Saturday, December 12, 2009
..."I said, 'I didn't know it was against the law to take a picture of an officer in uniform.' He [Basford] said, 'It's not against the law to take a picture of a police officer unless they don't want you to.'"
Isn't that just a wonderful attitude by the Charleston Police Department?
On Wednesday, the morning after a sheriff's detention officer reported to jail to serve a contempt of court sentence, 20 of his colleagues called in sick for work at the Maricopa County Superior Court Buildings in Phoenix.
Those same buildings were evacuated for three hours Wednesday morning when a bomb threat was called in targeting public defenders, the Arizona Republic reported.
Arpaio said neither the absentee rate nor the bomb threat were related to Stoddard's sentence, but said he does "have a political prisoner in jail who happens to be my detention officer."
POLITICAL PRISONER?!? He snuck a document out of a lawyer's files! IN the freaking COURTROOM, and was caught on video! To play this game over this idiot is insane, and to say things like this is just flat stupid.
But wait! There's MORE!!
The case involving the deputy who read over and grabbed the defense attorney's papers gets stranger by the moment, even allowing that the county attorney up there and the sheriff are reputedly, well, nuts.
As noted earlier, the judge held the deputy in contempt. Now the county attorney has filed felony charges against the judge. On a quick read they are pretty strange. For one thing, they are quite ambiguous. The judge provided "money, transportation, weapon or disguise or other means of avoiding discovery, apprehension, prosecution of conviction" to any judges, officials, or attorneys (only two being named).
For another, look at the verification. "Subscribed and sworn upon information and belief this 9th day of December 2009" .... and there is no signature of a notary. Then it has the judge's home address.
BTW, the defendant is the chief criminal judge of the county.
Oh, jeez, this is effing insane. Which is apparently what Arpaio has become. Either that, or so damned arrogant he thinks he IS the law; and last I heard Judge Dredd was a frickin' comic book character.
The Iranian news Web site Tabnak reported that Ahmadinejad, while speaking to survivors of soldiers killed during the 1980's war against Iraq, asserted that U.S. officials believe the Mahdi -- or the Hidden Imam whom Shiite Muslims believe will be ultimate savior of mankind -- is coming and they are working to prevent it from happening, al-Arabiya said Tuesday.
Saw this a couple of days ago, then was reminded when I read this at ShrinkWrapped. Key quote:
It is often difficult for Western secular rationalists to appreciate that when paranoid religious zealots make what sound to their ears like irrational statements, the zealots actually mean what they say. Ahmadinejad, the public face of the most religious fundamentalist Twelvers, actually tells us, repeatedly, what he believes. The fact that so many sophisticated Westerners don't believe he means it is their limitation, not a comment on his perspective.
There's a scene in the movie Khartoum when Gordon has just returned from a visit with the current mahdi, and has realized that the guy is not a fake: that he is as devout in his religion as Gordon in his(understandable; Gordon was used to devout people), and that he's not a warlord using the belief to gain followers; he truly believes himself to be The Mahdi. At which point Gordon knows it's war to the knife with him, that there can be no compromise.
Gordon understood what he was facing, and why; our politicians, far too many, don't or won't believe that Ahmadogcrap really means it. And if we're not very damned lucky, an awful lot of people are going to die because they refuse to believe it.
Police ended the occupation of the campus's Wheeler Hall earlier Friday. They arrested 65 people inside on misdemeanor trespassing charges, including about 24 who were not students, Mogulof said. One person was arrested outside the hall on suspicion of inciting.
He said the university decided to clear the building after protesters began breaking into locked classrooms and publicizing an all-night hip-hop party Friday.
The Wheeler Hall protesters were cited and released at the university's request, but those at the chancellor's home "will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law," Birgeneau said.
Let's see, California is broke largely because clowns like these expected other people to pay for everything; now fees and tuition are going up and you protest. Tough crap, people.
Oh, and what was that about the chancellor's home?
Eight people were under arrest Saturday after protesters broke windows, lights and planters outside the home of the chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley.
University spokesman Dan Mogulof said 40 to 70 protesters also threw incendiary devices at police cars and the home of Chancellor Robert Birgeneau about 11 p.m. Friday. There were no fires or injuries.
The protest at the chancellor's home came late the same day that police arrested 66 protesters at a campus classroom building that was partially taken over for four days.
Protest m oving up to property damage moving up to riot and arson; yeah, does sound like a bunch of leftists, doesn't it?
The incident happened at about 12:20 p.m. Wednesday at a home on Pickwick Lane in Willingboro.
According to officials, the 62-year-old Hamilton responded to the home following a call about two loose dogs.
When Hamilton arrived at the home, she saw a male dog go around the side of the home. When no one answered the door, she tried to secure the male dog in a yard where a female dog also lived.
"There was a hole in the fence that as she went around the side of the house to take a peek, he was already at the hole, charged through the hole and attacked her," Lt. Joseph Dey of the Willingboro Police Department explained.
She managed to call for help.
Lt. Dey said the two dogs were shot and killed by arriving officers after coming at them in an "aggressive manner."
Up to this point we have Bad Dog Owner and Bad Dogs; the Moron part comes in now:
Eyewitness News has learned that it is the third time since 2005 that officers have responded to the home for reports about the dogs.
The dogs' owner, Kevin Frink, contends it was the first time his dogs have ever bitten someone. Frink believes the officers did not have to gun down his dogs.
"They became the judge, the jury and prosecutor at that moment," Frink said.
Frink is apparently the level of moron who doesn't see that his dogs are not a threat to others, and does not maintain his fence. And he is, by his own words above, the level of moron who seriously deserves his ass kicked.
A: They only get to bite one person, idiot.
B: When they then behave aggressively toward the cops, they get shot.
C: You should be prosecuted. And possibly beaten severely by Hamilton when she's recovered.
I've had two families live next door to me with pit bulls. The first, I would not have trusted those dogs at all; they weren't treated very well(yes, Animal Control was by more than once) and were quite aggressive toward people. The second... they were treated as pets, and I never had to worry about more than the normal 'woof-woof' when I went out, or was mowing. Once I made friendly with them, the woofs were primarily "Hey! I'm over HERE! Munchy?"* Frink apparently either didn't treat them right and/or didn't train them right. Jackass.
*I'll note that after a while, when they saw me pruning trees they'd get real attentive: one day while chopping some stuff up I noticed them watching me. And remembered seeing one of them jumping up to grab a branch and chewing on it. So I cut a couple of pieces about a foot long and a little more than an inch across and walked over to the fence. The female was at the fence(they bred them and kept them apart most of the time), the male on the other side of the yard, both locked on. I held up a stick and said "You want a chew?" The female was practically vibrating when I dropped hers over the fence, and she pounced on it. Tossed the male one and he grabbed it and did that bouncy doggy "I've got a CHEW!" run over to a shady spot. It made them very happy when I was pruning.
“The truth is that the e-mails, while unseemly, do little to change the overwhelming scientific consensus on the reality of man-made climate change. But they do hand a powerful political card to skeptics at the start of perhaps the most important environmental summit in history. Still don’t know what to make of it?”
to which the followup is
As far as Walsh is concerned, the big lesson is that “in the aftermath of the e-mails, climate scientists and advocates will need to rethink how they engage with critics.”
Nothing to really deal with the rather inconvenient-to-the-cause information about data being massaged(to put it politely) and faked and threats to illegally destroy data rather than let a 'doubter'(i.e., an actual scientist who wants to see if the data holds up to repeated examination) get hold of it.
I will say that it is a fairly good article, in that it points out that a lot of scientists are really bugged by the way the CRU and associated people/groups are so actively hostile to actual peer review and have tried to destroy the careers of people who won't fall into line; but it keeps coming back to that overwhelming scientific consensus on the reality of man-made climate change crap. And, again, glosses over the problems with the data the CRU put out, and the effects it has on all the others being used. Primary thrust is "Scientists need to wear down the skeptics by open debate. Which would be great; open debate and open access to the data is what a lot of the 'skeptics' wanted in the first place, and it was the True Believers denying that that caused the damned problem. Article closes with this:
Perhaps the lesson of Copenhagen is that raw politics and thinking critically don’t mix. One hopes, however, that the politics of science allow some room for open debate. That doesn’t mean letting your opponents run roughshod over the facts. Nor does it involve shutting off their microphones.
with the strong hint that the people doubting AGW are 'running roughshod over the facts', which is kind of hard when A: they weren't allowed to let their infidel eyes gaze upon the Holy Raw Data and B: in science, the data is SUPPOSED to be run over with roughness; tried over and over, in different ways, to see if it holds up to the examination.
Second thing is this over at Flopping Aces, in which one of the 'not a real scientist' people has something to say about the e-mails:
“The recent ‘ClimateGate’ revelations coming out of the UK University of East Anglia are but the tip of a giant iceberg of a well organized international climate warming conspiracy that has been gathering momentum for the last 25 years,” said Colorado State University’s Dr. William Gray.
His are the annual hurricane forecasts that are the standard for weather prognostications. His work pioneered the science of forecasting hurricanes and he has served as weather forecaster for the United States Air Force. He is Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at CSU and heads the school’s Department
of Atmospheric Sciences Tropical Meteorology Project.
Remember, this is one of the people derided as 'bought off' and 'not a REAL scientist' for not going along with that Holy Consensus on AGW. FA also has a link to a piece by Roy Spencer, I'll borrow one part:
4. Skeptics are not unified with an alternative explanation for global warming. Well, that’s the way science works in a field as immature as climate change science. The biggest problem is that we really don’t understand what causes natural climate variability. Kevin Trenberth has now famously admitted as much in one of the Climategate emails, where said it’s a “travesty” that we don’t know why warming has stopped in the last 7 to 10 years. For century-time-scale changes, some believe it is cloud cover being modulated by cosmic ray activity, which is in turn affected by sunspot activity. A few others think it is changes in the total energy output of the sun (possible, but I personally doubt it). In my opinion, it is internal, chaotic variability in the ocean and atmosphere circulation causing small changes in cloud cover. Since clouds are a natural sunshade, changing their coverage of the Earth will cause warming or cooling. The IPCC simply assumes this does not happen. If they did, they would have to admit that natural climate change happens, which means they would have to address the possibility that most of the warming in the last 50 has been largely natural in origin.
Also this one, on those pesky glaciers:
5. But the glaciers are melting! Many glaciers which have been monitored around the world for a long time have been retreating since the 1800’s, before humans could have been responsible. A few retreating glaciers are even revealing old tree stumps…how did those get there? Planted by skeptics?
I have to take note of that line in 4 about 'unified with an alternative explanation'; what the HELL does 'unified' have to do with dealing with facts? A lot of scientists and doctors have been screwed over mightily by others 'unified' in the knowledge that this new idea is obviously bullshit; thus things like germ theory and vaccinations, for instance, did not become what they are as early as they could. Being 'unified' behind an idea doesn't make it right, and claiming otherwise is crap.
*Reminds me of the people in the 80's screaming "Nuclear freeze or FRY!"
The internet is buzzing today with the news that Harry Reid quietly inserted a loophole in the Senate health care bill that would let insurance companies put limits on medical care for folks struggling with costly illnesses — angering patient advocates, and in apparent violation of a promise made by Obama this fall.
But in an email to me, Reid’s spokesperson defended the move, arguing it was necessary to hold down premiums.
My first thought is they're playing "Maybe we can bribe the insurance companies with this to shut them up." And it won't keep Obama & Co. from trying to destroy private health insurance down the road, so breaking this promise won't mean much to them(as if any of them really do).
Friday, December 11, 2009
The claim said that when Arambula fell to the floor, Lilly shot him two more times. That's when Arambula told Lilly he'd shot the wrong man. In his Internal Affairs interview, Lilly admitted firing at Arambula without any verbal warning, according to the claim.
Oh, boy. If either of those is true, the cop is screwed. And rightly so. And so is the department for trying to cover it up.
And the County just announced(after the election, isn't that interesting?) that yes, we WILL have to come up with more than 400 million for the jail.
And, I have to note, most of our local media didn't say squat about the Mayor's connections and other political connections to people who're going to make a lot of money off MAPS, and neither did they, so far as I know, say squat about the jail in the time leading up to the election.
WKY, KOCO and KWTV news? You suck, people. We know we can't trust you to bring a lot of this stuff up, which is why about the only thing I trust you to bring up anymore is the weather.
Muslim Americans faced more anti-Muslim bias but fewer physical assaults in 2008, according to a report released Thursday by the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations.
"In 2008, Muslims continued to face barriers to their full and equal participation in American society. Certain individuals and institutions persisted in profiting by smearing Islam,” the report said. "American Muslims continued to fear profiling, surveillance and undue scrutiny by law enforcement and other authorities.”
Hmmm, 'more bias'... so let's go further in.
The study said CAIR recorded 2,728 incidents of anti-Muslim discrimination or bias in 2008, a 3 percent increase from 2007. So-called hate crimes (acts involving threats or physical violance) fell 14 percent, from 135 to 116.
Ok, 'CAIR recorded'. I went to Dogpile and searched, and found some things. Like the FBI 2008 Hate Crime statistics; I copied the numbers covering two particular religions:
Bias motivation Incidents Offenses
Anti-Jewish 1,013 1,055
Anti-Islamic 105 123
So according to that, Jews have faced far more of actual reported hate crimes than muslims in 2008; they break it down to
- 65.7 percent were anti-Jewish.
- 13.2 percent were anti-other religion.
- 7.7 percent were anti-Islamic.
- 4.7 percent were anti-Catholic.
- 4.2 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
- 3.7 percent were anti-Protestant.
- 0.9 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. (Based on Table 1.)
Ok, how 'bout 2007?
Against Jews, 969 and 1010
Against Muslims, 115 and 133
So numbers against muslims are down, and against Jews are up.
There are all kinds of ways to take that press release, especially the face barriers to their full and equal participation and Certain individuals and institutions persisted in profiting by smearing Islam lines; based on some of the crap they've thrown out in the past, I probably count as 'profiting by smearing'(so where's my damned check? Huh?); and by 'facing barriers' they might well mean "Some people say mean things about us". In both cases, Screw you. One of the nice things about that pesky 1st Amendment is I can say what I think(which in this case includes "Cair is a terrorist-supporting bunch of RWPPs") and they can't stop me. Every religious group in the country catches crap from somebody; it just that most of them don't whine and moan and demand protection from the mean words like CAIR & Co. does. And, when you consider that CAIR gets whiny and threatening when someone does something as insensitive as, oh, speaking uncomfortable truths about some members of the Religion of Submission...
They also have this in the release:
CAIR expressed concern about government surveillance of Muslims and mosques, profiling, and worries that many politicians play on public fears about Muslims and equate tolerance of Muslims with weakness on national security.
Bull-effin'-crap. There's surveillance of muslims and mosques because of those that are involved in terrorism and supporting terrorists; you don't like being watched, do something about the members of your religion that want to murder and rob and rape in the name of your religion. When there's one of the periodic 'right-wing terrorism' scares due to either the SPLC or DHS having a spasm, we wind up with anyone who says anything unkind about a federal agency or politician being 'suspected'; so deal with it, you whiny bastards. And most politicians are so busy being PC and/or 'sensitive' that they treat islam with more tolerance than they do other religions. I mean, when a muslim went jihadi and murdered a bunch of people at Fort Hood, one of the first things to come from the politicians- and I include that politician in uniform General Casey- was "We don't want this to damage our diversity", and you whine about how you're treated by politicians? Shut the hell up.
CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said the increase in reported incidents might be attributed to greater Muslim American organization and less fear about seeking help from law enforcement or civil rights groups. Still, he said, "There is an increasingly vocal minority of Muslim bashers who are promoting hate and trying to marginalize Muslims, and they are having an impact.”
Or, there might also be more BS reports of fake 'hate crimes' by some members of the ROS so they can play victim some more. Bleah.
Look, someone who craps on someone else simply because of how(or how not) they worship is a jerk*. Period. Fact is, muslims who are Americans and proud of it, who do NOT want sharia forced on them and like the freedoms of this nation do catch crap because of the(far too many) muslims who make excuses for, raise money for or very actively help terrorists. I don't give a rats ass* if you worship in a church or mosque or synagogue or grove or wherever; I truly don't. But when you start acting against others, and making public BS statements as CAIR so often does, or actively aiding terrorists(as CAIR has been caught doing), then I care. A lot. Because you're a bastard and need to be dealt with.
Just some thoughts on this, for what they're worth
*Or their skin color or where their ancestors are from originally or whatever.
The reason Wall Street lawyers and board rooms are concerned about ACORN beyond the current political and public relations drawbacks, ACORN’s actions of throwing sensitive private information into a public dumpster containing bank customer records begs the question, is a class action lawsuit in the offing? One document obtained by Biggovernment.com shows Citibank customers names, addresses and mortgage loan numbers were illegally disclosed, not to mention the very fact that these individuals are on this list reveals their credit worthiness since they are in a default status with regards to paying their mortgage loans.
Wall Street certainly has enough to worry about with a weak U.S. economy and uncertainty in global financial markets. But thanks to ACORN, there is now more to worry about. Citibank’s cavalier treatment of its customers sensitive, personal and financial information is potentially a serious breach of state and federal law. As the depth of the San Diego ACORN office data breach becomes more clear, Citigroup and possibly more banks, will have to prepare for the inevitable onslaught of low-income homeowners lining up to take advantage of what is truly to be a cash bonanza for the poor. Be assured that there will be many law firms willing to help “spread the wealth” to these economically disadvantaged individuals whose personal information was treated with careless disregard.
"In the wake of the Civil War, the former Confederate states began passing a series of laws, ordinances, and regulations that robbed the recently freed slaves and their white allies of their political, economic, and civil rights, including the right to arms. Mississippi’s 1866 Black Code, for example, declared “that no freedman, free Negro, or mulatto…shall keep or carry firearms of any kind.” In other words, America’s original gun control laws were designed to disarm African Americans and leave them at the mercy of predatory state governments.
So the Radical Republicans of the 39th Congress responded with the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, and which was explicitly designed to secure the life, liberty, and property of all Americans from tyrannical state attack. One of the leading figures in this process was Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, the author of the 14th Amendment’s first section (quoted above). In a speech before the House of Representatives, Bingham explained that “the privileges and immunities” protected by the amendment “are chiefly defined in the first eight amendments to the Constitution.” That quite obviously includes the Second Amendment.
Similarly, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, who presented the Fourteenth Amendment to the Senate, declared that its purpose was “to restrain the power of the States and compel them at all times to respect these great fundamental guarantees,” including “the right to keep and to bear arms.” As the legal scholar Michael Kent Curtis writes in his masterful history No State Shall Abridge: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights, both Bingham and Howard “clearly said that the amendment would require the states to obey the Bill of Rights. Not a single senator or congressman contradicted them.” "
But Chicago(i.e. Daley and every corrupt politician and gun bigot there) thinks the Amendments don't apply to Chicago. Or at least the ones they don't like don't apply. I wonder, have the gun bigots really thought through the implications if the Supremes ruled that a city or state can pretty much ignore an amendment they find inconvenient?
"I understand the Republican leader doesn't want us to do health care. I appreciate that. He and I have different positions on that," said Reid. "I see no reason to punish everybody this weekend and I hope the minority will give strong consideration to the proposal that i've made."
But in addition to shepherding the health care bill through the Senate, Reid is also locked in a tough reelection campaign.
And in that regard his desire for a weekend off is not so benevolent to other Senators and staffers.
It turns out Reid has a 1,000 plus per plate fundraiser scheduled for Saturday in New Orleans, according to one local paper, which also reports that Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-LA, a key swing moderate in the health care debate, will also be in attendance.
Personally I'd have written that "Sen. Landrieu(For sale but she's not cheap-LA)", but that's just me.
Update: they cancelled the fundraiser. And no wonder Reid was desperate to be there:
The entry level contribution was $4,800. Landrieu’s office said she would not be in Louisiana this weekend because she will be working on the health care legislation, which is likely to be shaped by floor votes
Gateway has a bit on Media Matters trying to claim "Aw, this is no big deal!'. Unconvincingly.
Just for the timeline:
Wednesday evening: extractor failure(and disappearance)
Thursday morning: call S&W, "You'll get a label within 48 hours"
Late Thursday: take one last look before boxing it up and Lo! found the extractor; tape it and spring to the receiver
Friday morning: get label and take it to FedEx.
So a few days to get there, this time of year no telling how long to get to it. We'll see.
A Correction. On Jan. 13, 1920, "Topics of the Times," and editorial-page feature of the The New York Times, dismissed the notion that a rocket could function in vacuum and commented on the ideas of Robert H. Goddard, the rocket pioneer, as follows:
"That Professor Goddard, with his 'chair' in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution, does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react - to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."
Further investigation and experimentation have confirmed the findings of Isaac Newton in the 17th Century and it is now definitely established that a rocket can function in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere. The Times regrets the error.
They regretted the error. IN 1969.
Yes, I know, what they deserve can't be done. Although there's no shortage of ants and honey.
No part of the school curriculum is immune from the social justice makeover crew. Zinn’s partners at Rethinking Schools have even issued teaching guides to “Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice by the Numbers” – which rejects the traditional white male patriarchal methods of teaching computation and statistics in favor of p.c.-ified number-crunching:
“Rethinking Mathematics is divided into four parts. The first part is devoted to a broad view of mathematics that includes historical and cultural implications. Part Two includes nine classroom narratives in which teachers describe lessons they have used that infuse social justice issues into their mathematics curriculum. Included here…an AP calculus lesson on income distribution. The third part contains three detailed classroom experiences/lessons. These include a physical depiction of the inequitable distribution of the world’s wealth, the results of a student investigation into how many U.S. Presidents owned slaves, and a wonderful classroom game called ‘Transnational Capital Auction’ in which students take on the role of leaders of Third World countries bidding competitively for new factories from a multinational corporation.
Short lessons, provocative cartoons, and snippets of statistics are scattered throughout Rethinking Mathematics. A partial list of topics includes racial profiling, unemployment rate calculation, the war in Iraq, environmental racism, globalization, wealth distribution and poverty, wheelchair ramps, urban density, HIV/AIDS, deconstructing Barbie, junk food advertising to children, and lotteries.”
You folks with kids, you'd better be keeping an eye on what's sliming into their school.
Lots of people have been very approving of him pointing out, for a change, that the US is a good country that's done a lot of bleeding for the cause of freedom; BIG change from his usual speeches of apology and bows. Why?
I think it's pretty simple: He got the Peace Prize when he damn well knew he didn't deserve it; it was a last whack at Bush 43 AND that it was being used to pressure him to cut and run in Afghanistan. He can't openly cut and run as he'd like to, and he knew that if he danced to the tune the Euros wanted(and he's inclined to) he'd catch hell for it; so suddenly we have a speech that defends the US.
Up to a point.
He had to say something to defend himself against the lefty anger for giving McChrystal less troops than he needs, and this was it. And he STILL had to throw in crap like "I banned torture"(which already was) and "I closed Guantanamo"(which is still open) and "The US has to hold to a higher standard"(which gives terrorists the cover of the rights of US citizens and such crap).
What did you expect? He's playing triangulation. If the speech had held to his previously demonstrated thoughts and actions he'd have caught hell for it here in the US; so he said nice words about this country. Problem is, I have a hard time believing that he believes a word of it.
We all remember President Obama's statement containing the assertion that one of the flaws of the US Constitution was that is only contained a list of "negative rights," meaning negative government "rights." The idea that a Harvard-trained lawyer thinks that the government has rights or that there was no list of positive responsibilities assigned to government was mockable. (Hey, you voted for him.)
But what the statement betrayed was a widespread misconception present in those of us who aren't lawyers of any variety of a friendly fed whose role is to insert itself between God and man's liberty and to redistribute wealth (aka stealing). The notion that the founders "forgot" to address this is hilarious.
So when the Democrats came to full power this year, they began to build on the foundation that Democrat Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson laid. The good news? Between Socialized Medicine, Cap and Trade, TARP, etc., the federal government's active role in overstepping its bounds--in crippling America--is opening the eyes of Americans of all races. The bad news: there may not be an America left when the federal locusts finish.
The piece is on government overstepping bounds, well worth reading.
On Tuesday, we asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger why he wouldn’t even consider suspending AB 32, the state’s landmark 2006 anti-global warming law, given that state unemployment was 12.5 percent. Schwarzenegger threatened to veto AB 32, which will force Californians to use cleaner but costlier sources of energy, unless it included a provision allowing for its suspension in times of economic distress.
The response from the governor’s office: “Your question is premised on an unproven assertion that implementation of AB 32 would be harmful to the economy when all the evidence points in the opposite direction.”
At roughly the same time, veteran Sacramento reporter-turned-blogger Greg Lucas broke the story that a draft report by a state advisory committee estimated that implementing AB 32 would cost businesses, government agencies, private organizations and individuals who emit greenhouse gases from $48 billion to $143 billion from 2012 to 2020.
The next morning, the evidence that the governor was untethered from economic reality grew even more. A report on the growth in “green jobs” – which Schwarzenegger says will be the foundation of the future California economy – noted that even though they had grown 36 percent statewide since 1995, they still constituted less than 1 percent of all state jobs. The report offered no reason of any kind to believe the governor’s premise they will be California’s economic salvation.
Incredibly, Schwarzenegger’s aides sent out nearly a dozen mass e-mails citing news coverage of the report, as if it validated his claims about the boundless benefits of the coming green economy.
We have an interesting line from a story on a greeny idea that fell apart:
In a Soleri design, masses of people are packed into the small-footprint arcology so that the land surrounding the community can remain pristine, unpolluted by human touch. It was an idea much in fashion a few decades back. "As urban architecture, Arcosanti is probably the most important experiment undertaken in our lifetime," wrote Newsweek in 1976.
Soleri designed models of many futuristic communities, guided by his intense dislike of U.S.-style development. "The 'American Dream,' as physically embodied in the single-family house," he once wrote, "has to be scrapped and reinvented in terms which are coherent with the human and biospheric reality."
This has been hit on by a lot of greeny socialists: you shouldn't be allowed to have your own house and yard, let alone a bigger property, oh no; you should have to live in an anthill that they consider 'proper' housing for us nasty humans. To which most people invite them to go to the nether regions of hell, and if you come to drag me from my house I'll introduce you to Mr. Pumpgun.
Another piece on the fetish the clowns have for rail systems, even when some buses would be cheaper and better. Of course, they'll be spending other peoples money on it, so why should they care what it costs? "It's RAIL, it's GREEN, and you'll pay for it whether you like or use it or not!"
And my last note of idiocy, and why our schools and so many students are so screwed up,
I was told that 2 + 2 = 4 is merely a matter of opinion. I was told that Gödel showed mathematics could be inconsistent, so anything goes. (Actually, 2 + 2 = 4 is a theorem of Presburger arithmetic, which is arithmetic with addition and subtraction only, and Presburger arithmetic is, and has been proven to be, decidable, complete, and consistent.
I’ve had this experience several times now. University faculties now teach that truth is whatever the consensus of the faculty says it is (this was made explicit is the Berkeley faculty handbook a few years ago). This idea that the ruling group of faculty can establish truth by authority, even over the truths of mathematics like 2 + 2 = 4, has a chilling Orwellian flavor.
And there's that word 'consensus' again; interesting where all it pops up, isn't it?
Thus, when Mann arrived at work on Sep 22, 1999, Mann observed that he had walked into a “hornet’s nest”. (Mann Sep 22, 1999, 0938018124.txt). In an effort to resolve the dispute, Mann said that (subject to the agreement of Chapter Authors Karl and Folland) he would add back Briffa’s reconstruction, but pointed out that this would present a “conundrum”:
So if Chris[Folland] and Tom [Karl] are ok with this, I would be happy to add Keith’s series. That having been said, it does raise a conundrum: We demonstrate … that the major discrepancies between Phil’s and our series can be explained in terms of spatial sampling/latitudinal emphasis … But …Keith’s series… differs in large part in exactly the opposite direction that Phil’s does from ours. This is the problem we all picked up on (everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably concensus viewpoint we’d like to show w/ the Jones et al and Mann et al series. (Mann Sep 22, 0938018124.txt
Mann went on to say that the skeptics would have a “field day” if the declining Briffa reconstruction were shown and that he’d “hate to be the one” to give them “fodder”:
So, if we show Keith’s series in this plot, we have to comment that “something else” is responsible for the discrepancies in this case.…Otherwise, the skeptics have an field day casting doubt on our ability to understand the factors that influence these estimates and, thus, can undermine faith in the paleoestimates. I don’t think that doubt is scientifically justified, and I’d hate to be the one to have to give it fodder! (Mann Sep 22, 0938018124.txt)
By the following day, matters seem to have settled down, with Briffa apologizing to Mann for his temporary pangs of conscience. On Oct 5, 1999, Osborn (on behalf of Briffa) sent Mann a revised version of the Briffa reconstruction with more “low-frequency” variability (Osborn, Oct 5, 1999, 0939154709.txt), a version that is identical up to 1960, this version is identical to the digital version archived at NCDC for Briffa et al (JGR 2001). (The post-1960 values of this version were not “shown” in the version archived at NCDC; they were deleted.)
As discussed below, this version had an even larger late-20th century decline than the version shown at the Tanzania Lead Authors’ meeting. Nonetheless, the First Order Draft (Oct 27, 1999) sent out a few weeks later contained a new version of the proxy diagram (Figure 2.25), a version which contains the main elements of the eventual Third Assessment Report proxy diagram (Figure 2.21). Two weeks later came Jones’ now infamous “trick” email (0942777075.txt).
Among other things, please note the 'reasonably consensus' bit, and the almost frantic need to prevent ANY facts that might hurt the AGW line getting out; these are not the actions and words of a scientist putting forth a theory, these are the words and actions of people who have a point of view they want shoved along without having to deal with inconvenient facts. These are the actions and words of people who are True Believers and will hide and destroy any facts that don't fit their view and- as the e-mails show- will work to damage or destroy the careers of anyone who questions too hard, or in some cases just kept pressing for the raw data so they could check it.
This isn't 'science', this crap is activism and a power grab. And these clowns should face the science equivalent of disbarment and being banned from ever again getting public funding.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Federmann began to survey the immensity of the display before him, preparing his shopping list for the soldiers of his still-unborn country. In one of the first warehouses he entered, he stumbled on a strange device. It was a US Army pack rack designed to help a man carry a heavy load. Federmann hesitated for a moment. They might be useful, he thought, and they cost only twenty cents apiece. With a shrug, he marked three hundred down on his list and walked on. One day, Federmann's twenty-cent pack racks would save the Jews of Jerusalem from starvation. -- O Jerusalem!, page 121.
Avidar had one more surprise. The three hundred pack racks Xiel Federmann had bought for twenty cents almost as an afterthought on Christmas day in Antwerp had found at last a utilization. Avidar ordered the hastily mobilized men to lash their sacks to a rack and get back into their buses. They were off to the hills of Judea. -- Ibid., pp. 551-552
This human pack train of determined, out-of-shape older men kept the Jews in Jerusalem resisting until the Burma Road was completed and a ceasefire was declared. Some died of heart attacks, others fell off precipices, and all left their blood and flesh on the sharp rocks. Some made it on their hands and knees. But they made it. And in doing so they saved Jerusalem's 100,000 Jews. Federmann's sixty dollars had been well spent.
The City Council’s decision came after being advised by the City Attorney, who studied the authorities cited in the demand letter, that the law was not legally defensible. A copy of his report and related documents are available at www.calgunlaws.com.
Richmond apparently has at least one thing over San Francisco: their mayor and council didn't decide to waste millions of dollars of other peoples' money arguing an illegal law through the courts.
It also called for university students to do 100 hours of community service and employers to let workers carry out one week of civic service every year.
Yes, punitive taxes and involuntary servitude is the answer! And we're at risk, too; remember our socialists wanting kids to do mandatory 'volunteer' service(and are these clowns so far gone that the contrast of those two words just doesn't register?) before they'd be allowed to get a diploma and graduate from high school?
I'll borrow the words of the gentleman: Admittedly sociology grads ought to be branded on the forehead with the word “twat” and sentenced to a lifetime picking oakem but the rest of us…
Pointed to by the Random Strikes gentleman
Bike wouldn't quite, so pulled the battery and put it on the charger.
Neighbor needed channel-locks, and the damn things have gone into hiding. Use vise grips.
Put flea stuff on Security Staff. Who always acts like I'm wiring her to a battery or hiding a club behind me.
Get all the leaves out of the driveway and from in front of the door.
I need to prune the rose bushes back, but that'll wait till tomorrow.
And no label from S&W yet.
And, dammit, I forgot to get bread.
The accident happened during the testing of a fuse for shells for a 155mm howitzer. Ministry and agency officials were investigating the exact cause of the blast at Pocheon, 40 kilometres (25 miles) northeast of Seoul.
Found at Cowboy Blob; take a look at the picture he's got
More than 1,700 scientists have agreed to sign a statement defending the "professional integrity" of global warming research. They were responding to a round-robin request from the Met Office, which has spent four days collecting signatures. The initiative is a sign of how worried it is that e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia are fueling skepticism about man-made global warming at a critical moment in talks on carbon emissions.
One scientist said that he felt under pressure to sign the circular or risk losing work. The Met Office admitted that many of the signatories did not work on climate change.
One scientist told The Times of London he felt pressure to sign. "The Met Office is a major employer of scientists and has long had a policy of only appointing and working with those who subscribe to their views on man-made global warming," he said.
And I love this from Gringa:
Political analysts are discussing the fact that political asylum cannot be given for criminal charges.
Hehehehehe, which means Zelaya and a bunch of his thieving friends may have even more troubles than they thought.
“The American president is acting like an elephant in a porcelain shop,” said Norwegian public-relations expert Rune Morck-Wergeland. “In Norwegian culture, it’s very important to keep an agreement. We’re religious about that, and Obama’s actions have been clumsy. You just don’t say no to an invitation from a European king. Maybe Obama’s advisers are not very educated about European culture, but he is coming off as rude, even if he doesn’t mean to.”
I'll point out that we CAN say no to a king; that's one of the things about this country getting started in the first place; doesn't change that to be actively rude or dismissive this way in a diplomatic context, without damn good reason, is foolish.
Oh, and keeping your word is very important to most people here, too; you just happened to give the Nobel to a politician who considers 'truth' to be whatever he wants, and his word to be malleable so as to fit whatever he sees as the current conditions.
That may have something to do with Obama’s uncharacteristic shunning of the press. Whereas other prize winners have viewed the standard Nobel Peace Prize CNN interview as an opportunity to address the world for a full hour, Obama seems unwilling to answer any questions at all. There will be no press conference, just a statement from the president.
“It’s very strange that he is unwilling to meet the press,” said Marie Simonsen, political editor at Dagbladet, one of Norway’s biggest daily newspapers. “I’m very disappointed. You get the impression he is not proud of the prize.”
I think he may consider it his due, not a true prize. But in any case, if he's taking questions at a conference he'll have to answer them. And he doesn't want to.
Each year, I get invited to Washington DC to serve as a pimp. A scientific pimp. I’m expected to join a small legion of volunteers to beg my senators and representatives to spend tax money on a program called the Math and Science Partnerships. This program is supposed to help improve how math and science is taught in this country. What could be wrong with that?
Narrow intellectual gatekeeping is omnipresent in academia. Want to know why the government wastes hundreds of millions of dollars on math and science programs that never seem to improve the test scores of American students? Part of the reason for this is that today’s K-12 educators—unlike educators in other high-scoring countries of the world—refuse to acknowledge evidence that memorization plays an important role in mastering mathematics. Any proposed program that supports memorization is deemed to be against “creativity” by today’s intellectual gatekeepers in K-12 education, including those behind the Math and Science Partnerships. As one NSF program director told me: “We hear about success stories with practice and repetition-based programs like Kumon Mathematics. But I’ll be frank with you—you’ll never get anything like that funded. We don’t believe in it.” Instead the intellectual leadership in education encourages enormously expensive pimping programs that put America even further behind the international learning curve.
I realize I'm not a Fully Degreed Teaching Expert, but how the hell do you even pretend to teach math without any memorization?
You don't, which is what's screwing things up. And it appears these clowns want it that way.
While climate delegates are quarreling in Copenhagen, and President Barack Obama is collecting his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, an important story is unfolding in relative obscurity, in North Korea. Furious over a confiscatory currency "reform," citizens of the world's most repressive state have begun publicly criticizing their government.
It is hard to overstate just how bold a move that is. North Korea's military "is on alert for a possible civil uprising," according to a major South Korean newspaper, the Chosun Ilbo. Reports have been filtering out of North Korea that the country's markets have become arenas of protest, with traders--many of them women in their 40s and 50s--publicly cursing the North Korean authorities.
You're talking about public protests in a country with even less problem killing troublemakers than the PRC. Like I said, nerve and desperation both, and anger. LOTS of anger.
Question is, whether they get stomped quiet again-for a while- or something changes, just how messy will it be?
'Course, the other question is will President Obama support them? Or play games like he did with Honduras?
And the UN is being challenged to PROVE some things:
We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.
Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:
Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
And so on. Yeah, before they take over the world economy and trash energy development and such, it would be nice if they actually proved these things, wouldn't it?
Or has this been happening for a while, and they're just getting to the point of "We have to speak out"?
Speaking of bread, one of the things about the large Vietnamese population in OKC is there are lots of oriental markets. One of them is Cao Nguyen on Military Drive a little north of 23rd; big market, including a big butcher shop and a big bakery section. The latter being right by the entrance so you see and smell the stuff as you walk in. Mini-baguettes baked fresh all day long, pastries... Last time I was in they had some ham & cheese croissants, the ham & cheese baked in, and being hungry... Damn. I've had far worse croissants from places with reviews of "Authentic French!" and such; it was good. And the baguettes make damn good garlic bread, as well as sandwiches.
They do have a "No weapons allowed" sign on the doors, which is a pain; as usual, I wonder if they actually believe the bad guys pay attention to such?
It was also impressed upon me that my mindset has become alien to most. Daughter and I used to argue about '.' in addresses: she says "Everyone calls it a dot", and I say "A dot is something in a drawing: you're writing, that makes it a period or a decimal point." So I give him the address of customer at whatever point net, and he starts to repeat it back as 'whatever p-o-i-n-t net?'
"Uh, no, a point? A period?"
"Oh, whatever DOT net, ok!"
It should also be noted(pointed to by Insty) that The Age tried the "Anyone arguing against AGW is uninformed, deluded or paid off, the science is settled, the e-mails mean nothing" thing and got taken apart in comments by their readers; you think this mess hasn't made a difference? One of the comments:
"Climate science may be complicated, but it's not rocket science."
It certainly isn't rocket science. Rocket science allows us to design, build and navigate rockets all over the show with great predictability. We still can't predict tomorrow's weather with any great accuracy.
Follow the money and it all becomes a little clearer. King O'Malley is paying attention.
And I have to go to this one from a Believer:
I have a very simple response to the skeptics. What if you are wrong? If you are right it would cost us some short term pain, decreased the level of pollution in the environment (which is good for the overall health of us and the planet) and extended the usable life of finite resources. Is that a bad thing????
First, that's not a response, that's a question; one I don't think you've really thought through. If you consider having your use of energy whacked by half within a few years, your standard of living going down the toilet and condemning, oh, a couple of billion or so people to the existence they have now forever to be 'some short term pain', you're a moron. And if the AGW True Believers and the watermelons using them get their way, it WILL be forever; you think they'll allow the construction of, for instance, nuke plants to supply more energy? Hell, no; they'd rather have us barely scratching by and developing nations stop developing than allow us to have the energy needed to grow. Lots of pretty and inefficient windmills all over the landscape and not enough energy; there's a wonderful plan.
Seriously is it a bad thing? Deniers need to get of thier high horse and think about the welfare of other people and not thier share portfolio, company profits or those annoying shareholders expecting to make a killing. Oh and by the way I am a shareholder, and I do NOT like companies that put profit before the planet. So my income is linked to performance, but I think long term is better than short term with a disaster at the end.
Uh, coming from someone on their high horse demanding the precautionary principle be followed, no matter who and how many suffer, that's an interesting demand. We ARE thinking of the welfare of others; ask someone using dried animal crap for cooking if they'd rather keep up their sustainable and filthy lifestyle or if they'd be willing to put up with a power plant somewhere around so they can have a cleaner life. And I've got news for you: if your company doesn't worry about making a profit it'll collapse, which does nobody any good.
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Parents are being warned by police not to buy their children realistic looking toy guns this Christmas as it could lead to them being shot by armed marksmen.
And Happy Holidays to you, too! I’m so glad to hear that the warmth of the Christmas season is prefaced with a threat from the police that if you buy your child a toy firearm, you may be condemning him or her to a death sentence. Even better, the gun control supporter quoted in the article agrees!
Go read, so you get the whole GFW flavor. Geez, what the hell happened where Great Britain used to be?
Found thanks to Uncle.
Whiskey tango foxtrot?!? What the hell was THAT?
Pulled back the bolt and there's a spring loose in there! It seems when the bolt dropped the extractor exited for parts unknown. I still can't find it.
Looks like there'll be a call to Smith & Wesson in the morning.
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
Heee, the UN weenies must have blown a testicle(metaphorically speaking*) when they read that.
Added: if you doubt this bad smell in Denmark is about money and control, go here.
Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down – with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of “exported emissions” so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer than “old Europe”, must not suffer more than their richer partners.
I would like you to take a look at this line in particular: to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. I want you to read that line simply because it is a flat effing impossibility. Developing nations need energy and freedom to really grow, and the bastards meeting in Denmark want to refuse them both.
Good GOD, do these (unintelligible words trying to describe them) actually ever think about what they're putting out? THEY CAN'T EVEN GROW MORE FOOD WITHOUT RAISING THEIR EMISSION LEVELS, YOU FOOLS! Computers or radios or better building materials, better heating and cooling sources, better food storage, IT ALL HAS EMISSIONS. You're like that fucking bastard Ed Begley Jr., saying that African villagers should be 'allowed' to have some solar panels for radios or maybe some computers, but anything else would 'ruin their village existence'. You sorry bastard, they want to be able to cook without having to use charcoal or dried animal dung! They want to be able to preserve foods without being restricted to drying them or salting them or smoking(oops! Smoking means EMISSIONS, you going to ban that way of preserving meat? Or just ban meat from them?); they want to be able to move beyond late iron age or very early industrial age, and you miserable shits don't want to let them.
I'm stopping now, this is really messing with my appetite and state of mind. The little socialist tyrant wannabes fuck EVERYTHING up...
*Hey, it would have to metaphorically; they'd have to actually have some for it to be literal
...I have two major concerns about Mr. Gore
and his position (or perhaps “posturing” is a better word) on
global climate change and scientists who disagree with him.
1. He appears to believe that those who disagree with him are
part of some vast industry-led conspiracy, and his ego will not
entertain the thought that his opposition really is just a group
of individuals and small organizations led by people whose
motivation is something other than financial gain. Some scientists
who oppose him do receive funding from organizations
and companies that have earned Mr. Gore’s ire, and he
has tried, as he did with Ted Koppel, to smear those scientists
with guilt by association. Ironically, I think that Mr. Gore
would be first in line to defend people who are besmirched
that way by others, even if he disagreed with their opinions.
2. As his own aides have reportedly said, Gore has “a long memory.”
Like Richard Nixon, it is said that he’s a “don’t get mad,
get even” kind ofguy——witness the many scientists who have
been harassed and bullied (see chapter by Happer, this volume)
and the journalists who have been frozen out or fired.
Pointed to by the Real King of France
Oh, we should also note that Al Gore is a liar. Looking like a somewhat desperate one, too.
Yeah, the dog's going to contaminate those sealed-in-plastic Slim Jims and candy bars. And the DRINKS, oh, the horror!
Anybody think Obama will actually try to get this bastard back in prison?
I didn't think so.
The Scottish Government, the UK Government and our current also-socialist President: giving comfort to terrorist supporters the world over.
He wants the UN running the whole world, preferably with himself in charge.
The US having an ally in Britain means A: independent nations and B: independent nations working together without being under UN control; neither of which fits into the world he wants.
Add to that the personal grudge he shows against Britain, and the answer is 'Yes'. What makes this funny- in the only way it can be- is you've got one socialist peeing all over another, and Brown's finding he doesn't like it. And it rather causes him some problems.
Despite the controversy, Barack Obama’s Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings and his GLSEN organization did nothing to clean up their act. In fact in 2001 activists handed out “fisting kits” to the children and teachers who attended the GLSEN conference.
But that’s not all. The children who attended Kevin Jennnings’ GLSEN Conference also left with their own “Little Black Book – Queer in the 21st Century”.This book exposes the young teens to–
Rimming – Fisting – Water Sports (Pi$$ Play) – Toys
It’s what every teen needs to know…
[T]he Justice Department has, for now, ordered two key career attorneys not to comply with a subpoena about the case issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The commission, by law, has explicit power to issue subpoenas, and the law mandates that "all federal agencies shall cooperate fully with the commission." The Justice Department, however, is citing internal regulations stemming from a 1951 case to support its order to ignore the subpoena.
One of the attorneys, J. Christian Adams, has been advised by his personal attorney, former South Carolina Secretary of State Jim Miles, that failure to comply with the subpoena could put him at risk of prosecution. "I can't imagine," Mr. Miles told The Washington Times, "that a statute that gives rise to the power of a subpoena would be subjugated to some internal procedural personnel rule being promulgated by DoJ." In short, the department is stiffing the commission and unfairly putting its own employee in a legal bind.
Yeah, I'd think telling someone to ignore a subpoena might cause a 'legal bind'. More, from a piece linked to in the above:
Second, that same day, the two Republican House members with top-ranking jurisdiction over the Justice Department, Rep. Frank Wolf of Virginia and Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, issued a joint statement calling Justice Department delays "a cover-up," and "a pretense to ignore inquiries from Congress and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights." At a hearing on Thursday, Mr. Smith said that "continued silence by the Justice Department is an implied admission of guilt that the case was dropped for purely political reasons."
Third, at the same hearing, Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican, accused Justice Department Civil Rights Division chief Thomas Perez of not being "truthful" while under oath, to such an extent that "there are people who have gone to jail" for such a level of purported "dishonest[y]."
Now, I'm not a lawyer, etc., but I don't think you have to be to know that for a Rep. to basically call a DOJ division chief a liar is a pretty strong statement. He pretty much said "You committed perjury and people go to jail for that." Here's what this is about:
The disputed statement, from what appeared to be prepared remarks by Mr. Perez that he later repeated insistently, was that "the maximum penalty was sought and obtained" against the one Black Panther for whom the charges were not entirely dropped. The bizarrely weak penalty consisted of a mere injunction for the Black Panther not to brandish a weapon near a polling place, within Philadelphia, through Nov. 15, 2012. In short, he is prohibited, only within Philadelphia and only for four years, from doing something that is illegal anyway.
Wow! Such a penalty Holder pushed for! Such a load of steaming crap!
"Holder and them have done a terrible job on this," Mr. Wolf told The Washington Times. "This has just been handled so poorly.... You can't hide these things. There is something wrong here. There is something very wrong. When it all comes out, I think it will be very bad."
The congressman is probably right.
He'd damned well better be, if we're to have any confidence left at all in the justice system.
If you are comfortable using excel and converting text files to data tables and overlaying graphs or screen shots, you too can help prove whether man-made global warming is real or a crafted statistical mirage!
Reader grumpguy went to the NASA GISS site and pulled down data for one station in New York. What he found is no surprise – another example of raw station data being ‘adjusted’ to show recent warming.
He even did us all a favor by graphing and posting his results on the internet (imaging if alarmists were so forthcoming). He compared the raw data with the GISS ‘adjusted’ data and the evidence is clear:
The light colored lines are the ‘adjustments’, the blue lines are the original data. Two things jump out on this result:
1. The temperature scale as been dropped a magical 0.5°C (y-axis on left) in the ‘adjusted’ data.
2. The last few years of temps are used in both data sets – another version of “Mike’s (Mann’s) Trick” of using unprocessed sensor data to give the impression of warming.
GISS pushed down the earlier temperature record to make it look like it was cooler than today, when in fact there has been no significant change over the entire record. The adjustments are clear as day, as is the growing mountain of evidence that the raw temperature record is proving one of the two climate model predictions right.
MUCH more at the link. And thanks again to Keith for it
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Thanks to Soros-linked Media Matters we now know that GLSEN director, and current Obama Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings was confronted on the vile content discussed at the children’s conference.
“Like the Parents Rights Coalition and the Department of Education, GLSEN is also troubled by some of the content that came up during this workshop,” said Kevin Jennings, national executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.
He said people who run workshops in the future will get clearer guidelines, though Jennings said the network’s annual conference at Tufts University should not be judged on the 30-student seminar “What They Didn’t Tell You About Queer Sex and Sexuality in Health Class.”
“We need to make our expectations and guidelines to outside facilitators much more clear,” said Jennings. “Because we are surprised and troubled by some of the accounts we’ve heard.”
But despite Media Matters’ claims, Kevin Jennings and his GLSEN organization did nothing to clean up their act. In fact in 2001 activists handed out “fisting kits” to the children and teachers who attended the GLSEN conference.
That’s correct. Fisting kits.At Kevin Jennings’ 2001 GLSEN Conference an estimated 400 student attendees were given their own “fisting kit.”
Mass News reported on the 2001 conference:
ESPECIALLY if you have kids of school age, read the whole thing
Rep. Schakowsky’s husband, Robert Creamer, used to be the leader of Citizen Action/Illinois. He also founded its predecessor, Illinois Public Action, in which Ms. Schakowsky served as Program Director. He runs a political consulting firm, the Strategic Consulting Group, which lists ACORN and the SEIU among its clients and which made $541,000 working for disgraced former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.
Creamer resigned from Citizen Action/Illinois after the FBI began investigating him for bank fraud and tax evasion at Illinois Public Action. He was convicted in 2006 and sentenced to five months in federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, plus eleven months of house arrest.
While in prison—or “forced sabbatical,” he called it—Creamer wrote a lengthy political manual, Listen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (Seven Locks Press, 2007).
The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern—the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House—and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer’s tome “provides a blueprint for future victories.”
Creamer adds: “To win we must not just generate understanding, but emotion—fear, revulsion, anger, disgust.”
Democrats have followed Creamer’s plan to the letter. They have claimed our health care system is in crisis despite polls showing the overwhelming majority of Americans are happy with the care they receive. They have—with the help of President Obama—circulated false horror stories about Americans dying for lack of health care and health insurance.
Democrats have cut deals with the pharmaceutical industry and the American Medical Association, among others. They have brought in the President himself to tell wavering “Blue Dog” Democrats that their re-election chances depend on passing health care reform. They have bused in SEIU members to town hall meetings, and used rabbis and pastors to back health care reform from the pulpit.
Wonderful people the President associates with and listens to.
Most Americans would see a massive reduction in their daily output: You drive to the grocery store once for every seven times you go now.
Or, you could take your kid to school once a week instead of every day.
As part of this new world order, industrialized nations such as the United States that have already so damaged the planet would be forced to pay the rest of the world for those damages.
In explaining the US role during the past two decades, Donald repeatedly refers to "criminal conduct" and describes our behavior as "morally corrupt."
And ultimately, he says with glee, international law will catch up with us and make us pay for our unconscionable crimes.
Ok, try telling me this is about 'science'; this is about power and control: THEIR power and control over everyone else. Over every damned thing in our lives, and our lives themselves.
I'm going to excerpt the last part of the article:
Still, Donald acknowledges without any sense of shock or irony that the climate-change predictions of the advocate-scientists so far have not panned out very well.
"People think that science is certain," he says with a hint of derision.
"We can't know what is going to happen. There will always be scientific uncertainty."
It is a moral matter, not a scientific one, Donald says, that requires us to take such drastic action now, even though the proof of actual damage remains hard to come by.
He is asked whether there is anything unethical revealed in the recent e-mails where fellow advocate-scientists discussed manipulating data and suppressing information that undermined their lucrative global-warming beliefs.
"On that I am agnostic," Donald says.
As far as he is concerned, he says with rising anger about the general indifference about climate change, the global-warming debate "will determine who lives and who dies."
Oh, what a moral titan he is! He's 'agnostic' about fraud, about concealment and destruction of data, but "we have to act NOW even if there's no proof!" he says.
One more of the corrupt watermelons and 'scientists' who demand we hand control of everything over to THEM. Because THEY are the moral ones who know the Truth that we're not smart enough to believe in.
The e-mails, which were stolen from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia last month, have been seized upon by sceptics as proof that experts are spinning data to prove thetheory that humans are to blame for rising temperatures.
The scientific community was aghast at the fallout, which fuelled many people's doubts about the phenomenon and how much man is responsible.
Hey, guess what? If so many of the scientific community hadn't been in collusion to hide data and destroy data and destroy anyone who questioned their Holy Truth, you wouldn't have to worry about this fallout: you brought it on yourselves. And now, when you have to face questions and the facts of how you twisted things, you insult and belittle and lie and spin and yet still demand that you be respected as 'scientists'. And the 'moral ones' trying to save us all.
'There are also people who want to cast doubt on the science therefore it's not surprising that some people are not convinced. Therefore, we have to redouble our efforts, the scientific community has to redouble its efforts to persuade people.
'Frankly, it would be irresponsible for me to pretend anything other than what the scientists are telling me so I don't disagree that there's a long way to go to absolutely convince people of this but I think it's important that we do.'
Note the implication: 'the scientists' tell him this, everyone else is just a deluded doubter
Lord Lawson, the chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, yesterday said Mr Miliband should be 'ashamed' for trying to stifle debate on the issue.
But Mr Miliband hit back, accusing the peer of 'spreading doubt' despite a scientific consensus and insisting the Government could not just to stick its head in the sand.
Ah yes, the 'consensus' that's supposed to convince us; "Ignore the thousands of scientists who say this is crap, or say it is unproven; ONLY pay attention to the consensus we tell you of." Uh huh.
As a side note, anyone else find it ironic that the Governor of CA is busy cheering and breaking bottles to christen a ship that, if his idiotic greenie friends have their way, would never be allowed to fly? Or only for government-approved purposes and people?