"Global weirding"

Check out this piece from today's Boston Herald.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

The Nation's Village Idiot . . . a.k.a. Joe Biden

According to the Vice President, "every single great idea that has marked the 21st century, the 20th century and the 19th century has required government vision and government incentive."

Every single great idea since 1800 . . . every single great idea for 210 years . . .

Does he really believe that Henry Ford's assembly line came about because of Washington's vision instead of his own capitalistic ingenuity?

Bill Gates wrote BASIC because of a government stimulus program?

The Frisbee?  Rock and Roll?  Fantasy football?

And this guy is next-in-line for the presidency.

But there's something deeper to learn from the Village Idiot's latest random thought . . . this is the way many, many, powerful Democrats think . . . we can't (and don't) live without government intervention, without the government taking care of us, without our "betters," the ruling class in Washington, running our lives for us.

Individuality is at stake.  The time is here to remove Democrats from power as soon as elections allow.

A question for Stephen Hawking

According to physicist Stephen Hawking, God did not create the Universe.  "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing."  It is "because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing."  (Link here.)

But here's my question for Professor Hawking . . . why is there a law such as gravity?  Who created it?

Himalayan Glacier Update

They're still there.

Now, in an update to the previous story about the IPCC's false and unscientific claim that all the glaciers in the Himalayan Mountains would melt away by 2035, we have verification from the IPCC report's author that the claim was included for political reasons . . . Dr. Murari Lal told the U.K.'s Daily Mail that he was well aware of the fact that the claim "did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research."  Nonetheless, Lal admitted, "we thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action."  (Link to story here.)

In other words, the IPCC is willing to say anything - true or not, verified or not - to support their political agenda.

Shocker, eh.  It is almost as shocking as the breakup of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.  Hollywood marriages are usually so solid.

Here's something just as shocking . . . the chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri's Energy and Resources Institute used the "bogus" claims about melting Himalayan glaciers to win grants worth more than a million dollars.  (Link to story here.)

So is the IPCC falsely pushing its "global warming" agenda for political purposes - or personal economic gain?  Or, like most liberals worldwide, do they see those two things as one in the same?

Carbon Dioxide is - get this - NOT increasing in the atmosphere

The entire global warming religion is based on the premise that human beings are emitting so much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that we're causing the earth's temperature to climb beyond a life-supporting limit.  But guess what . . . a new study reanalyzing the data found that there has been no increase in atmospheric CO2 in the past 150 years.  (Link to story here.)

Jim Talent on Ethical Vaccines

SLC is a busy man.  And, I have to admit that I'm not always good about reading my e-mails.  Tonight I checked and found that one of Jim Talent's staffers had noted my prior posts concerning the video that he and Bob Graham put out asking why we still grow vaccines in chicken eggs (Link to #1, #2, and #3) and brought them to the Senator's attention.  Here is Jim Talent's response to my concerns:

I am Vice Chairman of the Commission on Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Terrorism and Proliferation. I know that's a mouthful. Basically, our Commission is the follow on to the 9-11 Commission. Our job is to assess the threat that terrorists will get and use weapons of mass destruction and recommend ways of preventing an attack. Our view -- and this is sobering -- is that the chance of an attack is growing, that it will reach the level of probability within five years, and that it will most likely be a bio-attack that could kill hundreds of thousands of people. 

The good news is that the danger can be reduced. One way to do that is to develop and stockpile vaccines and therapeutics to help reduce the impact of an attack with anthrax, eboli, or plague -- the three most likely bioweapons. 

That's why we launched our Faster Vaccines campaign. We are highlighting the need for new technologies for producing vaccines so that America can defend itself against an attack. The issue you raise is an important one, and I want to assure you that the new technologies we advocate in the video are developed through animal cells, not human cells.

I'm glad to hear that Talent has not sold out his Pro-Life credentials.  Thank you, Senator, for the clarification.  Keep up the good work.

Unnatural Selection

Scientists at Stanford University have "successfully" created sperm cells and eggs from embryonic stem cells in the hopes of creating a cure for infertility.  (Link to story here.)

To put it bluntly, these scientists have chosen to kill one human being in order to potentially create, through unnatural and artificial means, another.

We are, right now, eating fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Environmental Nuts focus scare tactics on Missouri

Here's the lead of a story from tomorrow's St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

If greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase at current rates over the next few decades, St. Louis could face heat waves every other year like the one that killed hundreds of people in Chicago in 1995, according to a climate-change analysis released Tuesday.

Note two major weasel-words in this single (though long) sentence.  It boils down to this . . . "if" something we don't like happens, something really bad "could" happen and kill lots of people.

But, guess what, if it "could" happen, it also might not.  And, in reality, probably won't.

I have to give credit to the commenter "LEONARDWILSON" who wrote, "If we had valid climate data over the past 1,000 years, which we don't, we might actually be able to see some trends in climate change.  I guess the fact that we've experienced the coolest July on record, more or less, this year, doesn't mean anything."

I hate to tell you this Leonard, but facts don't mean much to the global warming nuts.  Our cool July - like Chicago's - is ignored because it doesn't fit the template.  To them, it isn't about science, it is a cult-like religion to them.

Even when the global warming nuts admit they can't explain things . . .

Today, this story came out where scientists studying climate change have had to admit that their s.w.a.g.'s about the "greenhouse gas" methane being released from the ocean floor 55 million years ago cannot explain why temperatures rose rapidly over a period of a few thousand years.  It seems that at a time when the world was already hotter than it is now, temperatures spiked another 5 to 9 degrees Celsius.  And the "commonly accepted scientific range" for the increase in greenhouse gasses during that time would only explain a 1 to 3.5 degree change.

In other words, what the climate scientists have theorized is not supported by historical, scientific fact.

But that doesn't seem to matter much to them.  Even after admitting that they have no idea why the earth warmed in the past, they remain certain that they know why it is "warming" now.  (Even though the planet actually seems to be cooling.)  And that, of course, is the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide.

It is maddening.  Oh if these folks could just learn a lesson from So-crates (as read/paraphrased by Bill S. Preston, Esq.) . . . "The only true knowledge is knowing that you know nothing."

Dude, that's them!

The male dairy cow

Have you ever wondered what happens to most male dairy cows?  Next time you have a hamburger, you might want to think about it.  A few lucky ones survive long enough to father some babies but most don't last too long.  Without the means to produce milk, there's not much reason to have them around.  They aren't worth their feed.

Why do I bring this up?  Well, guys, we're one step closer to suffering the same fate as those male dairy cows as researchers in England have produced (yes, that's produced, as in artificially created) "human" sperm in their laboratories.  (Link to story here.)

Are we (the human race) getting close to the point where enough is enough?  We're trying to play God and messing with things we ought to leave alone.   Forgive us.

Hypocrite-in-Chief

If you answered "no" to my prior questions (Link 1 or Link 2) about whether or not there had ever been a bigger hypocrite that Barack Obama, check out this piece at RedState.com.  You might want to reconsider your answer.

The piece juxtaposes Obama's words with his administration's actions.  

On December 20, 2008, Obama waxed poetic about how "promoting science" requires "listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it's inconvenient - especially when it's inconvenient."

But in March, Obama's "Environmental Protection Agency suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming."  An EPA official explained to skeptical scientist in his own agency that "the administrator and the administration has decided to move forward . . . and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision."

In other words . . . if the science is inconvenient, the Obama administration sure hopes that you don't hear about it.

Stem Cell Research Triumph . . . note that I didn't say "embryonic" stem cell research

Amazing news is in the news (though maybe not in the mainstream media) today from the field of stem cell research.  Breitbart.com reported today on a study published Friday in The Lancet showing that "stem cells transplanted into early-phase multiple sclerosis patients stabilized, and in some cases reversed, the debilitating neurological disorder."  (Link to story here.)

Even more amazing than the breakthrough, and likely the reason that you won't find this story everywhere, is that the stem cells used in this promising treatment came from the patients' own body, not an aborted baby.

Kudos to the scientists at Northwestern University who conducted the clinical trials.

Medical research around the world, and maybe even some "stimulus" money should be spent in pursuit of ethical stem cell research.  Research that by definition would not sacrifice the life of one human being to potentially benefit another.

Why is Al Gore shivering?

Funny stuff from Fairbanks, Alaska.  (Link to story here.)

Praying for Global Warming?

Check out this excellent piece by John Tomlinson on something that you won't read Big Media.

In it, Tomlinson reports on a U.N. Global Warming conference held in Poland last month.  That conference didn't get much press coverage because at it "650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis."  

This news doesn't fit the "mainstream" template because it is a conclusion based on facts not feelings.  Facts like . . . 

"The earth's temperature peaked in 1998" and has "been falling ever since."

"Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels" and Antarctic ice "is up 5 percent since 1980."

and "core samples [from Antarctica] show conclusively [that increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide] follow the earth's temperature rise, not lead it."

Yet the liberals are still out there fear-mongering and insisting that we act now to stop carbon emissions and global warming.

But Tomlin writes that there is now "overwhelming evidence that the earth is on the verge of another Ice Age" and suggests we should be praying for global warming instead of combating it.

I'm not sure that I agree with that conclusion but I certainly don't understand spending billions or trillions of dollars and wrecking what's left of our economy to foil a myth like man-made global warming.

Global Warming Update

This update on one of my favorite subjects - the global warming hoax:

The first article is about an Irishman who gets it, UK MP and Environment Minister Sammy Wilson.  Wilson calls the money spent trying to reduce carbon emissions "a giant con."  He voiced his opinion that "in 20 years' time we will look back at the whole climate change debate and ask ourselves how on earth were we ever conned into spending billions of pounds which are going into this without any kind of rigorous examination of the background, the science, the implications of it all."

That question will certainly be asked.  But I think we already have the answer . . . liberals.

The second article actually shows a believable reason why the earth has been cooling (yes my environmentalist friends - cooling) for the past two years . . . decreased solar activity.

Is there any chance that Al Gore will admit that something outside human control could be having more effect on the planet than even his carbon footprint?

The second article is noteworthy for one other reason . . . a speech from Barack Obama's science advisor-to-be is referenced.  In that speech, John Holden (shown here) listed "limiting population" at the top of his ten solutions for global warming.  What are people?  Parasites?  A plague on the planet?

Watch out for "population control" measures from the Obama administration.

Global Warming - Vegas style

The global warming crowd is lying low these days.  For good reason.  Hopefully, sooner or later, the world will realize that the facts simply don't support the environmentalists' caterwauling.    

Voices of sanity are also rising above the din.  CNN Meteorologist Chad Myers is one of the latest.  In this story posted by the Business & Media Institute, Myers points out that human beings are probably incapable of warming the planet.  In fact, Myers said, "to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant."

Dr. Jay Lehr, described in the same story as "an expert in environmental policy" brought facts to the debate.  He is quoted as saying that "if we go back really, in recorded human history, in the 13th Century, we were probably 7 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than we are now and it was a very prosperous time for mankind."

Lehr's data shows that the planets temperature has risen and fallen throughout time, even before the industrial revolution and apoplectic fits from former vice presidents over greenhouse gas emissions.

With a concerted effort, human beings might be able to marginally affect temperatures on Planet Earth.  But . . . to think that we're so mighty that what we're doing now is causing global warming is, indeed, arrogant.

Reading Material for 2009

An Australian professor of geology, Ian Plimer, gave a speech this week titled Human-Induced Climate Change - A Lot of Hot Air.  Plimer's contention is that "climates always change . . . climates have always changed and they always will."  (The speech is discussed in this column by Miranda Devine in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald.)

According to Dr. Plimer, this change results from planetary wobbles, the varying distance between the sun and the earth, variations in solar radiation, etc., not from greenhouse gasses produced human society.

Plimer showed that the earth's climate has always been fluctuating for at least 110,000 years, when the "Pleistocene Ice Age" began.  This period ended with the 800-year-long "Bolling warm period" about 14,700 years ago, which preceded the "Older Dryas cooling," which was followed by the "Allerod warming," and then "the Little Ice Age" from 1300 a.d. to 1850.  Since then, the earth has experienced "one of the most stable climate periods in history."

In addition, Dr. Plimer has completely debunked the idea that increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere results in global warming by simply charting CO2 levels and temperature.  The chart shows "little correlation" and "demonstrates one of the 'lessons from history' to which geologists are privy:  'There is no relationship between CO2 and temperature."

Apparently the global warming nuts aren't privy to geologists.

Dr. Plimer has a new book coming out in 2009, Heaven and Earth:  The Missing Science of Global Warming.

Is there any chance that we can get Al Gore to add it to his summer reading list?

House of Commons moves to legalize creation of Mutant Cow-People

You think I'm kidding?  If only.

Today in London, the British House of Commons voted overwhelmingly to approve a bill legalizing the creation of "animal-human embryos for medical research."  (Link to story here.)  The measure moves on to the House of Lords but passage there is expected and "research" unimagined by Dr. Frankenstein will be legal in the U.K.

The world does not need Mutant Cow-People.  The idea of cross-breeding human beings in a laboratory with cows, pigs, horses, or other animals is absolutely disgusting, appalling, and immoral.  It is just too much.  

Stop it now . . . before we see the fire and brimstone.

Global Warming (er, cooling?) Update

In what must come as a shock to Al Gore and all the rest of the Global Warming Crowd, Alaska's glaciers grew this winter due to large amounts of winter snow and chilly temperatures over the summer.  (Link to story.)

Economic Collapse has a Silver Lining - at least according to the global warming kooks

The world's recent economic woes, which seem to border on total collapse, are bringing smiles to the global warming crowd.  While recognizing "it's a cruel thing to say," Nobel Prize winning atmospheric scientist Paul Crutzen goes ahead and says, "if we are looking at a slowdown in the economy, there will be less fossil fuels burning, so for the climate it could be an advantage."  

(Link to Reuters article here.)

So there you have it.  Even if the global economy collapses into depression, things aren't all bad . . .