issues. We are not ashamed of emotionalizing issues. I think it’s a fact.

SACKUR: You call it emotionalizing. Others would call it “scare tactics.” Will you sit here now and tell me, in all honesty, that you do not that the Greenland ice sheet is going to melt by 2030?

LEIPOLD: I don’t know. I don’t think it will be melting by 2030.

SACKUR: So, in fact, would you say that it was a mistake for your organization to put that out?

LEIPOLD: It may have been a mistake. I don’t know this specific press release. I do not check every press release.”

Apparently, the head of Greenpeace has more important matters to tend to than being cognizant of what the organization he runs is saying publicly in press releases. He’d probably say he’s not a micromanager. He delegates.

To be fair, he may have been preoccupied with moving his personal effects from his basement to his attic in preparation of the raging flood waters that are on the way thanks to the melting Artic ice.

Frankly, Mr. Leipold looked like a deer in headlights, frightfully unprepared and ill-equipped to deal with a professional – much like the current New York Mets lineup.

Here is a video of the exchange:

In a related story, according to the Copenhagen Post, dated 19 August:

“The Foreign Ministry has cancelled 20,000 overnight hotel reservations meant for people attending the United Nations Climate Change Conference in December. The move is expected to cost the hotel industry about 40 million kroner in lost revenue. The ministry described the cancellations as a natural ‘adjustment’. But Thomas Færgeman, the director of environmental think tank Concito, was concerned the government had lost confidence that it could broker a ground-breaking climate and had therefore lowered expectations as to how many participants were expected.”

It probably had nothing to do with the fact that more and more people are coming to the realization that global warming, i.e. climate change, is (thus far) the 21st Century’s biggest farce – next to Al Sharpton and MSNBC.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

IT’S HUMANITY – ALWAYS HAS BEEN

Posted by Andrew Roman on August 18, 2009

From the beginning, it's been us

From the beginning, it's been us

It’s about time someone came out and said it. It’s about time someone had the courage to step up to the plate and say what so many of us have been thinking. There’s a certain kind of vindication – a feeling of exoneration and, yes, even victory – in having something corroborated that you’ve always known to be true in your heart, but couldn’t prove – namely, that man’s very existence causes global warming.

While I have no plans to immediately slit my own wrists, there’s no question that I deserve it.

As do you.

And we all owe it to the Earth.

From The Economist:

Anthropogenic global warming started when people began farming.

Imagine a small group of farmers tending a rice paddy some 5,000 years ago in eastern Asia or sowing seeds in a freshly cleared forest in Europe a couple of thousand years before that. It is here, a small group of scientists would have you believe, that humanity launched climate change. Long before the Industrial Revolution—indeed, long before a worldwide revolution in intensive farming, the results of which kept humanity alive—people caused unnatural exhalations of greenhouse gases that had an impact on the world’s climate.

It looks as if humanity has been interfering with the climate since the dawn of civilisation.

While there is so much begging to be said, is there anything that can remotely hold a candle to the notion that human exhalations of carbon dioxide can be considered “unnatural?”

Naturally, my first question would be … What level of human exhalation would have been more “natural?”

It’s not unlike asking a global warming hysteric, “What should the temperature be right now?”

Of course, global warming nutcases, climate change screwballs, and environmentalist whackjobs view humanity itself as being unnatural.

The totality of all existence is natural except humanity.

Posted in environmentalism, Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

SHE’S ALSO SORRY, BY THE WAY

Posted by Andrew Roman on July 20, 2009

hillary clinton

I’m not sure exactly if it is a prerequisite for all members of Obama’s Transformation Team, nor can I say for sure whether or not special “groveling” seminars were attended by Obamacrats looking to score points, but this getting beyong ridiculous. I, for one, am getting more than a little tired of having to hear high-ranking members of the United States government either apologize, express regret, or otherwise place “blame” on this country for “mistakes” made in the past – and on foreign soil, yet!

It is already well-known the President himself has mastered the art of diplomatic anguish, but now Americans are getting the opportunity to see other Obamacrats in action.

It’s Hillary’s turn.

Being an imperialist, war-hungry state hell-bent on imposing values on other nations is one thing. But contributing to the ruination of the planet due to the crippling effects of man-made Global Warming is another entirely.

Robert Burns of the Associated Press writes:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton opened a three-day visit to India on Saturday by urging India not to repeat American mistakes in contributing to global pollution, and she passionately defended U.S. demands for help in fighting terrorism.

“We acknowledge now with President Obama that we have made mistakes in the United States, and we along with other developed countries have contributed most significantly to the problem that we face with climate change,” she said. “We are hoping a great country like India will not make the same mistakes.”

She was referring to Obama’s statement in Italy earlier this month that the U.S. had “sometimes fallen short” of its responsibilities in controlling its carbon emissions.

Sources have confirmed that that the solar-powered, enviro-friendly wind barge she was to take to India last week was still undergoing repairs.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

MOUNT DOPEMORE

Posted by Andrew Roman on July 9, 2009

global warming on mount rushmore

There is not a scintilla of courage to be found in taking the position that the planet is in grave danger due to the effects of man-made global warming. There is nothing honorable or gallant in taking the public stance that humankind is placing the planet in peril due to the destructive effects of climate change. It takes no heroism to run blindly with the cackling mob on this overplayed, over-hyped, hysterically concocted hoax of a matter, especially when the hypothesis is wholly unproven and the so-called science behind it is little more than the proliferation of a wacko political agenda – just the latest disaster waiting to wipe out humanity (and the planet).

Yet, according to Greenpeace USA Deputy Campaigns Director Carroll Muffett, it’s precisely “courage” that will be needed if President Barack Obama is actually going to get off his waffle and lead the fight to nip global warming right on it’s globe-destroying ass.

My only real question is … If the continued trend of decreasing global temperatures is not to be considered the most relevant indication that man-made global warming is not happening, then what is?

What precisely is the perfect temperature for 9 July 2009 at 8:00PM in the evening in New York City? What is the “right” condition for this date and time?

Maybe we should ask the Greenpeace activists in South Dakota who were arrested for hanging a large banner next to the face of Abraham Lincoln on Mount Rushmore yesterday.

The read: “America Honors Leaders, Not Politicians. Stop Global Warming.”

Isn’t that just delicious?

(Note that the words “Climate Change” were not used).

From the AFP:

Greenpeace activists were arrested Wednesday for scaling Mount Rushmore and hanging a banner next to the carved face of Abraham Lincoln urging President Barack Obama to get tough on climate change.

A video posted on the environmental group’s website showed the massive banner hanging on the South Dakota mountain face.

“Doing what it takes to solve global warming demands real political courage,” Greenpeace USA deputy campaigns director Carroll Muffett said in a statement.

“If President Obama intends to earn a place among this country’s true leaders, he needs to show that courage, and base his actions on the scientific reality rather than political convenience.”

Courage.

*cough*

The protest comes as Obama meets with other G8 leaders in Italy.

G8 leaders agreed to bear the brunt of steep global cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, saying developed countries should reduce their pollution by 80 percent by 2050, a summit declaration said.

Greenpeace said the 11 climbers “took special care not to damage the monument, using existing anchors placed by the National Park Service for periodic cleaning.”

There is simply no courage in modern liberalism.

Where is the fearlessness in today’s class of mainstream media potato-heads who overwhelmingly exist to promote the liberal agenda and do nothing to question what is only, at best, hysterical speculation?

Where is the bravery among Hollywood types who exist in a cocoon of single-minded, lock-step leftism, bellowing adamantly in friendly surroundings about the impending demise of Earth?

What kind of guts does it take to clench one’s fist and roar in favor of a stylish cause from among a crowd of stylish drones when not a single bit of scientific evidence supports the manmade global warming hoax?

(I’ll take caller six).

In other news, the month of June was the sixth coldest on Record in Boston, the coldest in Chicago in 40 years, the coldest since 1958 in New York, and the 7th coldest on record in Rapid City, South Dakota – which is about ten miles or so from Mount Rushmore.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

THAT’S COOL – NUMBER EIGHT WITH A BULLET

Posted by Andrew Roman on July 6, 2009

The Untouchables and The Twilight Zone were still a year away, but Chuck Berry’s all-time classic “Johnny B. Goode” was new and burning up turntables across the map. Marilyn Monroe, Jimmy Hoffa and Elvis Presley were still alive. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was born. And yes, the damn New York Yankees won yet another World Series.

It was also the year that brought the coolest month of June to New York City in thirty years.

It was 1958.

In fact, beginning in 1929, there hadn’t been a New York City June any cooler than the one that gripped the five boroughs that year.

So, what’s my point?

Just a quick exercise in dealing with reality.

Can you guess which year brought the second coolest June to the Big Apple since 1929? 

(insert drumroll here

If you said 2009, you are the winner. Take a hip-hip-hooray out of petty cash.

That’s right – this year has brought the second coolest June to New York City in eighty years.

As traitors and turncoats to planet Earth continue to deny that the world hangs perilously in the balance thanks to the imminent dangers of man-made global warming, temperatures last month averaged only 67.5 degrees Fahrenheit here – the eighth coolest June since four years after the Civil War ended.

But don’t allow things like cooler temperature readings blind you to the realities of a planet see-sawing precariously over the pits of ineluctable destruction.

Thank God human beings are causing temperatures across the globe to rise to near catastrophic levels. Thank goodness man-made global warming is propelling the Earth to almost irreparable levels of damage.

New York City might have been debilitated with the coming of a premature, crippling ice age otherwise.

Only human selfishness, indulgence and the thirst for profits helped to save us this time.

Freon, lead cans and Pampers for all!

Posted in Junk Science, Liberalism, Science | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

I CONFESS

Posted by Andrew Roman on June 30, 2009

Paul Krugman - the anti-traitor

Paul Krugman - the anti-traitor

For those who may have suspected as much – particularly my friends on the left who regularly send me heartfelt e-mails and love notes – I must now confess to something that I have held in hard denial for the duration of my conservative life. The time has come – finally – to throw off the shackles of refutation that have crippled me intellectually and allow some much needed illumination to cut through my self-imposed narrow-mindedness, i.e. conservatism.

With the help of master leftist and hysterically agenda-driven economist (and columnist) Paul Krugman, I can now admit, without reservation, that I possess a treasonous streak.

That’s right, a treasonous streak.

Indeed, I am a traitor to my country – and yes, my planet.

There, I said it.

I am an honest-to-goodness turncoat to Mother Earth – and thanks to Krugman, I am now able to own up to it.

In his New York Times column yesterday, he set the record straight, writing about those who dared to vote against the so-called global warming “Cap-and-Trade” bill in the House – and by extention, all of us who have denied the man-made global warming threat:

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.

In other words, we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself. How can anyone justify failing to act?

Still, is it fair to call climate denial a form of treason? Isn’t it politics as usual?

Yes, it is — and that’s why it’s unforgivable.

Wow, unforgivable.

Gone are the quaint old days when dissent was deemed patriotic. Washed away into the scrap heap of history are the days when opposing the party in charge was considered a healthy thing.

Welcome to the splendor of the Obamacratic Age, where striding out of lockstep with those in power – those whose goal it is to fundamentally transform the United States into the United Statists – is now considered betrayal.

Democrat Congressman Henry Waxman put the cherry on the cake for me – helping me to come to terms with my treasonous ways – by saying the following about Republicans, global warming deniers and other haters:

“They want to play politics and see if they can keep any achievements from being accomplished that may be beneficial to the Democrats. They’re rooting against the country and I think in this case, even rooting against the world because the world needs to get its act together to stop global warming.”

It’s absolutely true.

How did they know?

I not only strived for a world where life itself would be threatened on such a grand scale, but I thought it’d be fun to play a little politics on the way to our destruction.

Man, these guys are good.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

BETTER PANICKING THROUGH UPDATED LANGUAGE

Posted by Andrew Roman on May 4, 2009

climate-change-1

The term “global warming,” which for a period of time had been unofficially replaced in the American lexicon with the phrase “climate change,” just doesn’t play well with a lot of people anymore. That the world is neither warming (and hasn’t been for several years) nor behaving in any way inconsistent with the cyclical climactic nature of its four billion year life span seems to be irrelevant to those attempting to determine why this is so.

According to John Broder of the New York Times, the term “turns people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes.” The reality that people may actually be tired of being bombarded day and night with nonsensical threats of a bogus global warming catastrophe doesn’t seem to enter into the minds of the people at EcoAmerica, the “nonprofit environmental marketing and messaging firm” that conducted a recent poll on the matter.

Rather, it is all in the packaging.

Thus, as liberals are wont to do when evidence, history and facts shatter their contrived calamities and political agendas, they change the label in the hope that the people will buy into the product.

Broder writes:

Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”.”

EcoAmerica has been conducting research for the last several years to find new ways to frame environmental issues and so build public support for climate change legislation and other initiatives. A summary of the group’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally sent by e-mail to a number of news organizations by someone who sat in this week on a briefing intended for government officials and environmental leaders.

Environmental issues consistently rate near the bottom of public worry, according to many public opinion polls. A Pew Research Center poll released in January found global warming last among 20 voter concerns; it trailed issues like addressing moral decline and decreasing the influence of lobbyists. “We know why it’s lowest,” said Mr. (Robert M.) Perkowitz, a marketer of outdoor clothing and home furnishings before he started ecoAmerica, whose activities are financed by corporations, foundations and individuals. “When someone thinks of global warming, they think of a politicized, polarized argument. When you say ‘global warming,’ a certain group of Americans think that’s a code word for progressive liberals, gay marriage and other such issues.

Arrogance, thy name is environmentalism.

A question … The fact that “environmental issues” consistently rate near or at the bottom of polls couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that most people understand that the hysteria of impending doom that environmentalists like Al Gore peddle to the masses is pure hogwash, could it?

The idea that most people are not operating in red-alert panic mode over the preposterous claims that the planet is on or near the brink of irreversible devastation absolutely infuriates the greenie-wacko set. The problem, according to EcoAmerica, is that they just haven’t hit upon the right catchphrases, slogans or angles to sell their haggard agenda well enough.

If “global warming, as Mr. Perkowitz suggests, is perceived as a code phrase for “progressive liberals,” who exactly is to blame for that? If today’s environmentalism is associated with “progressive liberalism,” it’s because they are the ones who consistently and repeatedly latch onto crisis after phony crisis, hysteria after hysteria, doomsday scenario after doomsday scenario, with the fate of the planet and humanity hanging in the balance. There isn’t a crisis they won’t promote … or one they have gotten right. From global cooling to overpopulation, from resource depletion to the threat of heterosexual AIDS, from global warming to second-hand smoke, each new challenge is a threat to the very existence of humanity – and ultimately, the earth itself.

They’re batting 1.000.

They’ve been wrong every time.

It makes one wonder what the “perfect” temperature is, or what the “correct” number of people on earth would be, to today’s enviro-warriors.

If “global warming” was anything but political fodder for the Left, why would a name change even be necessary at all? Why would “campaigns” and “strategies” need to be devised to convince people of its very existence? The fact is, years and years of environmentalist screeching about the dangers of human activity and the effect it has on the climate ring less true to more and more people as global temperatures continue to go down – just as they always have after a warming trend. In other words, if the Left (and a few misguided rightists) genuinely believe that the danger facing the planet was clear-cut and irrefutable, why would their agenda need to be prettied up with more favorable focus-group-friendly phraseology?

This isn’t just a matter of finding the right bumper sticker slogan for an unknown product that needs public exposure. Anyone who has been alive and cognizant anywhere in the developed world over the past decade-and-a-half has heard the phrase “global warming” and knows what the phrase implies.

That many have rejected the product  – with many more doing so each day – is proof that clarity of thought is not yet dead – only victims of lefticide.

Posted in environmentalism, Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism, politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

PRINCE CHARLES SAYS 100 MONTHS TO GO

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 9, 2009

prince-charles

Temperatures in Rio De Janeiro are expected to be in 80s this week. It is probably a far better and more credible locale from which to deliver a global warming doomsday speech than, say, Washington, D.C., which recently saw a huge rally of earth-conscious moonbats brave near blizzard conditions to protest the warming of the planet.

And so it will be that this coming Thursday, in Brazil’s second largest city, that the world renowned climatologist, and future King of England, Prince Charles, will give a keynote address in which he will warn that humanity has less than 100 months to act before damage from man-made climate change becomes irreversible. How this prognosis meshes with Al Gore’s prophecy that the northern polar ice cap will be gone in less than two thousand days – roughly 66 months – isn’t clear. Neither is how Charles’ warning stands up against the seemingly contradictory claims made recently by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that it’s already too late to do anything to save Earth.  

Still, the Prince is positive about all the negatives that await humanity unless action is taken now.

From the UK Telegraph:

Prince Charles will say that the need to tackle global warming is more urgent than ever before and that, even in a global recession, the world must not lose sight of the “bigger picture.”

Government officials believe that the Prince’s passion to protect the environment is hugely respected abroad and that he can play an increasing important role as he inevitably moves closer to becoming king. Some believe he is an “asset” that has been underused in the past and they want to use him more in a role of “soft diplomacy”. In Thursday’s speech, the Prince will warn that a failure to act in the next eight years will have catastrophic effects for the planet.

Temperatures in Tokyo may not be as balmy as in Rio De Janeiro – only in the 50s this week – but I wonder why the Prince doesn’t make a stop in Japan to impart his doomsday forecast to the apprehensive masses there.

Oh wait .. maybe it’s because Japanese scientists have recently declared the entire man-made global warming scare pure garbage.

Didn’t they get the memo that the debate was over?

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

AL, IT HAS TO BE A COINCIDENCE

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 3, 2009

protest_dc1Remember these?

On Valentines Day, 2007, a House hearing entitled, “Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?” was scratched due to snow.

In 2006, in a speech delivered in New York, Al Gore warned of the imminent dangers of global warming while wind chills approached forty below zero.

In October of last year, another speech by Mr. Gore on global warming – this time at Harvard University – took place while Massachusetts was hit with “near 125-year breaking low temperatures.”

Last year, in Utica, New York, cyclists “braved freezing cold temps” as they promoted global warming awareness.

There are, of course, a plethora of zesty ironies such as these documented.

Global Warming zealots make it increasingly more difficult for satirists and comedians to invent fresh material. Many of these dedicated climate warriors have become living embodiments of self-parody – not just because of their fatuous notions of a planet in peril, but because it isn’t possible to write a script more ironic, more hilarious or more emblematic of liberal doltishness than these real life occurances.

As has been widely reported, what was supposed to be the “nation’s largest act of civil disobedience to fight climate change” in Washington on Monday was all but stymied due to – you guessed it – a huge winter storm.

Turnout was, you might say, on the low side.

Eric at the great Vocal Minority website comments:

The event went on, although the turnout was more like hundreds instead of the predicted thousands. You know you’re a hard-core global warming activist when you’re protesting in a ton of snow in March.

He’s also got a handy compilation of other “Gore Effect” type of incidents posted, such as:

– Global warming activists urged to focus on Earth Day rallies and ignore snow as it ‘piles up outside our windows’ (April 17, 2007)

– Obama to global warming demonstrators: ‘This is probably not the weather to hold up those signs…it’s a little chilly today’ (October 28, 2008)

Fox News says that as many as 2,500 nutcases- er, protesters – braved the wintry conditions yesterday, but that figure comes from protest organizers:

…But the shroud of snow wasn’t the only wet blanket in the nation’s capital Monday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who called on the architect of the Capitol to stop burning coal at the power plant last week, cancelled her appearance at the rally because her flight to Washington was cancelled.

Some protesters couldn’t make it as dozens of flights in the area were delayed or called off, and some couldn’t face the dangerous roads or blustery weather, leaving hundreds safe, if sorry, back at home.

One protester named Kat had planned to get arrested and be bailed out Monday but decided to stay put and donate her money to a good cause instead.

“I don’t want to travel in the snow today. However, I am donating my bail money to fight mountaintop removal,” she wrote to the Climate Action Web site.

It takes a special kind of person to donate her bail money to help the environment.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

YES, CASSANDRA, IT IS GLOBAL WARMING HYSTERIA – ANSWERING A READER

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 2, 2009

climatehoax

After my article last week, FUNNY GLOBAL WARMING TIDBIT – PESKY DATA – which I invite you to read if you haven’t already – I received a reply from a reader called Cassandra, who took me to task for what she obviously felt was a typical flat-earth, knee-jerk, right-wing reaction to a story related to global warming.

As I have done on many occasions with other readers, I would like to address Cassandra’s post, point by point.

Even if you haven’t read my piece, or the original article I’m referencing, you’ll still get the gist of it all, I assure you.

_____________________________________________

Cassandra wrote:

Why is science “leftist hysteria”? Isn’t the scientific method intended to remove bias rather than foster it?

I respond:

It isn’t science. That’s the point. It is instead “leftist hysteria,” quite rightly classified as such because of what has been a long history of unfounded and universally incorrect doomsday scenarios created by agenda-driven, research-money hungry “experts” with leftist worldviews.

For instance, recall that it is with the same fervor and certitude currently fuelling the increasingly ridiculous “global warming” panic that the abundance of stories and studies were published predicting the United States would be overrun with widespread heterosexual AIDS in the 1980s. It was inevitable we were told.

It never happened, of course, despite “consensus” from experts and scientists.

Thirty-five years ago, we were warned that global cooling was going to ravage the Earth when things were “trending” in that direction. Somehow, the world managed to get a bit warmer, after it had gotten cooler, after a warming period, which coincidentally followed a cooling trend.

Let us not forget how we were admonished that humanity would run out of food by 1990. Remember that?

Or how, by 1997, the O-Zone layer would be so damaged due to human activity that the number of cases of ultra-violet-light induced skin cancer would explode to catastrophic levels.

Surely you remember the fear-mongering of how natural resources would be depleted by the year 2000? or how overpopulation was going to be the death knell to humankind?

When agenda trumps truth in the sciences, it is a bad thing, Cassandra.

Cassandra wrote:

Why do many people assume that a “trend” needs to be linear? For example, isn’t it evident that we currently have a stock market trending down even though there are many up days?

I respond:

First, I know of no one was has denied any warming trend. (By most objective standards, temperatures in recent years have leveled off and are starting to “trend” downward).

So what?

There have been warming trends throughout the history of Earth. In fact, there have been trends that put the most recent one to shame. Recall the Ice Age, for example. Obviously, things warmed up enough to melt prodigious amounts of ice without the benefit of SUVs and disposable diapers.

The “hysteria” of the current position lies in the adopting the trinity of climactic disbelief – that not only are temperatures rising, but that the rise must be proven to be triggered by human activity, and then at such a level as to cause catastrophe.

But of course, the real question here is … from what starting point are you basing your trend? Compare temperatures today to the 1970s, and it is generally warmer. Compare them today to the 1930s, the late 1990s or the eleventh century and they’re cooler.

Second, why is it that global warming alarmists automatically believe the world should be colder now? On what do they base that conclusion? Should it have been colder when the Vikings were growing grapes in Newfoundland, centuries before the advent of the automobile and airplanes? Was it too cold during the Little Ice Age between 1200 and 1800?

Cassandra wrote:

Why was the time frame of the “sensor drift” error left out in the discussion? Isn’t it pertinent that this error started in early January of 2008 and was caught and corrected? How come an error that affected less than two months of real time data (now expunged) refutes decades of other data?

I respond:

How come you completely miss the point I’m making?

The year 2008 was reported as being the “second lowest” in terms of how much Arctic Ice exists. The year before, 2007, was reported as being the “lowest.” If the criterion for “warming” is based on how much Arctic Ice exists, then, by definition, it cannot be getting warmer, if the amount of ice “grew” from one year to the next.

To dip into my bag-o-logic, if I have less money and assets this year than I did last year, I cannot be getting wealthier.

If I weigh less this week than I did last week, I cannot be getting fatter.

Before the “drifting sensor” problem was realized, there was believed to be less ice than there really was. This only reinforces my point.

Cassandra wrote:

Also, I thought it would be helpful so include URLs to the actual NSIDC articles, so here are two primary links to the NSIDC info under discussion:

February 18, 2009
Satellite sensor errors cause data outage: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2009/021809.html

February 26, 2009
Near-real-time data now available: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

I respond:

I sincerely appreciate your links to the original articles. I encourage people to read them.

However, none of it – repeat none of it – does anything to further the argument of those who believe that the world is not only getting warmer, but that it is being caused by human beings, and that the result of those man-made temperature rises are catastrophic for the planet.

Seeing as everything that is happening to this planet right now, climactically speaking, has happened before – many, many times, in an endless merry-go-round of climactic cyclical bliss – and the fact that the planet is somehow still here, in one piece, lends nothing to the credibility of these hysterical assertions.

love-my-co2First off, there is no consensus – nor is there evidence – that CO2 causes global warming. There simply isn’t. There is actually more evidence to suggest that CO2 levels increase after warming begins, despite the “facts” peddled in Al Gore’s largely discredited piece of garbage film, An Inconvenient Truth. Besides, the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is so minimal as to be nearly insignificant in terms of temperature. Even doubling the amount of CO2 would have little effect on climate.

Second, I have to assume that “global” warming means only the Northern Hemisphere, seeing as whatever warming has been noted over the past few decades has only occurred north of the equator.

Third, the Medieval Warm period was warmer than it is today. How is that possible without smoke stacks, diesel engines and Al Gore’s mouth?

Fourth, does it occur to anyone on the panicked side of the debate that the loss of a multitude of cold climate weather stations in the collapsing Soviet Union in the late 1980s and 1990s somehow, remarkably, inexplicably coincided with the totality of “global temperatures” rising? The fact is, thousands of measuring stations closed in that part of the world during that “death of the Soviet Union” period. Wouldn’t that fact, at least, warrant some consideration from the supposedly unbiased scientific community? Wouldn’t that seem like a logical point to ponder in a debate that has sadly been declared over by such notables as Barack Obama?

By the way … if the debate is over, why are hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars still needed to study this stuff?

Thank you, Cassandra.

In other news, this damned global warming is burying my car under a foot of snow.

 

Posted in environmentalism, Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

QUICK FOLLOW UP – IRREVERSIBLE GLOBAL WARMING IS HERE

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 28, 2009

As the Earth spirals violently to its demise as a result of irreversible man-made Global Warming, snow storms have taken the lives of at least nineteen people and have left nearly a million without electricity across the country. Meanwhile, Al Gore is braving the wintry mess to tell Congress that the current financial crisis should not draw attention – or funding – away from the fight against Global Warming.

There is no better example of irony – or idiocy – available.

From Fox News.com:

A destructive winter storm that has left more than 800,000 customers in the dark barreled into the Northeast on Wednesday, delaying flights and turning the morning rush into the morning slush as communities braced for the worst.

The storm has been blamed for at least 20 deaths and a glaze of ice and snow caused widespread power failures from the Southern Plains to the East Coast. Authorities said it could be a week before some communities have electricity again.

Tree limbs encased in ice tumbled onto roads and crashed onto power lines in hard-hit Arkansas, Kentucky and Oklahoma on Tuesday and overnight. In Arkansas — where ice was 3 inches thick in some places — people huddled next to portable heaters and wood-burning fires as utilities warned electricity may be out for a week or more.

Recall that the effects of Global Warming have been officially declared “largely irreversible” by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

wordpress statistics

 

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

UNPREDICTABLE TODAY … GUARANTEED TOMORROW

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 27, 2009

melting earthA couple of weeks ago, “six to eight” inches of snow were forecast to fall in and around the New York City area. Every station in town began their “team coverage” from salt truck stations all over the Tri-State area well in advance of the storm’s arrival.

The forecast remained fairly steady in the hours leading up to the “event.”

Then, about seven hours before the storm was supposed to hit, the predicted time of the storm’s arrival was pushed back by about eleven hours. On top of that, snowfall totals were amended to “one to three” inches due to slight shifts in the weather models.

By the time it was all said and done, an inch – at best – fell here in Brooklyn.

It happens.

I have also done some research, looking to find reports from meteorological professionals (other than Al Gore, Jr.) dating back to last winter and spring predicting a “colder-than-normal” season this winter (in some places, a record cold winter). Unfortunately, I didn’t find too many, save for the few who wrote “Global Warming is Causing Global Cooling” end-of-life-as-we-know-it doomsday pieces. I did, however, find thousands – literally thousands – of articles about the planet’s impending demise due to man-man climate changes.

This is not a slam piece against weather forecasters. I actually admire the profession very much. That isn’t my point.

With unpredictability not uncommon in short-term weather forecasting, and with computer models seemingly yielding more and more inaccuracies – some would say more than just sometimes – it is stunning with how much certitude experts can predict the calamity awaiting mankind due to so-called Global Warming.

And with more winter storms scheduled to hit the American Northeast over the next day or so – and temperatures in Fairbanks, Alaska hovering around two degrees – comes the announcement that the effects of Global Warming are irreversible.

Irreversible.

From Yahoo News:

Climate change is “largely irreversible” for the next 1,000 years even if carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions could be abruptly halted, according to a new study led by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

The study’s authors said there was “no going back” after the report showed that changes in surface temperature, rainfall and sea level are “largely irreversible for more than 1,000 years after CO2 emissions are completely stopped.”

NOAA senior scientist Susan Solomon said the study, published in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal, showed that current human choices on carbon dioxide emissions are set to “irreversibly change the planet.”

Researchers examined the consequences of CO2 building up beyond present-day concentrations of 385 parts per million, and then completely stopping emissions after the peak. Before the industrial age CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere amounted to only 280 parts per million.

The study found that CO2 levels are irreversibly impacting climate change, which will contribute to global sea level rise and rainfall changes in certain regions.

For the next thousand years?

How they know with such confidence that the “irreversible” effects won’t linger for, say, only three hundred years, or five hundred years, is remarkable.

One question … Can I get just one study that proves CO2 levels trigger temperature fluctuations, and not the other way around? Just one? (Okay, that was two).

My guarantee … as more and more people realize that climate conditions fluctuate in spite of human activity, and that the human beings cannot be blamed for altering the weather, these people won’t give a rat’s tush what the temperature is.

That’s because it was never about the Earth.

In other news, it’s cold.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

DOWN WITH LIBERTY, UP WITH A STABLE ENVIRONMENT

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 15, 2009

climate_change1

If you’ve been thinking of packing up your kit and caboodle and setting up shop in Madison, Wisconsin, you may want to hit the “pause” button on those plans – that is, if you’re a fan of personal liberty and free enterprise. If, however, your focus is one of helping to achieve “environmental sustainability,” then damn the freedom, man. Get your packing tape, load up the U-Haul, get your mail forwarded, say goodbye to that wacky neighbor who always went to the mailbox in his underwear and head to Cheese Country.

Madison, Wisconsin wants your liberty – all in the name of “climate change” – and they’re ready to make such lefty shangri-Las as Berkeley, California look almost moderate in comparison.

It’s about saving the Earth, dammit – and if the citizenry can’t see that, then the government will show them.

Jeff Poor of the Business and Media Institute says that what the city is proposing is “a case of liberalism via central planning gone wild.”

He writes:

According to the “Broad Strategies” section of a meeting agenda recently posted on the City of Madison Web site, an ordinance being considered would force city zoning to account for and mitigate climate change:

Zoning should adapt to meet the demands of climate change; use zoning to address or mitigate effects, or adapt to climate change; remove any barriers to mitigating the effects, adapting to climate change (trees, green space, mobility, renewable energy, land use).

Another item in the “Broad Strategies” section has a grim outlook for the future. It includes a proposal that spells out a doomsday scenario – allowing for the city to function should shortages in energy and food occur:

Write the code to allow the city to function when automobile travel will be severely limited and oil-related products, including food and heating fuel, become prohibitively expensive because of the scarcity and high-cost of fuel.

Other proposals throughout the document would push for use of alternative energies (solar, geothermal and wind), conservation, electric cars and urban agriculture. Other more Draconian regulations throughout the document would:

-Limit waterfront development in the name of water sustainability,

-Require two trees to be planted if one is removed from your property

-Limit the “number/density of fast food outlets and drive-through windows” in the name of public health

-Discourage individual parking options to promote public transportation usage.

I can almost hear the cadence of jackbooted horticulturalists emerging from over the hill, armed with shovels and baby Live Oaks, making sure each house has two trees in the ground.

The vagueness and unspecificity of the passage that affords the Madison nannies the ability to “write code to allow the city to function” in the event of some potentially resource-draining circumstance should scare the living hell out of anyone with a reasonably functioning circulatory system. The term “blank check” was devised to describe just such a thing.

Exactly what “code” will be written?

And precisely what will the city be allowed to do to continue to function? Seize personal property on demand? Violate personal rights? Confiscate your children and sell them on E-Bay?

And what of the right to open a business of one’s choosing? What else in the name of the new 21st Century morality – healthcare – will be limited? 

The goal here, as I have written before, must be to make sure that no one ever dies again.

There is much to pick apart and eviscerate here, but I’d like to zoom in on something that most likely would go unnoticed amidst the glut of absurdity coming from the good folks of Madison.

Madison Capitol Building

Madison Capitol Building

Liberals, you’ll have noticed, attempt to personify things to make them more accessible – thus more real.

Liberals are far too deliberate.

If one is asked to “adapt to meet the demands of climate change,” what exactly does that mean? How is that different from, say, “adapting to climate change?”

A heavier coat?

Thicker gloves?

This is no trick question. I pose this in the most literal sense.

What exactly does the phrase “to meet the demands of climate change” mean, and why was it written that way?

(To help illustrate what I’m getting at, change the phraseology by substituting “climate change” with “your boss” and try it again. If someone now suggested that you, as an employee, needed to “adapt to meet the demands of your boss,” it would probably make more sense to you, right? That’s because “your boss” is a living entity capable of “demanding” things from you).

Because “climate change” can now demand things of us, it isn’t just a matter of having to accept fluctuating weather conditions that are beyond our control. “Climate change” is now alive. It is real. It can now be dealt with.

Therefore, liberty can now be constrained for the greater good while limitations are implemented. (We’re talking the survival of Earth here). If we, as humans, can at least deal with climate change, there’s always a chance that positive developments can be affected.

If, however, it is all beyond our control, then the realization that there are things bigger than us settles in … and that is as disturbing a concept to the Left as anything.

The cartoonish idealism of silly liberty may be nice in theory, but it cannot hold a candle to preserving the habitat of the red-horned triple-beaked purple button flapper owl.

Indeed, I am aware that “demands” are placed on us all the time by things that are not specifically human. Our jobs demand things from us, for example. One can even say that certain situations demand us to behave in specific ways if particular results are desired.

But “jobs” are created by people.

The weather is not. It is beyond human control. We cannot do anything to affect it.

Welcome to the liberal mind. 

Government always knows best.

– 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

GLOBAL WARMING FRIGIDITY

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 10, 2009

the planet is heating up

the planet is heating up

Russia may have cut back on natural gas supplies to Europe this week, but they’ve certainly had a whole lot of Siberia to share as global warming continued to keep most of Europe in a deep freeze.

Since last month, global warming frigidity has gripped that continent like Jimmy Carter grips contemptibility.

In Germany, for instance, three deaths have been attributed to the brutal cold. In addition, water ways have frozen over, and ship traffic on the River Elbe north to Hamburg has been stifled.

It is one of the coldest German winters in a century.

In Poland, as many as 83 people (mostly homeless) have died since the beginning over November due to the warming arctic blast.

Heavy snow in France effectively shut down Marseille – a port city in the south – for two days.

In Spain, Madrid’s Barajas Airport saw all four of its runways shut down for four hours after a rare blast of snow wreaked havoc there.

Meanwhile, the International Panel on Climate Change predicts that by the year 2100, half the world could be starving – thanks to global warming.

It predicts a 6 degree Fahrenheit rise in average growing-season temperatures in many areas and a 20 to 40 percent drop in crop yields. The hardest hit will be the tropics and subtropics, home to some of the world’s poorest populations. “You are talking about hundreds of millions of additional people looking for food because they won’t be able to find it where they find it now” [Reuters], said study co-author David Battisti.

That must mean that the colder temperatures get, the better it is for crops.

If that is, in fact, the case, then happy days are here again for the United States. Record harvests could be on the way.

AccuWeather.com Senior Meteorologist John Kocet writes:

This is about as bad as it gets folks. I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it since 1994. Sure its been very cold at times over the past 14 years, but the total area impacted by this cold wave will be huge. By next Thursday and Friday, extremely cold air will chill the entire area from the Great Plains to the Eastern Seaboard, and the cold is also going to reach the Deep South. Only the far West will be unscathed.

From the central Plains to the Northeast temperatures are going below zero; there is no question about it. Meanwhile, the Upper Midwest and northern New England could experience readings lower than 30 below zero!

One might have to go back to Jan. 1994 to find anything worse. In that bitter outbreak, temperatures went below zero from the central Plains to the East Coast. In New York there is a chance it will go below zero next Thursday or Friday night. The last time New York City experienced a below-zero temperature was Jan. 1994.

Oh, global warming, why do you mock us?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

ON GLOBAL WARMING, ONE QUESTION FOR OBAMA

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 5, 2009

the quest to end denial

the quest to end denial

To start off, let me point out that, as of this writing, it is minus-36 degrees in Fairbanks, Alaska. The high temperature today was minus-28.

Just thought I’d throw that in.

Anyway…

Remember when Barack Obama vowed to end Global Warming denial? (Not just the “earth on the brink of death” ill-effects of the warming itself, but the denial of it).

Back on December 9th of last year, the next President of the United States met in Chicago with the guy who used to be the next President of the United States (and Joe Biden, too) in order to chew on some stale Global Warming snack crackers and reaffirm what will be the Obama Administration’s official policy on hysteria – that the battle against those who continue to deny that the planet is in danger must be swift, vigorous and unrelenting.

The hour-long get-together with Al Gore and Biden prompted The One to say:

“All three of us are in agreement that the time for delay is over. The time for denial is over. We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That is what I intend my administration to do.”

A month before that, at an event hosted by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (who famously said “We simply must do everything in our power to slow down global warming before it’s too late”), Obama (in a pre-recorded video message) proclaimed:

The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We’ve seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season.

That sea levels are rising at the same rate they have been for three hundred years shouldn’t be allowed to cloud the issue, of course.

And as Christopher Booker – journalist and author who has sharply criticized the claims of global warming alarmists – wrote in the UK’s Telegraph in November:

Far from global warming having increased the number of droughts, the very opposite is the case. The most comprehensive study (Narisma et al, 2007) showed that, of the 20th century’s 30 major drought episodes, 22 were in the first six decades, with only five between 1961 and 1980. The most recent two decades produced just three.

Recall back in October, 2007 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid blamed the California wild fires on global warming:

“As you know, one reason that we have the fires burning in Southern California is global warming. One reason the Colorado Basin is going dry is because of global warming.”

And who can forget this golden nugget from February of last year, spoken by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg:

Terrorists kill people, weapons of mass destruction have the potential to kill enormous numbers of people, global warming has the potential to kill everybody. This is really just as lethal, it’s just that the results are something we will face long term.

It looks like terrorism is number two with a bullet on the Bloomy Hit Parade.

All of this certitude is setting up a whole lot of people – including the next Chief Executive of the United States – to fall like Niagara flat on their panicked kissers.

My one question, if afforded the opportunity to pose it to our next Commander-In-Chief, would be: Have you, sir, ever actually read any peer-reviewed articles, heard any counter-arguments from any of a multitude of respected scientists, or reviewed any position papers that question the entire man-made global warming position?

Fair question, no?

To this day, there is no scientific evidence of any kind proving that increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere lead to warming. In fact, there is more to suggest the reverse is true – that higher CO2 levels have historically followed temperature increases.

In Canada, according to Barry Cooper of the Calgary Herald, the hysteria of Global Warming may be entering a new phase:

globe_2025jan06As James Peden, an atmospheric physicist, said, many scientists “are now searching for a way to back out quietly” from global-warming fearmongering, “without having their professional careers ruined.”

The crux of it is that major research grants and, in this country, prestigious Canada Research Chairs, have been awarded on the assumption something must be done to stop CO2 from destroying the world.

There was even worse news for those who believed in human-caused climate change. Up to now most of the debate, including the notorious intellectual swindle of the hockey stick graph, amounted to what paleoclimatologist Ian Clark called “wiggle watching” –matching the ups and downs of temperature with the ups and downs of CO2 or, say, sun spots. Until recently there was no experimental evidence to decide which wiggle was worth watching.

In 2006, experiments at the Danish National Space Center provided evidence that changes in the magnetic field of the sun can affect not CO2 but water vapour–clouds–which are responsible for up to 95 per cent of the warmth that keeps Earth habitable. Last year the implications finally sunk in.

One has to wonder how long it will take until the community of squiggly-light-bulb green-o-crats, Kyoto knuckleheads, and hysteria-starved mercury jockeys realize that two plus two does not equal twelve – and that includes The One, Senator John McCain, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Paris Hilton, the dolts who run NBC, Elmo from Sesame Street and anyone else mule-headed enough (insert “dumb,” if you like) to stick with this crap.

Like the screeching delirium caused by the threat of homosexual AIDS wiping out large portions of the American population or the shutdown of the entire Western Hemisphere due to the apocalyptic “Y2K” bug, today’s madness – “Global Warming” (or “Climate Change” or “Doomsday – Part Eighteen”) – will be, within most of our lifetimes, exposed as the profound and ridiculous fraud it is, one of the greatest snow jobs (pun intended) ever contrived.

A nice try by the anti-technology, anti-industry, anti-capitalist, anti-big business carbon-credit counters, but it won’t fly for very much longer – except, of course, in universities, public schools, on television, in popular music and motion pictures and anywhere where idiocy is encouraged.

In the meantime, until such a time when the Gore Contingency becomes the fringe on this issue (yeah, right!), people like the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, who believes the man-made global warming disaster is a myth, will be ostracized and kept from the EU mainstream as much as possible, as recently depicted in the Times Online:

The European Union’s new figurehead believes that climate change is a dangerous myth and has compared the union to a Communist state.

The views of President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic, 67, have left the government of Mirek Topolanek, his bitter opponent, determined to keep him as far away as possible from the EU presidency, which it took over from France yesterday.

The Czech president, who caused a diplomatic incident by dining with opponents of the EU’s Lisbon treaty on a recent visit to Ireland, has a largely ceremonial role.

But there are already fears that, after the dynamic EU presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy – including his hyper-active attempts at international diplomacy over the credit crisis and Georgia as well as an historic agreement to cut greenhouse gases – the Czech effort will be mired in infighting and overshadowed by the platform it will give to Mr Klaus and his controversial views.

That last sentence is critical.

Note that it is Mr. Klaus’ view – that humankind’s activities are not leading to catastrophic climactic consequences – deemed the controversial position. It is a “consider the source” moment. The “community” viewing him as out of step is, of course, the European Union.

Enough said.

(For those familiar with it, a very famous Twilight Zone episode from 1960, “The Private World of Darkness,” comes to mind).

I wonder if Barack Obama has a backup plan – a “jettison” option, if you will – on any references he may make to “global warming” during his inaugural speech – just in case wind chills are hovering around zero on January 20th.

No need to look silly on your first day.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

ON GLOBAL WARMING, ONE QUESTION FOR OBAMA

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 5, 2009

the quest to end denial

the quest to end denial

To start off, let me point out that, as of this writing, it is minus-36 degrees in Fairbanks, Alaska. The high temperature today was minus-28.

Just thought I’d throw that in.

Anyway…

Remember when Barack Obama vowed to end Global Warming denial? (Not just the “earth on the brink of death” ill-effects of the warming itself, but the denial of it).

Back on December 9th of last year, the next President of the United States met in Chicago with the guy who used to be the next President of the United States (and Joe Biden, too) in order to chew on some stale Global Warming snack crackers and reaffirm what will be the Obama Administration’s official policy on hysteria – that the battle against those who continue to deny that the planet is in danger must be swift, vigorous and unrelenting.

The hour-long get-together with Al Gore and Biden prompted The One to say:

“All three of us are in agreement that the time for delay is over. The time for denial is over. We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That is what I intend my administration to do.”

A month before that, at an event hosted by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (who famously said “We simply must do everything in our power to slow down global warming before it’s too late”), Obama (in a pre-recorded video message) proclaimed:

The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We’ve seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season.

That sea levels are rising at the same rate they have been for three hundred years shouldn’t be allowed to cloud the issue, of course.

And as Christopher Booker – journalist and author who has sharply criticized the claims of global warming alarmists – wrote in the UK’s Telegraph in November:

Far from global warming having increased the number of droughts, the very opposite is the case. The most comprehensive study (Narisma et al, 2007) showed that, of the 20th century’s 30 major drought episodes, 22 were in the first six decades, with only five between 1961 and 1980. The most recent two decades produced just three.

Recall back in October, 2007 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid blamed the California wild fires on global warming:

“As you know, one reason that we have the fires burning in Southern California is global warming. One reason the Colorado Basin is going dry is because of global warming.”

And who can forget this golden nugget from February of last year, spoken by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg:

Terrorists kill people, weapons of mass destruction have the potential to kill enormous numbers of people, global warming has the potential to kill everybody. This is really just as lethal, it’s just that the results are something we will face long term.

It looks like terrorism is number two with a bullet on the Bloomy Hit Parade.

All of this certitude is setting up a whole lot of people – including the next Chief Executive of the United States – to fall like Niagara flat on their panicked kissers.

My one question, if afforded the opportunity to pose it to our next Commander-In-Chief, would be: Have you, sir, ever actually read any peer-reviewed articles, heard any counter-arguments from any of a multitude of respected scientists, or reviewed any position papers that question the entire man-made global warming position?

Fair question, no?

To this day, there is no scientific evidence of any kind proving that increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere lead to warming. In fact, there is more to suggest the reverse is true – that higher CO2 levels have historically followed temperature increases.

In Canada, according to Barry Cooper of the Calgary Herald, the hysteria of Global Warming may be entering a new phase:

globe_2025jan06As James Peden, an atmospheric physicist, said, many scientists “are now searching for a way to back out quietly” from global-warming fearmongering, “without having their professional careers ruined.”

The crux of it is that major research grants and, in this country, prestigious Canada Research Chairs, have been awarded on the assumption something must be done to stop CO2 from destroying the world.

There was even worse news for those who believed in human-caused climate change. Up to now most of the debate, including the notorious intellectual swindle of the hockey stick graph, amounted to what paleoclimatologist Ian Clark called “wiggle watching” –matching the ups and downs of temperature with the ups and downs of CO2 or, say, sun spots. Until recently there was no experimental evidence to decide which wiggle was worth watching.

In 2006, experiments at the Danish National Space Center provided evidence that changes in the magnetic field of the sun can affect not CO2 but water vapour–clouds–which are responsible for up to 95 per cent of the warmth that keeps Earth habitable. Last year the implications finally sunk in.

One has to wonder how long it will take until the community of squiggly-light-bulb green-o-crats, Kyoto knuckleheads, and hysteria-starved mercury jockeys realize that two plus two does not equal twelve – and that includes The One, Senator John McCain, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Paris Hilton, the dolts who run NBC, Elmo from Sesame Street and anyone else mule-headed enough (insert “dumb,” if you like) to stick with this crap.

Like the screeching delirium caused by the threat of homosexual AIDS wiping out large portions of the American population or the shutdown of the entire Western Hemisphere due to the apocalyptic “Y2K” bug, today’s madness – “Global Warming” (or “Climate Change” or “Doomsday – Part Eighteen”) – will be, within most of our lifetimes, exposed as the profound and ridiculous fraud it is, one of the greatest snow jobs (pun intended) ever contrived.

A nice try by the anti-technology, anti-industry, anti-capitalist, anti-big business carbon-credit counters, but it won’t fly for very much longer – except, of course, in universities, public schools, on television, in popular music and motion pictures and anywhere where idiocy is encouraged.

In the meantime, until such a time when the Gore Contingency becomes the fringe on this issue (yeah, right!), people like the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, who believes the man-made global warming disaster is a myth, will be ostracized and kept from the EU mainstream as much as possible, as recently depicted in the Times Online:

The European Union’s new figurehead believes that climate change is a dangerous myth and has compared the union to a Communist state.

The views of President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic, 67, have left the government of Mirek Topolanek, his bitter opponent, determined to keep him as far away as possible from the EU presidency, which it took over from France yesterday.

The Czech president, who caused a diplomatic incident by dining with opponents of the EU’s Lisbon treaty on a recent visit to Ireland, has a largely ceremonial role.

But there are already fears that, after the dynamic EU presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy – including his hyper-active attempts at international diplomacy over the credit crisis and Georgia as well as an historic agreement to cut greenhouse gases – the Czech effort will be mired in infighting and overshadowed by the platform it will give to Mr Klaus and his controversial views.

That last sentence is critical.

Note that it is Mr. Klaus’ view – that humankind’s activities are not leading to catastrophic climactic consequences – deemed the controversial position. It is a “consider the source” moment. The “community” viewing him as out of step is, of course, the European Union.

Enough said.

(For those familiar with it, a very famous Twilight Zone episode from 1960, “The Private World of Darkness,” comes to mind).

I wonder if Barack Obama has a backup plan – a “jettison” option, if you will – on any references he may make to “global warming” during his inaugural speech – just in case wind chills are hovering around zero on January 20th.

No need to look silly on your first day.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

2008 – THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF THE MYTH?

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 28, 2008

Let’s see … there’s that famous photograph of the sailor kissing that gal on VJ Day in Times Square … and the one of astronaut Buzz Aldrin standing on the surface of the moon … and the one of the Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima on February 23. 1945 …

three-picsc

And, of course, how can we forget one of several different history-making shots featuring a lone, clinging-to-dear-life polar bear stuck on a rapidly disappearing block of ice somewhere in the steadily warming Arctic Zone?

polar

These are the indelible images that serve as bookmarks to history – unforgettable moments forever captured in time. These are, in fact, the days of our lives. (Cue the hourglass).

Or maybe not …

The question of the hour, a mere four days before the launch of a new year … Will 2008 be forever remembered as the year man-made global warming was “disproved?” Will those pictures of cute little polar bears floating away on chunks of disconnected glacier ice fade away into the ash heap of desktop wallpaper history?

It’s a shame.

Those polar-pics had a certain urgency and power to them – like a migraine or bad gas.

According to Christopher Booker of the UK Telegraph.com website, the beginning of the end of the myth is at hand.

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare.

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus” in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus” which was only a politically engineered artifact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades … panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for “combating climate change” with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.

Let’s hear it for the “debate is over” detachment of humanity – which, incidentally, includes out next President.

A question I have asked for a long time – and one worth asking again: If it were proven unequivocally – beyond a shadow of a doubt – that rising global temperatures are in no way connected or related  to human activity, would leftists even care anymore?

*ahem*

You know the answer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

DOOM IS ALREADY HERE

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 15, 2008

melting20glaciersJust between you and me … I love doomsday movies. It’s a weakness.

The more inane and more incredible the premise, the more I enjoy it. I’m not sure what that says about me, but as long as buildings are being destroyed by monsters somewhere, continents are being threatened by hurtling meteors, and cities are being sucked into the ocean by Richter-scale shattering earthquakes, I’m happy. (I’m talking in the movies).

This is probably why I have such an affinity for global warming stories that forecast disaster for the Earth.

Unfortunately, so much absurdity has been injected into the discussion these days that to parody them is nearly impossible anymore. A disaster film about the effects a billion simultaneously melting glaciers, for instance, would more likely be seen as an instructional video rather than silly entertainment.

A few years ago while working on a project with the Young Republican Club of New York City, the idea came up that we could create a skit (for a TV presentation that never came to fruition) where a hard-nosed news anchor reported the threat of global warming being so serious that global cooling would break out. It sounded so ridiculous  – and potentially funny – at the time.

Today, it passes for just another disastrous by-product of the human race out of control.

Take, for instance, this paragraph from one of the better doomsday stories I’ve read in a while, composed by Seth Borenstein of the Associated Press, published yesterday:

Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it’s thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.

There it is.

That temperatures are actually falling now illustrates how fast the world is warming.

Indeed, the article is worth a read, if only for the use of the phrase “ticking time bomb” in the first paragraph and the equally endearing “time is running out” in the second. 

Who says objectivity is dead?

And for those who believe that the doom has already settled in, you may be right. Borenstein writes:

The amount of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere has already pushed past what some scientists say is the safe level.

Damn. That can’t be good.

The overall gist of the article is that new President will have very little time to get something done to save this planet.

Obama is stacking his Cabinet and inner circle with advocates who have pushed for deep mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas pollution and even with government officials who have achieved results at the local level.

Translation: Obama has put into place a team of radical leftist enivironmental freak jobs who will look to demonize business and industry by implementing “green” standards that will hurt the country.

Period.

Remember … Obama is a centrist.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

FIVE AND OUT

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 14, 2008

global stupidity

global stupidity

Someone really ought to inform Santa.

Expect a flood of refugee elves to inundate cold climate cities across the globe.

It would behoove Snow Miser to start pricing condos in Antarctica.

There are less than two-thousand days left in the life of the Northern Polar Ice Cap. According to internet-creator and carbon-credit-crunch-immune climate guru Al Gore, the Arctic ice cap will be gone in five years. For those who have been planning any sort of getaway to the great top-of-the-world ice sheets, you best make those arrangements now. There isn’t time to waste.

Gore was across the pond in Germany, at a natural history museum, in front of an audience of excited doomsdayers and model dinosaurs, all of whom were eager to hear about the world’s imminent destruction from the man himself.

They weren’t disappointed.

Humans will apparently undo in five years what Gore says nature hasn’t been able to do in three million – rid the planet of North Pole ice.

(It’s difficult to hear, but you can see the short clip here. There’s a German translator speaking over Gore. He never sounded so good.)

I don’t know this for sure, but I’m guessing Gore flew to Germany in a private jet and was delivered to the doomsday seminar via stretch limo. Of course, that’s just me being my cynical, holocaust-denying, uncaring, right-wing, long-live-greenhouse-gasses self.

I really do need to pay better attention to these things and get my death-calendar in order …

I was under the impression that the ice-caps were supposed to be gone by 2006. I goofed. I mistakenly dated the complete submergence of the North American Atlantic Coast under water, inland to about one hundred miles or so, as occurring by 2011. I also said polar bears would be roaming the streets of Des Moines, looking for ice chips by 2014.

I’m all mixed up here.

Meanwhile, I’m still trying to square away all of the other models of leftist hysteria that I’ve been confused about.

When did we run out of natural resources and precious metals? Wasn’t that going to happen in 1990 or thereabouts?

I missed the heterosexual AIDS epidemic that was to sweep across America. Wasn’t that supposed to wipe out tens of thousands of straight folks by 1988?

When was it that we ran out of land to accommodate the over-populating human race? I thought there would be no more room left to put anyone by the year 2000.

My recollection was that food supplies were going to dwindle to nothing by the year 1997.

Maybe I misunderstood.

Posted in Global Warming, Junk Science, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

GLOBAL WARMING WARNING NO. 2345

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 11, 2008

Snow fell earlier today in Southeastern Louisiana and Southern Mississippi.

From NEWS ONE:

Parts of Louisiana were expected to get up to four inches of snow. Snow also covered a broad swath of Mississippi, including the Jackson area, and closed schools in more than a dozen districts. The National Weather Service in Jackson said up to 8 inches was possible in the southern and eastern parts of the state.

Office workers stepped out of high-rises to catch a snowflake, snap pictures with cell-phone cameras and swap snow stories.

winter20weather20adef792b-5fcf-4961-8c53-cf72fd63307e_tnIn Louisiana, nearly 7,000 power outages were reported in south-central parishes as falling tree limbs snapped under the weight of ice and snow.

Forecasters said the mix of sleet and snow was expected to diminish later in the day as the weather system moved east.

The wintry weather is rare in south Louisiana, though the state‘s northern parishes see it about once a year. New Orleans‘ last snowfall, in 2004, was a dusting that came nine months before Hurricane Katrina struck. The record snowfall for the city is about 5 inches, recorded Dec. 30, 1963.

Of course, the phrase “Global Warming” has been rendered outmoded in favor of the more inclusive “Global Climate Change,” thus everything that happens meteorologically, no matter what it is, fits every conceivable model of destruction.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

WARMING CAUSES COOLING CAUSES EVERYTHING

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 7, 2008

From the “nothing else needs to be said” file …

Pundits, talk-show hosts, op-ed writers, cable news rambling heads and low-level blogging types (yours truly) can often be helpful in dissecting the comings and goings in this world, making them easier to comprehend or put into context – sometimes to the benefit of critical thought, other times to the determent. However, occassions do arise where it simply isn’t necessary to analyze and break down the often complicated stories and events of our time to be able to make some sense of them.

the world hangs in the balance

the world hangs in the balance

There are times when a “let it speak for itself” approach is sufficient.

This is one of those instances, I suspect.

On the front page of Drudge Report, as of early Sunday morning (Eastern Time), there were links to two global warming stories – a fairly common occurance there.

This particular time, however, there was something funny about them – they way they were posted on the page.  It was almost deliberately comical.

The first was a Reuters article with the headline, “Climate Protestors Demand Swift UN Action.” (That, in itself should be enough to have you wetting your inseam with laughter. The only thing the United Nations accomplishes in a timely manner is passing resolutions against Israel).

The second headline, directly below it read, “2008 will be Coolest Year of the Decade.”

I giggled. I thought of “The Onion” momentarily – the first story about the rallying wackjobs who believe the world is about to sizzle itself to death, and the second story – just below it – talking about how cold its getting.

After digging a bit deeper, however, I quickly realized that both articles were actually saying the same thing (as so many of them do) – that we are doomed (or almost doomed).

The first article’s opening sentences are indicative of the hysteria that has grabbed the environmental left by the short hairs:

Thousands of climate protesters, some dressed as polar bears, devils or penguins, demanded on Saturday swifter action from the United Nations to combat global warming. Several thousand more protesters took part in a march through London to demand “urgent and radical action” from the British government on climate change.

Costumes are always a winner. Penguin-suit wearing freak balls always put me in a warm and fuzzy mood.

“So far I think it’s going really slowly,” Susann Scherbarth from Friends of the Earth in Germany said of the talks in the western city of Poznan. She and other protesters in Poznan waved a banner reading: “Stop clowning around, get serious about climate action.”

Typical, off-the-rack goofballism. What could be more serious than a devil outfit?

Besides, there is something marvelously insane about watching global warming protestors bundled up in winter clothing, screaming things.

But wait … it actually gets better with the second article. Apparently, the cooling that’s happening doesn’t mean there isn’t still dangerous warming going on. The path to Earthly destruction (I’m happy to report) remains in tact. Below the main headline is the money quote – a sub-headline which reads in part: “… cooler temperature is not evidence that global warming is slowing, say climate scientists.”

That I have to pose this next question shows the level of absurdity this debate has descended to … but if cooling temperatures are not evidence of the slowing of global warming, what the hell is?

(This is where I turn at the camera with one of those great asides, one of those Jack Benny “looks” where nothing needs to be said –  a “let it speak for itself” moment. For those not familiar with Benny, think Jim on The Office).

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

GREEN COURT

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 1, 2008

global_warmingIf Stephen Hockman gets his way, the world could see the creation of a kind of international climate court which would exist as the ultimate authoritative body on environmental matters.

Oh, joy.

The gavel would almost certainly not be made of wood, incidentally, lest the death of a tree contribute to its formation and operation.

Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent for the UK Telegraph, writes:

The first role of the new body would be to enforce international agreements on cutting greenhouse gas emissions set to be agreed next year.

But the court would also fine countries or companies that fail to protect endangered species or degrade the natural environment and enforce the “right to a healthy environment”.

The innovative idea is being presented to an audience of politicians, scientists and public figures for the first time at a symposium at the British Library.

Mr Hockman, a deputy High Court judge, said that the threat of climate change means it is more important than ever for the law to protect the environment.

Innovative, she said?

It would be interesting to see how such a court would actually enforce these featherbrained greenhouse gas emission standards, or how they propose to exact fines from violating nations.

I envision a gang of unshaven, white helmeted men and women, sporting edible organic sandals, with beaded necklaces made from squirrel dung, arriving on their army of bicycles to the gates of Dow Chemical, singing that awful Tommy James song about hugging a tree, threatening (in their most intimidating voices) to raise their fines even more if they don’t quit it.

Their guitars will be at the ready should it escalate to the next level and a group Joan Baez sing is required.

(It will not be pretty).

“The time is now ripe to set this up and get it going,” (Hockman) said. “Its remit will be overall climate change and the need for better regulation of carbon emissions but at the same time the implementation and enforcement of international environmental agreements and instruments.”

The court would be led by retired judges, climate change experts and public figures. It would include a scientific body to consider evidence and provide access to any data on the environment.

Most importantly, Mr Hockman said an international court on the environment would influence public opinion which in turn would force Governments to take the environment seriously. He said: “If there are bodies around that can give definitive legal rulings that are accepted as fair and reasonable that has its own impact on public opinion.”

Friends of the Earth welcomed the idea.

Well, if Friends of the Earth digs the idea….

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

THE PLANET NEEDS YOU, MR. OBAMA

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 23, 2008

it ain't easy being green

it ain't easy being green

Check your carbon credits, Mr. President-elect. It looks like your limo is a planet slayer.

Sarah Baxter from the Times Online in Great Britain writes:

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to get a million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015. His own new presidential limousine will be far from green, however.

The Obamobile being prepared for the president-elect is said to be a monster gas-guzzler made by General Motors, the troubled car giant. It will look like a black Cadillac but is built like a tank. A spy photographer who tracks down future car models for magazines snatched pictures of the heavily disguised first-car-in-waiting when it was being road-tested last summer.

The armour-plated car, which has a raised roof, windows up to 5in thick, extra-strength tyres and a body made of steel, aluminium, titanium and ceramics, is thought to be based on a GMC 2500 truck that gets less than 10 miles to the gallon.

When the planet plunges into catostrophic ruin – and we’re practically there already, by most accounts – we’ll know where pointing fingers will be aimed.

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

MORE GORE

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 20, 2008

breath mint?

breath mint?

In his online journal on Wednesday, Al Gore cited a new study suggesting that “the Mayan civilization might have collapsed due to environmental disasters.”

Mr. Gore writes:

” ‘These models suggest that as ecosystems were destroyed by mismanagement or were transformed by global climatic shifts, the depletion of agricultural and wild foods eventually contributed to the failure of the Maya sociopolitical system,’ writes environmental archaeologist Kitty Emery of the Florida Museum of Natural History in the current Human Ecology journal.

As we move towards solving the climate crisis, we need to remember the consequences to civilizations that refused to take environmental concerns seriously.”

I’m confused.

I thought pre-Columbian North America was a veritable paradise of human civilization, where indigenous peoples were at one with both the land and sky, tending to Mother Earth’s tender balances, free of the material selfishness and moral evil that would define the soon-to-come destructive European invaders.

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

GREEN WEEK – HAPPY HAPPY JOY JOY

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 17, 2008

Showing Gore how it's done

Showing Gore how it's done

Did you know it’s Green Week at the National Broadcasting Company?

If not, where the hell have you been?

For those who are not self-absorbed, planet raping, carbon-credit crisis deniers, I trust you’ve made your preparations and contacted loved ones. I’m not sure if there will be a nationwide call for everyone in the country to simultaneously unplug their television sets or flip off circuit-breakers in the name of climate civility, but NBC is ready to go.

It’s scare-mongering time!

Mark Finkelstein at News Busters writes:

During half-time of last night’s Sunday Night Football game, Meredith Vieira helped, uh, kick things off with a bit of alarmism that would put Al Gore to shame. The Today show co-host raised the spectre of the oceans rising . . . at least 200 feet!

Readers will recall that Al Gore’s claim, propagated in An Inconvenient Truth, of a Manhattan-drowning 20-foot sea-level rise has been widely rejected as so much alarmist hooey. But compared to her apocalyptic vision, Vieira made Gore’s Wall Street-under-water image look like a bathroom floor puddle .

MEREDITH VIEIRA: Matt [Lauer] is in Belize, he’s off the coast at a place called the Blue Hole. It is the home to some of the most exotic marine life in the world, and all sorts of beautiful coral reefs and they’re all being threatened because the water temperatures are rising.

Al [Roker] on the other hand is in Iceland looking at the glaciers which store most of our fresh water. And if they were to melt, the oceans could rise at least 200 feet.

And our intrepid reporter Ann Curry, well she is climbing Mount Kilimanjaro as I speak. She hopes to reach the summit by Friday. The snows of Mount Kilimanjaro are rapidly melting, and that is threatening the people of Tanzania.

Wow, I had no idea it was this serious. I thought it was all just hysterical apocalyptic gun-jumping silly-speak.

I’m not sure Vieira and the Doom-Crew are aware of this – nor would it make a difference, seeing as they have the Earth already flirting with certain death – but Finkelstein points out that the United States Geological Survey says:

“Climate-related sea-level changes of the last century are very minor compared with the large changes in sea level that occur as climate oscillates between the cold and warm intervals that are part of the Earth’s natural cycle of long-term climate change. Global sea level was about 125 meters below today’s sea level at the last glacial maximum about 20,000 years ago.”

As Finkelstein writes, “Virtually none of that rise, of course, can be attributable to man.“

Hmm.

Must’ve been all of that Wooly Mammoth flatulence.

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

SO HOT, IT’S COOL

Posted by Andrew Roman on November 16, 2008

open up your ice cap and say "ah!"

open your ice cap and say "ah!"

It was the hottest October on record we were told. It was yet another indication of the world’s steady and catastrophic plunge into the depths of climate change (formerly known as global warming) hell. At least that was the word from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) last Monday.

The hysterical left (redundant) went nuts, like their team had just won the World Series – but only because the other team’s plane had crashed. A strange kind of “See? I told you the planet was on the brink of death” smugness settled in.

It was sweet vindication.

The only problem was … it wasn’t true.

They goofed.

The UK’s Telegraph website explains:

A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which is run by Al Gore’s chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.

The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.

I suppose that while initial reports of the hottest October ever had the boys in the newsroom in a collective euphoric state, it became unnecessary to pay attention to some of the “incidental” data coming in.

October, for instance, saw the “worst snowstorm ever” slam Tibet. Here in the United States, NOAA reported sixty-three instances of record snowfall last month as well as 115 record-breaking “lowest temperature” readings. In 114 years of stat-gathering, October, 2008 was the 70th warmest ever.

It’s fortunate for me that the mistake was caught when it was.

I was just about to list all of my incandescent light bulbs and electricity-dependant items on E-Bay, so that I might get my carbon-credit house in order … except the computer, of course.

_

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »