Since a large portion of you was upset by my proclamation that on the whole Middle-East culture is bad, I was wondering how you would respond to this question:
On the whole, would you say global warming is bad?
This is story right here is grade A humor.
He had hoped that his 11m reinforced yacht would be able to get all the way to Europe due to lighter ice conditions observed in recent years, thought to be a result of global warming.
But after making his way through the Chukchi, East Siberian and Laptev Seas, Flanagan has been forced to a halt by heavy ice at the most difficult point in the route, the Vilkitsky Strait.
Jesus thats funny. No doubt experts were sure the ice would be gone this time of year.
A few weeks ago, the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Marlo Lewis published an article opposing mandatory limits on carbon-dioxide emissions, arguing that Congress should not impose caps until the technology exists to produce energy that doesn’t depend on carbon dioxide. In response to Lewis’s reasonable piece, the president of the American Council on Renewable Energy, Michael Eckhart, issued a threat:
“Take this warning from me, Marlo. It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar. If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity. I will call you a liar and charlatan to the Harvard community of which you and I are members. I will call you out as a man who has been bought by Corporate America.”
It has been my experience that more people defend The Truth the less likely it is true. It was an extremely bad idea for scientists to vote on global warming’s existence. It has and will continue to lead to yet more moral heavy handedness.
Came across a talk Karl Rove gave about six weeks ago. I highly recommend watching it. He goes over the major policies of they day but does so in such way that you get a really good understanding of the issue and the administration’s position. Later on he talks about global warming and he gives data showing that we have reduced our carbon output much more than most European countries. How you ask? Turns out its more cost effective to be energy efficient and thus the markets in this country have forced efficiency that have reduced carbon output.
Huh, imagine that, free markets have done more for the environment then the environmentalist who are hyper critical of the free markets. No big surprise there.
Towards the end he has some great things to say about education.
Link here. Once you get to the page you need to click on the link that begins with Karl Rove
Several posts back I mentioned the left leaning media, ie MSM, black out on NASA revising its temperatures for the US. I came across a story that I think it does a fine job of being neutral in covering the story. Someone needs to get the author Danielle Day a liberal education her unbiased coverage of a politically loaded story is unheard of in modern journalism.
Apparently there was a problem in the methods used to ascertain the average temperature of the US. This has lead to a major revision in the hottest days of the last century. It’s this kind crap that will lead to serious discounting of scientific findings in the future. Particularly when you consider the big deal that was made by a chunk load of scientists about a consensus. Hey I have an idea! if you want people to believe in global warming why don’t you collect valid data to prove its existence instead of voting on it’s existence. I know its radical, but it might just be more effective, to you know, prove it’s existence instead of morally forcing it into existence.
This is a huge story, but has an absolute dearth of media coverage. Last I checked only Fox News has covered the story. Lets see if we can construct a story similar in fashion, but with different political overtones and see if the media responds differently. What we have here is a bureaucratic organization making a big deal about some evidence ostensibly proving their highly contentious political claim. Based off of this evidence they argue for immediate and severe action.
Can you think of anything that has happened in the last five years like that? I can’t think of a single example. What a relief, I guess the MSM is not bias….oh wait. Shit, I just thought of an example. That damn WMD thing. Turns out the Bush administration had lots of evidence ‘proving’ their existence, yet after the invasion, WMD were no where to be found. The press had an absolute field day with this. And the coverage lasted literally for years. It never ended. Yet revision to evidence in global warming doesn’t even yield small story coverage for one day. Can you say bias?
I will grant you that while the characteristics of the the two examples are very similar their magnitude is not quite the same. This should certainly lead to differential treatment of press coverage of the two stories. But to not cover a story which removes the fact that the hottest decade was the nineties after the press has presented that as fact for global warming on many occasions borders on absurdity. How the fuck is that not news?
One final thing. Several of the sources I have read have indicated that the NOAA, the government organization charged with tracking the country’s temperatures, has refused to give out the algorithms used for such calculations. If true, seriously what the hell is that? Really makes this whole global warming thing that much more suspicious. Really starts to reek of religion. Our methods for temperature ascertainment have been revealed to us by a divine entity. Only the chosen true believers are pure enough to view this divine equation. Skeptics need not apply.
Over at Iowahawk you can find some great bumper stickers to show your support for the environment. He also gives a good solution to solving the global warming problem.
The article details the change in attitude one of the founders of Greenpeaece had towards nuclear energy. The quote is reference to a current Greenpeace representative.
Mr. Townsley of Greenpeace disputes that. “We spend a lot of time looking at the science,” he says. “We’re pro-science. But you have good and bad science. Science has the ability to be our savior or our downfall.”
