Elder Goths Straw Ban

San Francisco Is Poised To Ban Plastic Straws. That's Got Bubble Tea Shops Worried

What a Waste

This seems counterproductive on multiple levels.

ClimateFaith Knocked Down a Notch?

More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Study: Half of warming due to Sun! (link to the Government)

Ah, I love it when I question authority...
Look, I'm not saying I'm right. I never said there wasn't warming.
All I've been saying is that NO ONE is right.
To dismiss any evidence against what's popular, which tends to be the norm - isn't Science. Constant observation and continuous checking and rechecking - skepticism - That's Science!
Now it seems that there's a couple other people who aren't so sure about this man made global warming swindle either...

A full Senate report is set to come out tomorrow…
A hint of what the upcoming report contains:

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # #

In addition, the report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a heavy dose of inconvenient climate developments. (See Below: Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History')

Again, I'm not a scientist - however - I do know what scientific method is. I'd like to see it applied to ClimateFaith.

New scientific analysis shows Sun “could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth's average temperature” (LINK) & (LINK)

Dr. Bruce West, A U.S Army Chief Scientist, Says Sun, Not Man, Is Driving Climate Change – June 3, 2008 – (LINK)

Awesome. Let's keep talking.

Ahem... ClimateFaith, that's mine!

It seems the Wall Street Journal reads this here blog.

They have done a piece that, granted a bit more intelligently than I, discusses the Faith of ClimateChange(tm) and the lack of science.

Bret Stephens seems to have looked at my work. He seems to have come to the same conclusion that I have - GlobalWarming/Climate Change is not based on science or (at least) good science. It has become a vehicle of ideological convenience... for Socialism. It's also based on faith, or theology - to which he has added the element of fear. And the last is psychological, and dealing with penance, which he remarks that's remarkable since penance sells strongly among a mostly secular audience. (link-age)

Damn I should have added the fear part. Hat tip to you Bret.

You know, I just wish they'd throw some credit around every so often, ya know? Sure, he'll lose his job for mentioning "Some Cap'n who writes on a Blog that he hijacked from OneF and Killre..." But still, Bret, how about a link to that "strange blog" or at least leave a comment on my original article... that I wrote a week ago. That gave you the idea for the story.

Oh, and don't tell me no one reads this thing either. We had 20K hits last week. Not one of you touched an advertisement -- but 20K hits is nothing to sneeze at. And try not to act surprised when this site becomes an all-gun, all-the time discussion destination. Seems a couple people like those types of stories they can't seem to find in the "popular press."

ClimateFaith

"More ozone and methane being destroyed than we previously thought," says Alastair Lewis of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science in Leeds, UK.

I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record here - a scratched CD - a half downloaded MP3...

I have contended on these pages that the Earth will not warm at the rate that the climate models suggest because they aren't factoring enough variables. There are a LOT of variables. However, three specific variables that I've never seen put into a climate model, because they're just too unpredictable. First, the heat sinks that are the Earth's Oceans. Second, the volatility of our atmosphere. Third, and most recently pointed out - Sun spots.

The Oceans not only absorb, but also reflect the sun's rays. More and less water change the equation for any climate model. It's too hard to predict, so that data is usually just ignored.

Second, our atmosphere. We know a little bit about how it works, but not enough to predict it. What happened to the Ozone layer? Why was there a hole? Why isn't there one now? Uh... Just leave that out, Timmy.

Ozone in the troposphere, up to 10 kilometres above the Earth's surface, is the third most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide and methane.

Yet climate models are not very precise when it comes to predicting where and in what quantities the gas is produced and removed. Part of the problem is that the molecule is largely recycled above the tropical oceans, where data is sparse.

When they began to measure how the concentrations of ozone in the troposphere varied over time, they discovered that 13% of ozone is lost each day in this area, not 8% as predicted by models.

Third, Sun Spots. According to some of the things I've posted here for you to absorb - to toss out as an alternate point of view to the norm (again, check the masthead) the temperature of the earth MIGHT actually be related to the fluctuations of the giant nuclear fireball in the center of our solar system. Fancy that?

Here's the thing - I'm not sure. I'm not positive that I'm right. There, I've said it. Problem here, is that there isn't a debate. There's only junk science and the blind religion based on "Climate Change" band-waggoning. Non-thinking, blind acceptance to something that has not yet been observed in more than an anecdotal fashion... THAT IS NOT SCIENCE. That is FAITH....

So I'd like to start calling those that blindly follow this religion of ClimateFaith, ClimateThumpers.

I think I better get off the chair here before I get hurt.
Here's the link to the article from NewScientist

And here's a link to another trusted source.

Global Warming Update

Well, here I go again. Doubting that the world will end up looking like Venus. But at least I'm not alone as - More than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition denying that man is responsible for global warming.

Wow. 9000 of the 31,000 have PhD's, even.

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of ... greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments."

Meanwhile, if you think that this will stop the religion of environmentalists, even I know better than that. The environmental 'green' movement will be championed by WalMart and McDonald's as a way to limit their energy usage - not to save the earth - but to save their profit margin by NOT spending money on extra energy cost, and therefore generating more money for their stockholders.

Don't be totally surprised to see McDonald's turning a profit from used fry oil in the not too distant future.

UPDATE: There are no sunspots - We're DOOMED!
Here's why (and I might have mentioned this before)
Ice Age, dude. Ice Age.

Here's the story on that one (link). Now you have to decide - death by Ice, or death by fire?

That's always one that has bugged me since I was a little kid.

Freezing to death, or burning?

Freezing seems slower, and more frustrating. But burning seems much, much more painful.

Rethink Green

WIRED magazine has done some math. They've actually weighed the issues of global warming/climate change (or whatever we're calling it this week) and puts the smack down on the green movement for not doing the same.

For instance - not embracing Nuclear power as a carbon-free alternative to the massive black coal plants that dot the American landscape. Using Frank-n-food (genetically altered food crops) that will use less fertilizer, space, and ultimately energy to reduce carbon, and also to feed the people of the earth. What's a little strange mutation vs feeding people? Maybe a third eye is what we, as humans, need?

Wired's top 10 GREEN HERESIES

Live in Cities:
Urban Living Is Kinder to the Planet Than the Suburban Lifestyle

A/C Is OK:
Air-Conditioning Actually Emits Less C02 Than Heating

Organics Are Not the Answer:
Surprise! Conventional Agriculture Can Be Easier on the Planet

Farm the Forests:
Old-Growth Forests Can Actually Contribute to Global Warming

China Is the Solution:
The People's Republic Leads the Way in Alternative-Energy Hardware

Accept Genetic Engineering:
Superefficient Frankencrops Could Put a Real Dent in Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Carbon Trading Doesn't Work:
Carbon Credits Were a Great Idea, But the Benefits Are Illusory

Embrace Nuclear Power:
Face It. Nukes Are the Most Climate-Friendly Industrial-Scale Form of Energy

Used Cars — Not Hybrids:
Don't Buy That New Prius! Test-Drive a Used Car Instead. Building and disposing a Prius creates much more carbon and nickel waste than that damned H2.

Prepare for the Worst:
Climate Change Is Inevitable. Get Used to It - You're still going to die.

Global Warming Update

Did you know that the founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, is suing Al Gore?

He figures it is the only way to really get a healthy debate on record.

"Is he committing financial fraud? That is the question," Coleman said.

"Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."

I bring it to your attention since there is little to zero reporting of this issue or litigation in the popular press. He continues:

"Does carbon dioxide cause a warming of the atmosphere? The proponents of global warming pin their whole piece on that," he said.

The compound carbon dioxide makes up only 38 out of every 100,000 particles in the atmosphere, he said.

"That's about twice as what there were in the atmosphere in the time we started burning fossil fuels, so it's gone up, but it's still a tiny compound," Coleman said. "So how can that tiny trace compound have such a significant effect on temperature?

"My position is it can't," he continued. "It doesn't, and the whole case for global warming is based on a fallacy."

Interesting development - throwing such things as facts, figures, and observable scientific data into a debate that will surely turn him to a social pariah. However, his reasoning is that due to Gore's "baloney" it's messing up his product of accurate weather prediction that people depend on to live their lives.

Ice Age?! - Hey, wait a minute...II

Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966. (link-o)

The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."

China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century.

In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.

And remember the lost Arctic Sea ice that will kill the polar bears off? The ice that last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past....

Well, that ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.

One winter does not a climate make. It might be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming.

But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter's weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.

And the rest of the article is just a re-post of MY article from last week about the new Ice Age based on less activity in the Sun.

Stuff White People Like

Recycling is a part of a larger theme of stuff white people like: saving the earth without having to do that much.

Recycling is fantastic! You can still buy all the stuff you like (bottled water, beer, wine, organic iced tea, and cans of all varieties) and then when you’re done you just put it in a DIFFERENT bin than where you would throw your other garbage. And boom! Environment saved! Everyone feels great, it’s so easy!

This is important because all white feel guilty about producing waste. It doesn’t stop them from doing it, but they feel guilty about it. Deep down, they believe they should be like the Native Americans and use every part of the product or beast they have consumed. Though for many white people, this simply means putting plastic bags into a special drawer where they will accumulate until they are eventually used to carry some gym clothes or bathing suit. Ultimately this drawer will get full and only be emptied when the person moves to a new house. Advanced white recyclers will uses these grocery bags as garbage bags.

If you are in a situation where a white person produces an empty bottle, watch their actions. They will first say “where’s the recycling?” If you say “we don’t recycle,” prepare for some awkwardness. They will make a move to throw the bottle away, they will hesitate, and then ultimately throw the bottle away. But after they return look in their eyes. All they can see is the bottle lasting forever in a landfill, trapping small animals. It will eat at them for days, at this point you should say “I’m just kidding, the recycling is under the sink. Can you fish out that bottle?” And they will do it 100% of the time!

The best advice is that if you plan to deal with white people on regular basis either start recycling or purchase a large blue bin so that they can believe they are recycling.

(Cutn'pasted from Stuff White People Like)

Toxic Lightbulbs

In an attempt to save the planet from ourselves, you may have purchased a few fluorescent lightbulbs to replace the .03 cent ones that you're more accustomed to using.

Here's a detailed 10 step guide to dealing with broken light bulbs has been drawn up by the UK House of Commons Commission—an organization responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Parliamentary estate.

Naturally, this had many taxpayers in an uproar. It seems that the people are angry that they need tax money to tell them how to throw away a lightbulb. A spokesman for the Taxpayers' Alliance referred to the list as "ridiculous." He went on to gripe about how public officials are being paid to write "guidelines on how to use a dustpan and brush." However, Fluorescent bulbs contain mercury. Not something to play around with - anymore.

But right when you think that the nanny state will step in and educate the public - Nick Harvey, the Commission spokesman, said nothing of mercury in his response. Instead, he noted that the guidelines were necessary, because "there had been an incident where a light bulb had been broken and placed in a waste paper bin. Someone had picked it out and cut their finger." So it appears that a portion of the commission's £144 million budget is spent on band-aid prevention?

I have not seen such warnings from Al Gore, nor our own governmental bodies warning of the mercury that these bulbs contain, nor am I aware of my disposal procedures for such bulbs in the U.S. Feel free to forward that message along in the comments section. Expect these to be filling up our landfills and entering the water supply in, oh, about 5-7 years when they burn out.

NASA Global Warming Data - 0, Blogger - 1

An amateur meteorologist, and angry blogger, uncovered a serious flaw in NASA's global warming data. Of course NASA acted like competent scientists and acknowledged the error... are you kidding? -- they tried to bury the mistake. Original story on the jump.

"As a result of Stephen McIntyre's calculations, climatologists at the Goddard Institute of Space Science in New York now accept that 1934 was historically the United States' hottest year since records began, not 1998 as they had claimed. It also turns out that five of the 10 warmest years on record in the US occurred before 1939, and only one is from the 21st century, raising questions over the statistics used in Al Gore's environmental film An Inconvenient Truth to highlight the faster pace of climate change."

Well isn't that interesting?

Here's another take on the Newsweek cover story from last week (on the jump)
Noel Sheppard responds to each paragraph in the article. Much better than I care to.

Gore does it again!

Just a week after dumping tons of CO2 in the atmosphere to promote not dumping CO2 into the atmosphere, Al Gore again shows his commitment to Mother Earth by serving a threatened species of fish at his daughter's wedding.

Gore and his guests at the weekend ceremony dined on Chilean sea bass
- arguably one of the world's most threatened fish species.

Also known as Patagonian toothfish, the species is under pressure from illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing activities in the Southern Ocean, jeopardising the sustainability of remaining stocks.

Do as I say, not as I do.