Friday, June 06, 2008

My Lying Eyes

Is it just me or do you also see the total disconnect between the current concept of Global Warming or the reality of Climate Change?  

I look at the titles in the Financial Times page - http://www.ft.com/climatechangeseries   - and my mind simply cannot grasp the dissonance between the various stories!  Most of the stories warn of dire consequences and events due to "global warming"  while the one story - Comment: Sceptics - clearly reports that there has been no warming for 10 years.  I know, and I hope you do also, that there is significant credible scientific opinion and evidence that climate change is not influenced by man, is not abnormal and is highly unlikely to be catastrophic to mankind.  

The FT approach is not unusual however - it is the standard for most of the mainstream media.  This approach is what is driving the multi-trillion dollar Warner/Lieberman bill before congress.  Sen. Warner, when challenged that the bill may have severe economic consequences, stated that the bill has "built in controls that would allow a future President to curtail or change any part of it should it be detrimental" (I paraphrase)  Like you buy your kid a car that can go 200 mph but it's OK because you can always take it away if he gets out of control!!!

A year ago the conventional wisdom was that man-made global warming was "unequivocal."  This is the word used in many places in the IPCC reports and by many in the global warming business.  Yes, it was and is a business - all of the advocates stood to gain financially from the proposition and most did.  Since then many credible scientists, engineers and others with good scientific data have started to come forward and show that the global warming theories and models are deeply flawed.  

Has this dissension been given the same level of attention as the media gives global warming? Obviously not - see Warner/Lieberman above!  In a classic capitalistic approach, big industry - GE, BP, most major oil companies, many large engineering companies, etc. have embraced global warming and expect to see huge profits from their "innovations" and "greening" of their products.  Do you really believe that solar and wind power is imminent?  Is a hydrogen car just around the corner? That we will have a "sustainable world" in the next decade?  This is what needs to happen to satisfy the scenarios presented by these alarmists.  One solution, which has been proposed by influential UN politicians, but has not received much press, is a rapid and large reduction in the number of people in the world.  Which brings me to;-

Cap and Trade is going to be the biggest boondoggle of all.  Trillions of dollars are going to change hands - where are these funds coming from?  You, me, our children and their future generations.  In a world which by any measure is in a very fragile financial situation a massive program such as this can tip the scales and cause a world wide depression.  If you think I am overstating this danger consider what happened to the USSR in 1998.  It collapsed!  Banks and factories closed, unemployment was rampant, human essentials were unavailable.  People died!  What pulled Russia out of the hole?  Exploitation of large oil and gas reserves and - not least, a quick return to autocratic government under Putin.  Can this happen here? Damn right it can! Only, we may never recover. We do not have the will to exploit our oil reserves, do we have the backbone to avoid autocratic government? 

Well, I just am trying for a sanity check.  Do I believe all this global warming stuff or do I believe my lying eyes?

Todays "Sip of Reality" - http://icecap.us/index.php

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Brave New World

 Thank God!  It’s over – or at least a part of it’s over.  Obama and Clinton can now change their propaganda approach and instead of pretending to be opposed to each other – they now can embrace each others position.  Still, we continue to see the ominous march of the forces of evil spreading over the countryside and through the cities.  Under the banner of  “democracy, freedom for all, end of racism and sexism” the Democrats, or Progressives, or really Socialists, spread their doctrines throughout the na├»ve and immature minds of modern Americans.

We march forward into a brave new world that will ensure that the poor are taken care of, the climate is managed, we will all be able to get all the health care we need and no one will have to go without.  America has never faced as grave a threat as it does now.  The Democrat's socialistic agenda teeters over us like a diseased tree about to fall.  Whatever combination of candidates the liberals choose, if they win the White House we will see unprecedented changes in the law, in our lives and more importantly, in the lives of generations to come.  Even if McCain were to be elected as President – highly unlikely – the liberal make up of the house and senate all but assures that the agenda will be very socialist.

Taxes must increase to pay for the handouts the liberals have promised.  They have the perfect scapegoat in Bush and the conservatives for years of “fiscal mismanagement and concessions to the rich and big business" for the economic depression which will follow.  The propaganda war against the American way of life will further embed the guilt which many Americans share for their "wasteful and indulgent" lifestyles.  Significant changes will take place in the makeup of the Supreme Court with maybe three or more retirements pending - replaced by socialist ideologues. This will further erode the Constitution and weaken the rule of law -  promoting the power of the “trial lawyer lobby” were justice is secondary and power and money is everything. How do you feel about John Edwards for Attorney General?

Some say Thomas Malthus was wrong.  They say that science saved mankind by producing enough food and facilities to compensate for the global explosion in population.  Not so, - if not for birth control, abortions, AIDS and other catastrophes the world population would be a huge problem today.  These are hardly solutions of choice for managing population are they?  Today environmentalists and others dance around concepts of a drastically lower world population being necessary to sustain our world.  Who decides who lives and who dies?  Who decides who is born?

Maurice Strong, an influential UN and Canadian politician, global businessman and considered by many, including himself, to be one of the world’s leading environmentalists, has declared that the only way to save the earth is to have a drastic reduction in population.  Is euthanasia going to be an option again?  It seemed a good idea at the turn of the 19th century when Roosevelt, Churchill, and notably, Hitler thought it was sensible under some circumstances!

This is the Brave New World the Democrats wish for us. 

Even if you have read these books - go back and read them again.  Aldous Huxley’s famous book 'Brave New World' or better yet, George Orwell’s '1984'.