Monday, September 15, 2014
The myth of Arctic meltdown is caught out. Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker now and covers 1.7 million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago....despite Al Gore's prediction seven years ago, it would be Ice-Free by now. An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago has expanded for the second year in a row.
The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ''The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff.'' he said. ''It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Only seven years from now!'' Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Noble Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change. Far from vanishing the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession - with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.
The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by NASA. These reveal that - as of three weeks ago - the ice cover was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years - an impressive 43 per cent.
Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different message, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise! Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting. Professor Andrew Shephard, of Leeds University and University College, London, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said last week; ''It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in the thickness over the past year. It seems that an unusually cool summer in 2013 allowed more ice to survive through to last winter. This means that the Arctic sea ice pack is thicker and stronger than usual, and this should be taken into account when making predictions of its future.''
Yet for years, many have been claiming that the Arctic is in an ''irrevocable death spiral'', with imminent ice-free summers bound to trigger further disasters. These include gigantic releases of methane into the atmosphere from frozen Arctic deposits, and accelerated global warming caused by the fact that heat from the sun will no longer be reflected back by the ice into space. Judith Curry, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said; ''The Arctic sea ice spiral of death seems to have reversed.''
It's amazing that the warmists snouts were so deep into the government subsidies trough that they didn't take notice of the pause in global warming over the past 19 years! (See Chart on right) And even now, they and their brainwashed political cronies can't come around and admit they got it wrong. Those who just a few years ago were warning of ice-free summers by 2014 included US Secretary of State John Kerry, who made the same bogus prediction in 2009, while Mr Gore has repeated it numerous times - notably in a speech to world leaders at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen (in the middle of a huge snow storm), in an effort to persuade them to agree to a new emissions treaty. Damn Hypocrite !
Meanwhile the South Pole also has the Warmists (the real Deniers) flummoxed !
Remember warmist scientist Chris Turney and his Ship of Fools last December? (See my posting 3 January, 2014 - Ship of Fools: Doomed by Wishful Thinking). Chris is a professor of climate change (another trough feeder) at Australia's University of New South Wales, said it was ''silly'' to suggest he and 73 others aboard the MV Akademic Shokalskiy were trapped in the ice they'd sought to prove had melted. He remained adamant that sea ice IS melting, even as the boat remained trapped in the frozen sea. ''Sea ice is disappearing due to climate change, but here, where we were trapped, ice is building up,'' his Australian Antarctic Expedition said in a statement.
Sea ice disappearing???? Anthony Watts now reports; ''The Antarctic Sea Ice Extent on September 13th may have set a NEW all time record (at least for the satellite era, we don't have data prior to that.'' So who are the Deniers now? Satellites have never detected so much Antarctic sea ice before, (see photo above) which leaves warmists blaming....you know what:
CEO of the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Tony Worby, said the warming atmosphere is leading to grater sea ice coverage by changing wind patterns.
But what warming atmosphere? Hasn't he even bothered to see the IPCC had drawn attention to an apparent levelling-off of globally-averaged temperatures at the 15 year mark? Professor Ross McKitrick studied land and ocean temperatures since 1850. He also compared this to satellite data from 1979 to 2014. Trends in this data revealed global warming has been on pause for 19 years now. And it has been on hiatus for between 16 and 26 years in the lower troposphere - the lowest portion of the Earth's atmosphere, so it wouldn't come near the ability of it to change wind patterns. So, Mr Tony Worby ''You're dreaming or you are lying.'' This is ''the science''. Why do warmists keep ignoring it?
The Way I See It.....The UN has outed itself with a cynical stunt. What with ''the science'' against the faith it has so frantically promoted, the United Nation's IPCC searches for someone who will turn the debate. Note well: it's looking for someone who isn't a scientist but who can play the guilt, racial politics, gender politics and victimhood. The UN is looking for a young woman to be the ''Malala'' of the climate change movement, serving as a voice that will energize the opening session of the 2014 Climate Summit, being held on September 23rd in New York City.
The organization has put out a call for a woman under 30 and has to be from a developing country and must have a background that includes advocacy on climate change or work implementing climate mitigation or adaptation solutions. So far, the call for applications has drawn 544 women, who emailed short videos of the themselves in all their brainwashed innocence to the Secretary-General's office, showing they can persuade world leaders to act on climate change. See, this is no longer about science at all, just a religious crusade. Pathetic and hypocritical.
Friday, September 5, 2014
A disturbing set of developments has come about recently, all of them brought about by Barack Hussein Obama. Like puzzle pieces, they begin to fall into place. And the picture that is beginning to emerge is not a pretty one.
The first piece: 70,000 American-Trained Taliban: Paul Sperry, of the New York Post, has reported that the recent assassination of an American general by Taliban terrorist has exposed what he calls ''the lunacy of the administration's Afghanistan strategy.''
Under orders from President Obama, the military is now training Taliban terrorists, recruiting 7,000 a month -- often eschewing background check -- to fill the ranks of what is now a 350,000-member ''SECURITY FORCE''. Many of those hired have been imprisoned terrorists, released as part of a government-sponsored amnesty and reintegration program that is paying ex-Taliban warriors to join the government.
These American-trained Jihadis will surely end up being the ones who rise quickly to command level, once the American troops have departed Afghanistan. And, in the meantime=me, they pose an ongoing security threat to American military personnel at the highest levels. And is it just possible that some of these Jihadis might pose a threat to the integrity of the American homeland, even now?
Secondly, Obama ordered the release of Caliph Ibrahim, the now present head of the new Islamic State, from Camp Bucca in Afghanistan, in 2009. Back then he was called Au Bakr Baghdadi, and, upon his release, is known to have uttered the following words to his former prison guards; ''I will see you guys in New York.''
President Obama has allowed the Islamic State to grow and prosper. When this group of thugs were into taking control of the rebellion against Syria's Bashar Al-Assard off of the initial freedom fighters to make it there mission to turn Syria into an Islamic state, Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Libya secretly appropriating Gadhafi's weapons stash. With the help of White House sanctioning the CIA covertly was shipping these weapons to the jihadists through Turkey, without proper safeguards and regard for their future intentions.. The die was cast for these militants to be strengthened by the U.S.A.'s weapons undercover help.
Thirdly, as the fighting in Syria was progressing and ISIS became more powerful daily, the conflict was attracting many US and European Muslim passport holders to come and participate. The question now is will American Jihadis be allowed to return to America, after having trained with the newly upgraded Islamic State, with as much ease as the Boston Bombers?, Remember them? Americans need to remember that the Russians actually warned the Obama people about Dzhokar and Tamerlan Tsaraev, but they still were cleared by the Obama FBI for entry into the country anyway.
And strangely, it was the Obama White House that insisted on mirandizing and protecting Dzhokar by reading him his rights and shutting him up to protect him, before it was legally necessary or called for. And mysteriously, not one media outlet questioned the controversial legal moves.
A good question with regard to Obama Administration policy might be this: With such little enforcement of the Mexican border and having such permissive policies in place elsewhere why is Obama allowing radical Muslims ingress to the country. Is Obama actually, directly or indirectly, working to sponsor Islamist attacks against Americans?
Fourthly, in the past, Muslim immigrants were limited in number to 50,000 a year. Part of the reason
Fifthly, the recent shocking deal President Obama had managed to cut with the release of an American soldier that seems only to help extremist Muslims. The released soldier is Bowe Bergdahl, to all indications a Jihadi Muslim himself -- a deserter who abandoned his fellow soldiers in search of the Taliban, so that he might, allegedly, help them in their efforts to kill Americans. If fact four of his brothers-in-arms were killed searching for him. Obama sanctioned the release of the five most dangerous Jihadis in Gitmo for Bergdahl, much to the exasperation of the U.S. Military command. They comprised the Taliban Dream Team, (left below) and they will most assuredly return to the fight against
And last-but-not-least, Barack Obama's dithering on having Congress draw up a strong immigration policy and his continuous talk of an amnesty has created a Southern border insecurity nightmare. Many U.S. officials concerns keep falling on his deaf ears that the Islamic State is planning to attack the United States by crossing the porous region with Mexico. Even Texas Governor, Rick Perry, has already warned that the militants probably are lying in wait in some border towns on the Mexican side. Just recently, because Mexico does so little to police its own border that three Ukrainians with long criminal records easily walked into Texas. He added that ''it is a very real possibility that Islamist terrorists may have already entered the United States.''
The Way I See It......if President Barack Hussein Obama is not a jihadist sympathizer, bent on allowing a ''Muslim Death Cult'' to succeed in establishing a new Islamic Caliphate in the heart of the Middle East, then he and his administration have been just damn fools these past five years. We have watched as he has allowed a bunch of al-Qaeda militants in Syria, transform into, first, ISIS then growing into ISIL and now with a much broader agenda....The Islamic State.
Today, there are more terrorist groups than there were before 9/11. After all the sacrifice in Afghanistan and Iraq, why do we find ourselves in a more dangerous world? This administration's dereliction-of-duty has both sins of action and inaction, which is what happens when you are flailing around without careful strategic thinking. The Islamic State is now more focused on waging war as guerrillas and insurgents with ample expertise using social media for propaganda, fund raising and recruiting. Only time will tell if Western leaders get some backbones to seriously take them on. ''Peace through Strength'' only works if you have and show strength. Where's Ronald Reagan when you need him?
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Is Barack Obama the most useless president in US history? I do not think Barack Obama is a closet sympathizer of Muslim Jihadists bent on our destruction, but God help me I suddenly understand how some have arrived at that conclusion. More on that in an up-coming posting on this blog site.
He was in a taupe suit facing a dumb-founded press corps and to stand up to tell the world that America was going to do zero to help Ukraine and have no strategy to defeat ISIS is just insane.
This totally beige-moment was so shocking that the White House staff had to go into complete and total damage control afterwards is telling. But even their damage control was insufficient. They told Wolf Blitzer, anchor and journalist for CNN, the White House had a strategy, just not a strategy to go after them in Syria.
Here's Josh Earnest, current Press Secretary and Assistant to the President, doing damage control on CNN:
''The president was asked a specific question about what approach he was going to pursue when it came to possible military action in Syria against ISIL. That was the specifc question he was asked and the president was explicit, that he is still waiting for plans that are being developed by the Pentagon for military options that he has for going into Syria.''
How long has Syria been a problem? The President addressed the nation, a year ago, on September 10, about Syria and the actions we would take. But he said he would not get involved outside of forcing Syria to give up chemical weapons. His military leaders have insisted America do more, but the President dithered, much like he dithered trying to save James Foley, and now Steven Sotloff.
And what of the strategy to defeat ISIS in Iraq? Just words and a few tactical missile strikes. More from the White House Press Secretary:
''But when it comes to confronting ISIL, the president has been very clear for months about what our comprehensive strategy is for confronting the ISIL threat in Iraq. It starts with a unified Iraq government, that can unite that country to meet the threat that's facing their country right now.''
''Secondly, it includes strengthening our relationship with the Iraqi and Kurdish security forces, to make sure that they have the equipment ad training they need to take the fight to ISIL on the ground in their country.''
''The third component of our strategy is engaging regional governments. It's certainly not in the interest of governments in that neighbourhood to have ISIL wreaking havoc and doing terrible acts of violence in their region.''
''The forth aspect of the strategy is engaging countries around the world in this effort.''
And then, of course, the fifth aspect of the strategy.....the fifth component, is the use of American military force.''
So to kill the bad guys the President has to let the Iraqis set up a new government, then Obama needs to rebuild relationships with people don't trust him (like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey), then he needs to engage regional governments who've taken to launching strikes in Libya without telling us, then we need to sing kumbaya with the world....... As usual Obama now belatedly does something but very, very little. He is being shamed to stop his dithering and show some balls this crisis demands.
The Way I See It.....the president wants....to stay out of Iraq for probably and also certainly for political reasons. His bragging that he ended the war in Iraq has come around full circle and bit him on his embarrassed ass. He also wants to defeat ISIS and wants to do both. And the problem is, if you try to do both, you are going to do both mediocrely. And that's basically what happened.
I just don't think you can do both. ISIS is a pretty impressive organization and they have taken over. And for America to say it's going to leave it to the Iraqis to take care of ISIS strikes me as probably not an option that's going to be on the table. Expecting the Iraqis to be able to beat ISIS on their own is going to take months and ISIS can do a lot of damage in those months. And so I think this split-the-difference policy the president has adopted of trying to be in and out at the time is not going to be tenable. I suspect he has to get his hands dirty, suck up his pride, and is going to have to go in a little further....he has no more time to dawdle! How many will die because of this President and his foolishness????
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Australia's Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, addressing the launch of the Defining Moments Project has nominated the arrival of the first fleet, along with the launch of Rupert Murdoch's Australian newspaper and publication of The Lucky Country, as defining moments in the nation's history. Mr Abbott marked the 200th anniversary of the death of Arthur Phillip (31st August), the first governor of New South Wales, by crediting the arrival of that first fleet from Britain in 1788 as ''defining moment in the history of this continent'' He repeated it twice for reflective appreciation. He went on:
''It was the moment this continent became part of the modern world. It determined our language, our law and our fundamental values. Yes, it did dispossess and for a long time marginalise Indigenous people, still it's British settlement that has most profoundly shaped the country that we are.
It has provided the foundation for Australia to become one of the freest, fairest and most prosperous societies on the face of the earth. So Arthur Phillip (left) is as significant to modern Australia as George Washington is to the modern United States.''
There is a great gain to Abbott from saying something plainly true that will cause tribalists and grudge-mongers of the Left to rage. It makes him seem the voice of reason against the representatives of division and unreason. Unfortunately, but increasingly predictably, one of the critics was Abbott's top advisor on indigenous affairs, Warren Mundine: ''It was also a disastrous defining moment for Aboriginal people. Does that mean that Aboriginal people would have prospered from that? Of course not.'' Mundine is increasingly acting like an opposition member in the government.
Mundine should check what Abbott said before rushing to criticise him. Abbott did not deny dispossession. He did not say everyone benefited equally. He is not talking in the absolutes of the deadshit Left. Mundine however is talking in those absolutes that go with being a leader of the ''race'' industry. His own family history, his own relative prosperity and his own freedoms should tell him that, yes, he has indeed prospered, too, from British settlement. Look at the society around him and the benefits that he enjoys in full measure. How much of that would be there had no British, or indeed, European settlement occurred? (photo below) It is simply beyond any rational argument that British settlement was the single event which most shaped how the vast majority of us live today.
Of course our Leftist ABC finds other critics to rage against Abbott - or rage, rather, against a truth which does not fit their preferred narrative. Let me mention two ungrateful Abos. Matilda House, (photo on right) who does native ceremonies at Parliament, and who in her own mode of life and ancestry betrays the profound influence white settlement has had on her too, yet protests: ''I can't fathom how a ship that sailed into Sydney Harbor could overtake 60,000 years before.'' Look around you, Ms House. You may not fathom it, but the fact that more than 23 million Australians speak English, not one of the 510 languages your ''mob'' had, and abide by English-derived law, not Aboriginal, tells you just how profoundly those wasted 60,000 years, without any defining moments, were overtaken.
Then there's fair-skinned Kirsty Parker, National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, who must also know how defining an event white settlement was on her own family, too: ''This notion that the real Australia, the true Australia, the good and modern Australia started in 1788 is of course offensive to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.'' Once again, note how Abbott's critics need to verbal him in order to damn, suggesting that what he actually did say can't be demonised to their satisfaction. Parker rebuts an alleged fact not by proving it wrong, but by damning it as ''offensive''. This is one of the greatest poisons in public debate today, to make free speech unlawful.
The Way I See It....while it may be ''offensive'' to some, I say to Ms Parker, that does not make it untrue. If what Abbott says is false tell us his error. Tell us what he overlooked, are there any defining moments that we must recognize the Aboriginals achieved during their 60,000 years of occupation of this continent?
When did you invent the wheel? When did you settle on one language to consolidate the 510 that kept you from uniting as a real society? When did you discover metallurgy? What were you doing when empires were rising all over the world with coordinated building activities? Oh yes, that
I say to all Aborigines, do not retreat behind the imagined walls of ''race'' that so artificially divide us. Face the reality, even your how life is more complex that this ''us'' and ''them'' dichotomy suggests. We have all been profoundly shaped by British settlement, and, not incidentally, overwhelmingly for the good.
Sunday, August 24, 2014
We have a problem in Australia that I have been warning about since 2010 and now finally seems to have reared it's ugly head enough to get on the majority of Australians and their Leftist media's radar. Prime Minister Tony Abbott reached out to Muslim leaders to have an anti-terrorism discussion and to help avert what would be a disaster for the Muslim community. He met with Sydney leaders 3 days ago to build support for reforms that would allow police to arrest Australians who may have joined foreign conflicts. And 2 days ago he met with Islamic leaders in Melbourne to discuss the new laws.
But how serious and responsible are these leaders really? How quick are they to play the VICTIM card and make non-Muslim Australians seem the real problem. Keysar Trad, from the Islamic Friendship Association (I'm sure a euphemism for Death-to-all-Infidels) says the Government's proposals go too far, such as the move to make it illegal to travel to an area of obvious terrorist activity, such as Syria.
Amazing, this is the same Keysar Trad (right) now claiming to be just as concerned as the rest of us about jihadists. Trad was the former spokesman of the pro-Hezbollah Mufti of Australia, the extremist Sheik Taj Al-Din Al-Hiladsy. Trad was also a translator for the pro-Osama bin Laden and pro-jihadist Nida'ul Islam magazine, where he wrote; ''The criminal dregs of white society colonized this country....and the descendants of these criminal dregs tell us that they are better than us.''
Senator Cory Bernardi adds more about Trad, now advising our Prime Minister on how to deal with national security; ''In 2009, the New South Wales Supreme Court found that Mr Trad 'incites people to commit acts of violence', incites people to have racist attitudes and is a dangerous and disgraceful individual'' The courts based it's findings on the following evidence: Firstly, Mr Trad's website touted that he had ''very good articles on Islam and Muslims'' but the courts found that his website held ''significant anti-Semitic views''. He also said to a journalist that it is questionable about how many Jews really died in the Holocaust. In the end, both courts deemed that this showed Keysar Trad incited violence against Jewish people.
Then there's the finding that he was also a ''dangerous individual''. This was based an the unseemly opinion he give to the media; When talking about a gang rape of young women by a group Lebanese men, he chose to tell a joke and describe these types of perpetrators as ''stupid young boys''. The courts said that his comments about this issue ''demeaned the victims of the crime'', ''did not condemn the Lebanese scumbags'' and ''trivialised the responsibility of rapists.''
In 2006, already recognized as an Islamic spokesman, he failed to condemn Sheik Tak El-Din Hilali's comment on ''the blessings of the 11th of September'' and when he related to another rape case by saying, ''when you take out uncovered meat and place on the street with out a cover....the cats will come and eat it.'' and another revealing moment when the Sheik (left) condoned the use of boys as martyrs in the cause of radical Islam. The court said this ''involved putting forward ideas which risk an unbalanced or fanatical Muslim being encouraged, or encouraging others, to participate in such activities.'' and yet Trad said nothing.
Despite Tony Abbott's friendly approach to discuss the proposed new terrorism laws, by the end of the week Muslim leaders across Australia have denounced as unjust, unjustified and inflammatory the laws and have refused to ''rubber stamp'' them for the government. This bunch of self-appointed hypocrites included more than 60 organizations (I don't think not even Christians and Jews have that many organizations in Australia....is this Jihad By Stealth?), including 10 sheikhs and the present day Grand Mufti of Australia (who doesn't even speak English !) said the threat from the ostensible target of the laws - about 150 ''radicalised'' Muslims from Iraq or Syria - had been ''trumped up''.
The Way I See It......the liberal Left in the Western world are, as Lenin repeatedly said, ''are the useful idiots'' of the Islamist extremists, encouraging us to see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil against them. Just like the Communists, they got a free pass to carry on regardless. When U.S. journalist James Foley was decapitated in a subhuman act of depravity, the ''usefuls'' railed against pictures showing the last moments of his life because they conveyed a sense of the horror to come. I am left with a clear impression that these Islamic leaders have more interest in preaching victimhood than fighting terrorism. They are feeding what they should be fighting.
Even on Radio National, for the ''usefuls'' the issue of the day was how to deal with the images ''rather than how to prevent more of these acts, let alone how we tackle the global and home grown Islamist extremism driving these atrocities. Unbelievably, on ABC-TV's Insiders program, Australia's biggest ''useful'' asshole, David Marr (right), downplayed the threat embodied by ''depraved clown beheader'' Khaled Sharrouf and surmised Australians were ''not at risk because of this''. Never mind his 150 fellow citizens fighting with the Islamic State, or the hundreds from Indonesia, Britain and Europe. According to Marr, ''there is a tide of fear and hatred pulsing out not from the Middle East but from our media.''
While Mr Marr was in denial this week, he missed being put in his place by a senior leader of radical Sydney-based Islamic organisation al-Risalah denounced the Australia flag, as the group's supporters posted Facebook messages about beheading ''non-believers''. Wissam Haddad, the head deadshit of the al-Risalah Islamic Centre in Sydney's southwest told The Daily Telegraph he followed the ''flag of Allah'' rather than the flag of Australia. The flag, called the Shahada, is the same piece of filth used by Islamic State militants who think a beheading is something to be revelled in and divinely sanctioned by a heartless Allah. The Koran and Hadith licence the savagery we now see.
''I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.'' God declares in the Koran. ''Strike off their heads, then, strike off all their fingertips.'' Mohammed is said to have ordered the decapitation of 700 rebellious Jews. His sword -- after which the Iranian battle tank Zulfiqar is named -- translates into English as ''cleaver of vertebrae.'' I have to wonder how long the ''usefuls'' will take for granted the appeal of the brutal and murderous literalism of the Islamic State's recruitment of our Muslim children? Complacency is not an option.
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
If any business were to submit a prospectus as patently false and deliberately dishonest as ones used to advance the cause of the global warming industry, its directors would all be in prison by now. Does that mean Ed Davey should be thrown in the slammer for his claim on BBC Daily Politics the other day that in ''a recent analysis of 12,000 climate papers...of scientists who expressed a view 97 per cent said that climate change was happening and that it was human-made activity.'' ?
Not quite, unfortunately, because nothing Davey has said there is technically untrue. A better candidate for prison, actually, would be the one who tweets under the name @BarackObama. When he tweeted: ''Ninety-seven per cent of scientists agree; climate change is real, man-made and dangerous'' he was surely promulgating a demonstrable untruth. No one has ever doubted that climate changes. Pretty much everyone -- probably more than 97 per cent, even -- agrees that there is a degree of anthropogenic input, even it's barely measurable contribution of beef cattle farts or the heat produced by cities. But the dangerous bit? No one has come even close to demonstrating it, there is no reliable evidence for it, and very few scientists -- certainly far fewer than 97 per cent of them -- would ever stake their reputations on such a tendentious claim.
The background to all this -- and the ''97 per cent of climate scientists say....'' meme -- is expertly covered in a new paper for the Global Warming Policy Foundation by Andrew Montford. In a sane world it wouldn't have needed writing. An obscure green political activist called John Cook and a few of his eco-cronies produced a pseudo-scientific paper so riddled with flaws that it ought to have tossed straight in the bin. Instead, it was hyped up by a compliant mainstream media, a desperate and propaganda-hungry green industry, and by the ignorant U.S. President as a vitally significant meta-analysis offering indisputable proof of the scientific ''consensus on climate change.
Montford (left) concludes; ''The so-called consensus as described by the survey, is virtually meaningless and tells us nothing about the current state of scientific opinion beyond the trivial observation that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that human activities have warmed the planet to some unspecified extent. The survey methodology therefore fails to address the key points that are in dispute in the global warming debate.'' So how do the bastards go on getting away with it? Jamie Whyte provides a fascinating, erudite answer in his new paper for the Institute of Economic Affairs.
In it, he exposes the ''rhetorical bluster'' used by the climate alarmist establishment to make their case sound stronger and more trustworthily ''scientific'' than it really is. He is especially sceptical of those who try to advance their cause with the weasel phrase ''evidence-based'' policy. He writes:
''They are partial in their accounting for costs and benefits; they ignore substitution effects; they pretend that mathematical precision is evidence; they confound risk and uncertainty; and they exaggerate the certainty warranted by the available evidence. Having committed such errors, they obscure them with grandiose irrelevancies about peer-reviewed publication, consensus among scientists and the proclamations of official scientific committees.''
None of the projected disastrous effects of climate change exists in the present but only in an imaginary future (which may never come to pass, judging by no appreciably warming in the last 17 years). Remember, these are only unverifiable computer model ''projections.'' So we ought, when considering our expensive prevention/mitigation policies, factor in the key point the ''future generations'' are going to be richer than we are and therefore better able to pay for any problems that climate change may cause them. That includes the very real predictions by Russian scientists this year that there is a very real possibility that with no warming over 17 years and the last two showing a cooling curve associated with a quiet Sun, that we could have another mini-ice age in the next 100-200 years. This prediction was seriously presented on the cover of TIME magazine in 1977 with a scientific article to back it up well before the myth of global warning was developed.
But the alarmists cannot afford to admit this, their noses are too deep into the government grants trough, for to do so would be fatally to weaken their case that the time for action is now and that any delay will be fatal. Their emphasis on their imminence of catastrophe is designed to preclude rational analysis, so as to railroad through policies before more temperate heads notice their flaws. In order to give this catastrophism more credibility, alarmists are wont to appeal to the authority of the ''consensus.'' Which is why of course, the warmist establishment drags out Al Gore to rant, rave and curse at the first sign of public opinion waning.
The idea that the catastrophic climate change industry can derive any authority from real science is an insult to real science, especially now with the admission from the latest UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change saying that forecasting computers have not taken enough notice of the natural variability in the climate, therefore exaggerating the effect of the increased carbon emissions on world temperatures. I'd love to hear a convincing answer to this from the numerous well-known ''sell-your-name-for-a-grant'' scientists who have used their prestige or their presumed expertise to help push the great climate change scare all the while seeing chart after chart with each year showing no warming after 1997, while Carbon Dioxide increased by 25 per cent.
The Way I See It.....if you want further confirmation, you might care to read this superb recent essay about Dr Richard Lindzen, top Atmospheric Scientist at M.I.T. University (left) via The Weekly Standard ''Richard Lindzen: the Unalarmed Climate Scientist (January 13, 2014) He argues that mainstream climate science is currently akin to Lysenkoism, pertaining to the Russian T. Lysenko who twisted science to please Lenin.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/04/28/the-disgraceful-episode-of-lysenkoism-brings-us-global-warming-theory/ and that its adherents have more in common with religious zealots than scrupulous seekers-after-the-truth.
To summarize: Scientists have now discovered (which I was the first to post a couple of years ago, on July 30, 2012)) that between 950 and 1250 AD, before the Industrial Revolution, when the Vikings were running around in short pants, raping and pillaging, it was 3 degrees warmer for decades at a time, as they are now. That's when the Vikings discovered Greenland (it was GREEN) and they colonized it with 80 self-sustaining settlements until 1250 when they had to leave as the winters were getting longer and harvests were not productive anymore.
''Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be more costly. It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory, as Trofim Lysenko did, to accommodate politically correct positions. How can one escape from the Iron Triangle of ideology (Politicians, Media, and corrupted Scientists) when it produces flawed science that is immensely influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy on an ignorant citizenry for no relative good.''
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Hot on the heels of revealing Muslim anger over the Commonwealth Games committee having Scottie dogs leading each competing member country in the Opening Ceremony, it seems the Scotland is on the verge of major APPEASEMENT. Yes, it's now revealed that those damn Muslims have ''spooked'' the citizens of their host country in causing the Scottish Police to worry that a breakup of 2 Muslim Paedophile Rings will ''increase community tensions prior to the Games.''
There was so much tiptoeing around this story that you might get the impression that you're at the Bolshoi Ballet instead of reading an article about the breakup of two major paedo rings. Unfortunately or the police, the paedos in question appear to originate from a religion whose prophet had a thing for little girls. Naturally, the Scottish media couldn't bring itself to say this, the prophet part or the Muslim part. The closet it can come to saying that is to mention that there is an ethnicity involved that ''extremist'' elements will capitalize on.
It's an utterly appalling example of child abuse. Two 13-year-old Scots girls were groomed and raped by a network of ''numerous'' paedophiles across Britain. This operation resulted in 37 arrests and the identification of 108 further victims and perpetrators. Again, all of those involved are awaiting trial. The details of the crackdown were revealed by Chief Constable Malcolm Graham to the scale of the child abuse. Concern is growing that the problem has been grossly underestimated for years, with police failing to take victims seriously with political correctness shielding the involvement of the ethnic offenders. There was an obvious fear it would lead to ''significant community tension.''
|Constable Malcolm Graham|
Naturally, we mustn't jump the gun. Perhaps Mr Graham would care to expand his dataset by abandoning his daughter in the vicinity of some local mosques and seeing how that goes. Mr Graham added, It is acknowledged extremist groups have attempted to associate Child Sex Exploitation (CSE) with wider immigration issues and this has the potential for significant unrest.'' Right, yes. The extremists are the ones who think filling Scotland with people whose religion was founded by a child molester might be a bad idea. The moderates are the ones who want to expand the dataset.
The Way I See It....Mr Graham and his police force must continue to be determined to tackle this emerging threat to Scotland , not just by talking about it getting the political authorities to say ''the hell with political correctness.'' It was bad enough to see the Scottish National Party's (SNP) flirtation with Islam starting a few years ago. By aligning itself with an Islamist agenda the
As their stupid immigration rules funnel more Muslims to Scotland, with their high birth rate, to slowly replace the native population the Scots remain acquiescent for some reason. Mosques are clashing with traditional pubs. Scottish medical workers have been barred from eating at their desks during Ramadan....don't want to offend these dog and pork hating scum. The Burka is being promoted and Scottish Muslims have been planning to set up an Islamic state in some remote part of Scotland...hopefully at the bottom of Loch Ness! You would think....in this day and age that people would realize that appeasement will always lead to one's destruction.