Warmist Snowed in a Room Full of Eco-Idiots !

It must be a tipping point in the climate debate when a senior Shell executive notices something odd about the green activists with whom he has been consorting. Two weeks ago, David Hone, (photo) Shell UK's Melbourne-born ''senior climate change adviser'', went to an academic conference on ''radical emission reduction strategies'' in London. He concluded on his blog that he had fallen among eco-idiots wanting to remould society from the ground up!

Hone, also a director of the Emissions Trading Association, has a background in oil and shipping-trade markets. One explanation for his blog outburst could be that he was still in shock from the collapse of carbon pricing and trading scheme at the Warsaw IPCC conference a few weeks before. Hone wrote: ''This was a room of catastrophists (as in 'catastrophic global warming'), with the prevailing view, at least to my ears, that the issue could only be addressed by the complete transformation of the global energy and political systems, with the latter moving to one of state control and regulated consumerism. There would be no room for 'ruthless individualism' in such a world.''

He continued: ''The posters that dotted the lecture theatre lobby area covered topics as diverse as vegan diets to an eventual return to low technology hunter-gather societies. Much to my surprise I was not really at an emission reduction conference (despite my nametag saying I was), but a political ideology conference.'' The conference, sadly, was no less unhinged than the UK government's legally mandated goal to cut CO2 emissions by at least 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Stand by, hardy Britons, for brown and black-outs. Australian national targets are 5% emission cuts but 2020, compared with 2000 levels.

UK climate blogger Andrew Montford (photo) noted: ''Hone's sudden realisation that many of his fellow travellers in the environmental movement are completely round the twist is rather comical and you can't help but wonder where he has been in the last 20 years.'' At this loopy conference, Australia's ideas on climate catastrophism were well represented. One weblink paper was from Laurence Delina and Dr Mark Diesendorf, of the Institute of Environmental Studies, University of NSW. The title? ''Is wartime mobilisation a suitable policy model for rapid climate mitigation?'' No wonder Shell's Hone felt trapped in a madhouse!

Another participant was Professor John Wiseman, of Melbourne University's Sustainable Society Institute, whose weblink talk was titled: ''Winning the climate war; removing political roadblocks to radical emissions reductions.''  I particularly like a photo of Professor Un-Wiseman at an Australian Conference last October shown alongside a slide projection quoting excitable green activist Miriam Lyons: ''The highest priority action for achieving a rapid transition to a resilient post-carbon future is to sculpt visions of the future that are beautiful, and lifelike enough to fall in love with.'' Wow....that'll surely wet her panty liner!  It goes without saying that this twit is a regular guest on the biased ABC programs....gushing forth her warmist religion.

Among Wiseman's authorships is ''Hope, Despair and Transformation: Climate Change and the Promotion of Mental Health and Wellbeing.'' Hopefully the absence of global warming since 1997 has restored to sanity the victims of climate scare campaigns. And let's not forget about this inane person, Dr Jane O'Sullivan, (photo) of the University of Queensland, whose topic was; ''Reducing emissions through family planning and women's empowerment." I wonder how much she screwed us taxpayers for a grant to write this asinine paper?  I hear she's a gung-ho person on carbon taxes. Dr O'Sullivan shows symptoms of Life of Brian's People's Front of Judea divisiveness, being ''frustrated by the tangled web of misconceptions and the determination of environmental activists to regard any criticism of the cap and trade proposal as climate change denial.''

The Way I See It.....the UK still has some level heads that are influential like Matt Ridley, a member of the House of Lords and a science writer, whose latest bestseller is ''The Rational Optimist''. In it he finds the Greens exploiting Typhoon Haiyan as a sign of a great global warming catastrophe awaiting us as ridiculous. He says, ''Storms and weather events happen, they've always happened. There've been much stronger typhoons in the past and to blame this on climate change is a bit like shamanism. It's witchdoctory. It's going back 10,000 years to try and blame every weather event on mankind. So the idea that you can stop typhoons happening by cutting carbon dioxide emissions is just absurd.''

''Also I think rolling out immature and 14th-century technologies like wind power all around the world -- which are extremely expensive, don't cut carbon emissions very much, and on the whole it's disastrously bad for people's living standards. We should put a lot of money into research into new energy technologies. If we can get cheap fusion energy, or cheap thorium nuclear power, or even cheap ordinary nuclear power, then by the end of the century we probably won't need fossils fuels much. Here in Britain there is huge growing disquiet about energy prices, and they're about to go up even more, because of green levies, and that I think is beginning to make politicians rethink this agenda. David Cameron will have swallow his dream of a totally green England by 2030, the people and the government will be bankrupt!''

Ship of Fools: Doomed by Wishful Thinking !

Today, once the weather cleared over Antarctica, 52 passengers (made up of one-third tourists) of the ice bound Russian ship, MV Akademic Shokalskiy,  were rescued by a Chinese helicopter. The Russian crew will stay on board to wait for the ice to free their ship. But strangely, 98 per cent of the U.S. media didn't mention that mostly the ice-trapped passengers were global warmists, not tourists.

The farce: warmist scientists and reporters sail to Antarctica to find signs of global warming they claim has changed that continent since Douglas Mawson explored it a century ago. Instead, they find sea ice when Mawson didn't and their ship is locked in. Be clear about the joke here. This Australasian Antarctica Expedition (AAE) was meant to scare us about global warming changing Antarctica, causing melting instead of all this damn ice. As the expedition leader Chris Turney, a publicity-hungry professor, said on their website: ''....there is an increasing body of evidence, including by the AAE members, that have identified parts of the East Antarctic which are susceptible to melting and collapse from ocean warming....We are going there to determine the extent to which human activity and pollution has directly impacted on this remote region...''

A month ago the mission of the $1.5 million expedition was ''to answer questions about climate change''. Now the Australian Broadcasting Corp (ABC) describes the expedition as ''a Russian ship stuck in the sea ice in Antarctica....''  Let there by no doubt, the mission was to document and record scientific changes in Antarctica to broadcast to the world. Most scientific missions don't have a dedicated media team, but this one had a staff of FIVE journalists! There is a journalist and documentary maker from the leftist Guardian as well as a senior producer from the Science Unit at the BBC world service. Boy...if they'd discovered less sea ice, fewer penguins, or big cracks, we know the images would be all over the mass media and it would be evidence for ''climate change.''

But having their ship trapped by thick sea ice, the mission changed quickly to call it a tourist boat that only wanted ''to follow the route explorer Douglas Mawson travelled a century ago'', don't mention the climate.... The spin was that the team has ''met heavy ice.'' Not ''been trapped by unprecedently thick sea ice, unlike anything Mawson ever saw, and in record levels''. If they had met thin sea ice, would it have been described as a dangerously thin layer, a risk for penguins, and a stark reminder of how much the climate is changing? Would it have been an undeniable factoid? It's not what the ABC says, it's what it doesn't say (a.k.a ''lying by omission''). The headlines could read ''Global warming scientists trapped in  Antartica by record sea ice they didn't predict''. As if. Of course that would be against ''the religion''.

Penguins coming for a ''sticky beak''

Instead, there are bullshit reports from the ABC like this, with no mention of climate change or what the ''passengers'' on the ''cruise ship'' were actually up to: ''The Australian operation to rescue passengers from a Russian cruise ship stick in thick sea ice, is continuing this morning, but it's slow going. The Aurora Australis ice-breaker is the third vessel to try to help the stricken ship which has been trapped since Christmas Eve with 74 people on board. The ship is named The Spirit of Mawson in honour of Douglas Mawson who spent two years on Antarctica during which he lost two colleagues on the trek.'' Unfortunately, even the Aurora was stopped in its tracks and had to return to Casey base to finally finish unloading the coming year's supplies for the station as well as a number of researchers and their science gear.

The Way I See It.....this expense expedition was doomed by wishful thinking and cost-cutting. The first error the expedition leaders made was under-estimating the prevailing sea ice conditions at Mawson station, their destination. The scientists seemed to be convinced that Antarctica was a warmer place today than it had been 100 years earlier, and thus perhaps they could expect less sea ice there. This in turn would allow them to charter a lighter, cheaper vessel. This preconceived idea seems to be the case by their choice of vessel. It is only an ice-strengthened ship built in Finland in 1982.

What made the expedition even more dubious is that Turney and his team brought on paying tourists in what appears to have been an attempt to help defer the expedition's costs and to be a source of cheap labor with prices starting at $8000 a berth. It seems 26 paying tourists and 4 journalists got suckered in joining this ship-of-fools. Here it seems that the obvious risks and hazards of bringing tourists to the world's harshest environment in a budget-priced vessel unable to handle ice-breaking may have been played down or worse, brushed aside. Was this reckless on the part of Chris Turney? (photo) He was quoted on the website: ''In the Antarctic the conditions are so extreme that you can never make forecasts.''  Really Chris, is this an environment you'd want to bring unfamiliar tourists in (along with your wife and two youngsters) -- on a vessel that cannot even brake ice???  How much did this fiasco cost? Who's paying for the rescue?  The hubris of many warmists is amazingly stupid!

UPDATE:  The rescue will cost Australian taxpayers $400,000 !  The rescued people are on the Aurora Australis heading back to be dropped off in Tasmania costs at least $30,000 a day aside from the lost research time it had intended to do while down at Casey station. Officials say this mis-adventure has blown the Antarctic Research budget for this year. Just heard that the Chinese ice breaker that tried to help initially  but was thwarted by the dense sea ice is now also stuck fast.

SERIAL LOSERS : The Shocking History of the Democrat's Interventions !

Americans unsure what to think about President Obama's plans for Syria should remember that ALL military action undertaken by Democrats for the last half-century has led to utter disaster. You see, leftist Democrats are gung-ho about deploying the U.S. military provided only that it will harm the national security interests of the United States, but vehemently oppose interventions that serve American interests.

Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, the supreme commander of the Allied forces in World War II, said he could conceive of no greater tragedy than the U.S. getting heavily involved in Vietnam. He sent aid to the anti-communist forces, but no troops. However, as we all know.... Democratic President John F. Kennedy sent troops. But in short order he was conniving to assassinate South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem - also known as ''our ally in the middle of the war.''

JFK's brother, the Democratic attorney general, actually suggested that Americans donate blood to the North Vietnamese - ''our enemy'' - as gesture of good will. Unbelievable! Then came Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, who escalated the war in Vietnam in order to prove that Democrats could be trusted with national defence. Which they cannot. As journalist David Halberstam reported, LBJ would ''talk to his closest political aides about the McCarthy days, of how Truman lost China and then the congress and the White House, and how, by God, Johnson was not going to be the president who lost Vietnam and the Congress and the White House.'' LBJ sacrificed tens of thousands of American lives to try to make the Democrats look manly.

Richard Nixon came in and honourably ended the Democrats disastrous handling of the Vietnam War by signing the Paris Peace Accords in January 1973. In return for the lousy terms the president jammed down South Vietnam's throat, America promised that, if the North attacked, the U.S. would resume bombing missions and military aid. America hadn't been humiliated -- the left had to act fast! The media invented the Watergate scandal out of a minor snooping break-in, an implicated Nixon was forced to resign and a crazy left-wing Congress was inaugurated. Just a month later, North Vietnam attacked the South, and the Democratic Congress turned its back on South Vietnam, betrayed an ally and trashed America's word. (For Democrats, that's a ''victory.'')

President Carter's Iranian headache

In 1953, President Eisenhower assisted the Shah of Iran in removing nut-job Mohammed Mossadegh as prime minister, and a friendly government ruled Iran. Alas, 20 years later, Jimmy Carter became president. When Islamic fundamentalists staged a revolution in Iran, Carter refused to come to the aid of the shah, a staunch American ally. Democrats and leftist academic elitists praised Ayatollah Khomeini to the skies assuring the American people life would be peachy under him. What could go wrong? The ayatollah had barely seized power when Islamic lunatics took 52 Americans hostage in Tehran, where they remained for 444 days, until Carter was removed from office. By giving Islamic fanatics their nation-state, Carter produced the global Islamofacist movement we're still dealing with today.


President Clinton and Hilary

For the next eight years, peace and freedom spread throughout the world as President Ronald Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union and restored America's power. The Democrats and their minions wailed and condemned Reagan at almost every international effort. In the face of mass starvation in Somalia, George H.W. Bush sent troops to ensure that aide could get into the country. President Bill Clinton came in and decided to convert this simple relief effort into an exercise in ''nation-building.'' In short order, the Muslim rebels killed American troops and dragged their copses through the streets. Clinton instantly withdrew the entire military operation. Years later, Osama bin Laden would laugh about America cutting and running from Somalia, noting how this show of weakness had encouraged his al-Qaida fighters.


Presidents George W. &  H.W. Bush

In response to 9/11, President George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan and wiped out the Taliban and al-Qaida strongholds in a few months. Bush left a limited force behind to prevent return of the terrorist training camps. Most crucially, Bush removed a monstrous dictator from Iraq and established the only Islamic democracy in the idle East. Saddam Hussein had aided and sheltered terrorists and horribly brutalized his own people, murdering millions of them. Iraq became a beacon of hope for all Muslims still living under despotic regimes. Then Obama threw away this victory in Iraq by withdrawing every last troop. Obama has allowed al-Qaida and Iran to overrun this shining example of an Arab democracy. The U.S. has troops stationed all over the world, but no troops for you, Iraq!

Then you have Obama in a fit of Islamic ass-kissing flinging America's prestige into removing the pro-Western Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Mubarak supported U.S. policy, fought the Muslim extremists and recognized Israel's right to exist. Or as the leftist scum calls it; Three Black Marks against the man. The Muslim Brotherhood quickly took control of Egypt and were worse than any of Mubarak's faults,  leading to this year's military take-over and Mohammad Morsi's arrest.

The Way I See It.....President Barack Obama is another Democrat president in a 50 year long line of presidents that have continued the traditional botches and blunders on the geopolitical stage. It is still a wonder that any country still wants to deal with America as an ally on an international level. When you hear behind-the-scenes stories of Obama and his advisors making foreign affairs decisions off-the-cuff and being face with the reality of those decisions; you only have to see the unnecessary tragedy of Benghazi and the lies that followed.

For absolutely no reason - no purpose whatsoever, that is, other than fulfilling Obama's idiotic campaign ''talking point'' about Afghanistan being a ''war of necessity,'' contrasted with Iraq, a potty little ''war of convenience'' you get the full picture of an America government bereft of any real objective and no concept of ''victory''.  And now we see Vladimir Putin circling like a shark. The Iraq War turned every Middle Eastern despot into President Bush's bitch. But now Obama is their bitch. I know that Democrats car more bout free birth control than geopolitics, but if they keep getting elected, Americans will getting fitted for burqas, not IUDs.

To Syria's Revolutionaires, Assad Isn't Looking So Bad After All !

Souad Nawfal with placard

With their revolution hijacked by Islamists, many Syrian rebels are rethinking their stance against the man they've been trying to overthrow. As was mentioned in the previous post, there are many jihadist deadshits coming far and wide (from Australia, America, U.K. and Europe, etc) to Syria to fight with al-Qaida operatives and usurping the original intention of turning Syria into a democratic country.

It all started because Souad Nawfal wanted to wear pants. Every day, the 40-year-old schoolteacher turned anti-regime activist, would go stand in front of headquarters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) in the rebel-controlled city of Raqqa to protest the al-Qaeda affiliates' harsh tactics in her hometown. She hoisted placards calling for an end to injustice, for an end to oppression. First they ignored her. Then they told everyone else to ignore her, and then they tried to beat her. Still she persevered. ''A woman all by herself facing the Islamic State,'' she sniffs in a recent video posted on Vimeo. ''Talk about a State! It's more like a small gang that takes advantage of people's fear.'' But that small gang was powerful, and when ISIS started threatening her life, Nawfal finally had to flee for Turkey to a safe house, wondering what has happened to Syria's revolution. Others have taken up her courageous actions to tell the Daesh (Syrian for ISIS) to get out of Syria.

She is not alone. Hundreds of activists have watched in desperation as the revolution they launched to overthrow the repressive regime of President Bashar Assad threatens to deliver their country into the hands of equally oppressive Islamist radical filth determined to turn Syria into n Islamic caliphate. ''A lot of former activists are now saying to me, 'When the choice is between ISIS and Assad, I am going for Assad,'' says Randa Slim, a Syria expert at the Washington-based Middle East Institute. To be sure, not all the rebel groups share the same ideology, but the most effective fighting groups, with their ranks filled by foreign jihadists, funded by private donors in the Gulf and backed by al-Qaeda, are gaining ground. As they grow they are squeezing out the activists that dreamed of a Syria founded on democratic representation, freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Reports of Christian villages and enclaves taking the major brunt of Islamist atrocities are many. The fighters (haters is more fitting) come into these settlements like that cold-blooded Mohammad did in 700s (AD) giving the lovers of Jesus the options of converting to Islam, keeping their faith and pay a high tax or be killed. The killing of these innocent people continued in Syria as entire families were murdered. The atrocities happened about 12 miles northwest of Damascus and were committed by  Jabhat al-Nusra and Liwa Al-Islam fighters.  The rebels just lined people up and shot them in the head for refusing to convert.


Military sources within the Syrian military said, ''armed groups have performed execution of civilians that has been verified that over 80 people were killed in areas now taken over by our army. Often whole families were put to death.''  Some families were kidnapped in order to be used as human shields in areas where the Syrian army is now trying to free civilians. According to the report, artillery isn't being used against the cowardly jihadists to prevent further civilian casualties. The report went on stating that ''the military is in the process of clearing out the town by searching every house. Assad's forces are said to have freed dozens of Alawite, Druze and Christian families from the rebels.''

The number of people murdered in the town of Adra is expected to rise as government forces ''recover the town.''  The stories of the atrocities committed by al-Nusra and Liwa Al-Islam are as violent and merciless as ever. One local resident Muhammad Al-Said reported; ''The situation was terrible...unidentified armed men came into town, but it was obvious that they were Jabhat al-Nusra militants.''  Al-Said then added an almost unbelievable statement; ''the worst crime they committed was that they roasted people in ovens used to bake bread when those people came in to buy it.!'' He added, ''the rebels committed the atrocities so they could place blame on government forces, thankfully many fled to Damascus while the elderly, mothers with infants, and the sick hid in their basements waiting for Syrian troops to save us from these vermin from other countries.''


The Way I See It.....arming the rebels was akin to arming the next generation of sectarian dictators. In the early days many Syrians derided the peaceful opposition groups as cowards for their attempt to effect change through dialogue and protest alone. But as they say ''you can't unscramble eggs'' so probably the best solution in the end may have to be compromise, even though the head leader of al-Nusra, ( left ) Abu Mohammed al-Jouani said in an interview with Al Jazeera yesterday that he ruled out peace talks with President Assad.

The upcoming peace talks in Geneva, slated for January 22nd, give Syrians hope. Nawfal says Assad is a criminal that must eventually leave power. Nonetheless, she says,''Syrians in the opposition and the Free Army (one of the early groups made up largely of defected government soldiers) should negotiate with the regime and accept a solution that leads to a coalition of sorts. It's not a popular conviction, but it is most practical to allow both to join in defeating the al-Qaeda scum. Without that, the whole country will be destroyed. Two and a half years of fighting is enough!'' 

Immigration or Colonisation by Stealth ! Part 2

Here we go again!  I wrote in a previous posting on November 18th that some forms of immigration to the West now look like colonisation instead. LONDON: Dozens of Muslim protestors gathered to demand that businesses stop selling alcohol in a popular East London area yesterday. The group, led by former Al-Muhajiroun leader Anjem Choundary, warned restaurants and shops in the Brick Lane area that they face 40 lashes if they continue to sell the product, which is banned under Sharia Law.

Radical preacher Choudary (centre) with ugly cronies.

Radical preacher, Choudary also defended three ''fantastic'' men who were jailed last week for attacking drinkers while on ''Muslim patrol.'' He was referring to an incident last January involving a group of five hooded young Muslim deadbeats confronting passers-by and demanded that they conform to their shit Sharia Law. The gang filmed their activities and uploaded the videos on line. They targeted people drinking alcohol, women who they considered to be dressed immodestly, and harassed others whom they perceived as being gay. One of these idiots even told a couple they should not hold hands walking down the street because it was a ''Muslim area''.

One video uploaded to YouTube by the gang was viewed more than 42,000 times. In it, the gang confronted people, shouting ''this is a Muslim area'' at them. The hooded men are seen forcing people to empty their alcoholic drinks down drains, and instructing a group of women that ''they need to forbid exposing themselves immodestly outside the mosque.'' A second video, beginning with the title saying ''Islam will take over the world'', showed the gang directing homophobic abuse at a man walking in Whitechapel. The gang shouted at the man who appeared to be wearing make-up that he is ''in a Muslim area dressed like a fag'' and must leave. The video ended with: ''We are coming to implement Islam upon your own necks. Muslim patrols can never be stopped!''

Protesting against such colonisation, however, is still the height of bad manners according to the P.C. police, as Clarrisa Dickson Wright found out last year. The television chef who reached fame as one half of the Two Fat Ladies, embarked on a tour of the country and was hoping to savour the culinary delights of every region. But her visit to one particular city, left a bitter taste and caused outrage by saying her visit to a Muslim area of Leicester was ''the most frightening experience of my life'', and claiming that it left her feeling like ''a pariah''  in her own country and topped it off by describing the area as ''a ghetto''.

When asked to explain the comments, made in her new book Clarrisa's England: A Gamely Gallop Through the English Counties, she said she was ''surprised any of the people who might object could read what I wrote as it is written in English.''  She added that she has ''never believed that political correctness was a reason NOT to say what I have experienced''. She went on to describe how she got lost after coming off the ring road and found herself in an area where all the men were wearing Islamic clothing and all the women were wearing burkas. ''None of the men would talk to me when I tried to find out where I was and how to get out of there. Even the women following meekly behind, if they could speak English they weren't about to show it by having a word with me.  It frightened me because it was part of my country I was born in''.

On Leicestershire, she writes of the ghettoisation in its city, saying that it demonstrates how multiculturalism has failed. She added; I have many good acquaintances and even some friends among the Muslim community but I must say that if multiculturalism is to work, which I have always been rather dubious of, surely it must be multicultural and NOT monocultural.'' Clarrisa went on to express a hopeful note; ''However, everything has an upside and one of the results of this is that Leicester has a very good selection of Asian restaurants. I can only hope that in a  generation to come there will be a merging of the cultures and not the exclusion zone that is the ghetto today.''



The Way I see It.....is when Ibrahim Mogra, (Left) the assistant secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, and a city imam, says; ''How can she judge an entire community on her one-off rare time of getting lost in Leicester?'' I say it's easy.  Especially when you hear more and more frequently the reports of purposely unassimilated Muslim neighbourhoods all around England rubbing the local citizens the wrong way with their ''holier-than-thou'' attitude with demands that non-Muslims are not welcome in invading their ''Muslim area''. To compound this dilemma you have authorities falling over themselves to be so politically correct not to offend this ratbag behaviour that it gives credibility to this type of attitude.

This English ''blissfulness'' in the face of a jihad-by-stealth ignores the fact that a network of groups led by Anjem Choudary has become the ''single biggest gateway to terrorism in recent British history'', according to a major investigation. This Islamic bum has ''facilitated or encouraged'' up to 80 young Muslims from the UK -- ands 250 to 300 others from across Europe-- to join al-Qaida linked forces fighting President Assad in Syria. Despite two decades of preaching filth, the 46 year old Briton has only ever been fined 500 pds for organising an illegal protest. Prime Minister David Cameron said Choudary needed ''to be looked at seriously because he strays extremely close to the line of encouraging hatred, extremism and violence.''  I think the Brits need a big dose of SPINAL COLUMN.

Save The Planet ! Mince Eagles & Drive People Nuts !

Eagle flying over a Duke Energy Wind Turbine

The Green Religion has a lot to answer for. How do green activists in good conscience come up with schemes that scar the landscape and kill rare birds? A major U.S. power company has pleaded guilty to killing eagles and other birds and assorted bats at two wind farms and agreed to pay $1 million as part of enforcement laws protecting birds against wind energy facilities. Duke Energy pleaded guilty to killing 14 eagles and 149 other birds at its Top of The World and Campbell Hill wind farms outside Casper, Wyoming. ''Wind energy is not green if it is killing hundreds of thousands of birds,'' said a disgusted Georg Fenwick, president of the American Bird Conservancy. Editor's Note: It's also not green if it doesn't do anything measurable to stop global warming.

Now, under pressure from the wind-power industry, the idiots in the Obama administration said last week it will allow companies to kill or injure eagles without fear of prosecution for up to three decades. The new ruling is designed to address environmental consequences that stand in the way of the nation's heavily subsidized wind energy rush; that dozens of bald eagles and golden eagles are being killed each year by the giant, spinning blades of wind turbines. An investigation by the Associated Press earlier this year exposed the Obama administration's reluctance to prosecute such cases and its willingness to keep the scope of the eagle deaths secret.

The sad resulting carnage of wind farms

President Obama has championed the pollution-free energy, nearly doubling America's wind power in his first term with utter disregard that this energy is more costly to the consumer than other traditional forms of power generation without any real hope of tackling global warming. The president's government has been forced to accept the not-so-green sides of green energy as a means to an end. Another AP investigation recently showed that corn-based ethanol blended into the nation's gasoline has proven more damaging to the environment than politicians promised and worse than the government acknowledges. These examples highlight Obama's willingness to accept environmental trade-offs in the misplaced hope that green energy will help fight climate change.

While in England they have a more serious consequence of wind farms. Wind industry skulduggery was exposed on the front page of the Telegraph exposing the way noise regulations governing the wind industry have been rigged by vested interests in one of the great public health scandals in many years. In the article entitled: Wind Farm Noise; Why is no one listening, by Richard cox, David Unwin and Trevor Sherman, they revel how government-approved pseudoscience underpins wind farm noise assessment. An assessment that completely ignores the fact that wind farms really create a noise nuisance. Also, that they actually disturb the sleep of people living near by and now there's a growing awareness that they can cause long-term ill health, including psychosis. There have been a number of Anti-turbine marches around England by concerned citizens.(below)

Anti-turbine march led by botanist David Bellamy

Of course, the government's Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) denies a problem exists. The reality is that when granting planning permission for a wind farm the Planning Inspectorate relies on a fifteen year old noise assessment methodology known as ETSU and to date no one is aware of them ever turning down an application based solely on its potential to cause noise nuisance. Yet, acoustics expert Mike Stigwood of MAS Environmental, one of the few consultants to act for local authorities and resident groups, is aware of 70 wind farms in the UK causing a noise nuisance. RenewableUK (RUK) routinely uses its muscle to divert public attention away from the noise issue and, in particular, amplitude modulation (AM), the most intrusive feature of turbine noise and the cause of most complaints.

The occurrence of  AM, the loud beating, slapping or whoose noise from wind turbines is closely correlated with periods of high wind shear. AM is the most annoying noise characteristic of wind turbines. The wind industry and DECC consistently maintain its occurrence is rare but evidence collected shows it is responsible for all the 70 cases previously mentioned. In addition, there is mounting evidence of significant levels of low frequency noise (LFN) being measured inside homes located near turbines. LFN directly affects the health of residents even where the turbine noise is either inaudible or barely audible at all. Once again the wind power industry and Government have denied the presence of LFN. This is becoming a major health scandal.

An intimidating presence.

So who's standing up for local residents against these powerful forces? We might expect the ETSU approach to be scientifically sound and use reliable data to support these complaints. Sadly this is not the case. Noise is regarded as being to technical for most people including planning decision makers. It is therefore left to the acoustic experts who we expect to act in the residents best interests. Sadly this is not the case either. Over the entire period from 1997 onwards most of the acoustic advice drawn on by the DECC has been provided by just two acoustics consulting companies, Hayes McKenzie Partnership (HMP) and Hoare Lea Acoustics (HLA). These two companies are also the largest players in the wind farm acoustics consultancy industry acting for wind farm developers. The conflict of interest could not be greater.

The Way I See It....any neutral observer might have expected a substantial revision of the guidelines, or, at the very least, some careful attention to address the widespread criticism that the ETSU has attracted. This has not happened. In 2012 the DECC commissioned the Institute of Acoustics (IoA) to review how ETSU is applied and produce a Good Practice Guide (GPG). Strangely, the DECC terms of reference excluded consideration of noise limits, and excluded any consideration of the health effects of turbine noise! Incredibly, amplitude modulation, the most troublesome aspect of turbine noise and the cause of most complaints, was also excluded! And last but not least, the mention of the killing thousands of birds wasn't brought up.

A token public consultation was conducted during the summer of 2012 and the final GPG was issued in May of this year. Although several qualified individuals provided consultation submissions identifying serious scientific failings with ETSU and the draft GPG, all were ignored. The published GPG endorses some of the worst examples of pseudoscience I have seen. As a result the new guidance will permit even higher noise levels to be inflicted on local residents and by default shorter separation distances for developers to exploit. Any semblance of a peer review process has been reduced to a sham. The IoA likes to present itself as a professional organisation. However, in endorsing the reprehensible actions of the DECC, HMP and HLA, somehow I doubt it. So why is nobody listening?  And I think everybody should be screaming....COVER-UP !!

UPDATE:  Britain's Mail on Sunday reports on the great green gravy train:  ''A three-month investigation shows that some of the most outspoken campaigners who demand that consumers pay the colossal price of shifting to renewable energy are also getting rich from their efforts.
                    Four of the nine-person Climate Change Committee, the official watchdog that dictates green energy policy, are, or were until very recently, being paid by firms that benefit from committee decisions.
                    A new breed of lucrative green investment funds, which were set up to expand wind farm energy, are in practice a means of taking green levies paid by hard-pressed consumers and handing them to City investors and financiers.

Why the West Wants to Make a Flawed Mandela a Saint !

As you get old and wiser one realizes that there has, for a long time now, been an enormous Western longing to find and celebrate a Third World leader as a saint. Lenin, Stalin and Mao enjoyed such acclaim at various stage, but so did, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Yasser Arafat, Hugo Chavez, and various other deadshits. In every case, they were found to have feet of clay or worse, they were selfish tin-pots with no vision for their people.

In the modern era, two men have enjoyed uncritical acclaim: Gandhi and Mandela. Yet Gandhi was a failed lawyer who had to leave India for South Africa to make a living. He denounced railways, modern medicine, hospitals and most elements of modern life. He also regarded South African blacks as mere savages and defended the Indian caste system. Besides in later life he slept naked with prepubescent girls and drank his own urine. Nelson Mandela had his full share of failings.

But in the case of Gandhi and Mandela, none of that seems to matter. This canonization seems to depend on a bottomless well of guilt about slavery, colonialism, and mistreatment of people of colour down the years. This is so obviously allied to a pursuit of the ''noble savage'' (ignoring the universal warring, raping, and kidnapping between rival tribes) and a longing to discover that somewhere, somehow, the Third World has discovered a new model, a new way which will transcend our fault-riven capitalism and our dead-end communism. It is as if by devoting oneself to one of these ''superheros'', one can receive absolution from that crushing burden of guilt.

What no one can take away is that Mandela showed extraordinary courage and fortitude through twenty-eight years in jail, and he adopted a generous attitude of forgiving his enemies when he emerged from jail. Otherwise, people exhibit an extraordinary amnesia. His presidential term started with the Shell House shootings, when ANC militants on the roof of ANC's headquarters used AK-47s to gun down Inkatha Freedom Party marchers in the streets of Johannesburg. Mandela simply refused to hand over either the murderers or their weapons, and attempted to justify this wholesale murder. Mandela and his ANC were about to turn South Africa into a Marxist country when they were bought off by the American Democrats and big multi-national business who showered the new black rulers with wealth and favorable international media coverage.

Then early in his term, Mandela's government laid off all the country's most experienced teachers, a blow from which the school system has never recovered. Mandela's administration also saw the passage of perhaps the most extreme labour laws in the world and radical affirmative action laws that saw the ruination of the civil service by mass replacement of skilled whites and Asians by mainly dumbass unskilled Africans. The civil service has also never recovered. His government also presided over a scandalous and extremely corrupt arms deal. I don't know if Mandela profited personally from this; the presumption is that he didn't. But corruption was slowly creeping into his administration.

Near the end of his administration he gave probably the most extreme speech given by any South African president when he suggested that thee was a vast conspiracy of opposition parties, NGOs and criminal gangs, al trying to overthrow the government. The object of the speech, quite transparently, was to lay out the rationale for his highly repressive measures. On top of that Mandela was quietly told that his mentions of HIV/AIDS were unpopular with black audiences so he shut up completely about the subject thereafter. Thus, it was under his administration that the disease grew to epidemic proportions in the country. Similarly, when the press criticised his ANC government he attacked it for being ''white-controlled'', even though most editors were already blank. So, despite his reputation for reconciliation, he was not slow to play the race card when it suited him.

The Way I See It......it was troubling to see Nelson Mandela's embrace of terrorism and - even as president - his lauding of corrupt dictators and men of violence. That's why I see Mandela's memorial service as a disgrace - a showcase of tyrants to honor a man who preached freedom. Speaking at his funeral was the Marxist co-dictator of the Cuban regime, a vice-president of the unelected Chinese communist party and the president of Brazil, who had once served in jail for being a member of a Marxist guerrilla group. The sole speaker from Africa other than Zuma was the socialist president of Namibia who congratulated  the brutal Zimbabwean scumbag Robert Mugabe for winning the rigged elections in July.

This white-washing of tyrants worked brilliantly, thanks in part to Barack Obama letting himself be used as a dupe:  Before he was caught taking "selfies" of himself  with British Prime Minister David Cameron and flirting with Denmark's pretty prime minister (much to Michelle's chagrin), Obama was on his way to the podium, when he unexpectedly stopped to shake hands with Cuban President Raul Castro and then President Mugabe. The crowd signalled its sympathies with the men of hate and oppression by giving them big cheers and massive applause but booed Zuma three times every time he and his four wives appeared on the big screens. Beware the sanctification of Mandela....beside his flaws, the good he did will be used to license evil.