visiting family and such. Just heard about the multiple cop murders yesterday afternoon, and haven't had time to check on it as yet.
So the Joyce Foundation works with Hollyweenies to screw with honest people who own/work on/use/buy or sell/make guns. With examples. Probably because a lot of the Hollyweenies are too effing stupid to come up with something all by their lonesomes.
More bullcrap on the Tiahrt Amendment(can't actually blame the EffingBI for not doing their job, now can we?) from, among others, Nanny "Better people go hungry than eat trans-fats!" Bloomberg.
The EffingBI wants to spend large amounts of other peoples' money to buy suppressed 20mm rifles. And yes, I'd like to know why, too?
So Jim Ryan is another "I support the 2nd, BUT" dirtbag politicians. Illinois, you people need to clean house. Bad. And spray for the infestation.
AG Holder proves once again that he's really troubled by those messy "You can't do that" stuff in the Constitution. Because he's a sorry little statist who wants to run your life. Into the ground.
Was this assault merely a flare up of tempers during a heated exchange of rival political camps? Or was it a coordinated attempt to silence the scores of protesters who had been so effective at swaying public opinion against the President’s health care scheme? Today, Big Government will bring to light documents that read like an instruction manual for the SEIU forces in St. Louis the evening of August 6th. We will also show that on the very same evening of the St. Louis assault, an almost identical scene played out in Tampa Bay, Florida. Also involving SEIU and OFA. Also resulting in hordes of union members shouting down and physically evicting protesters from a U.S. Representative’s Town hall meeting. Finally, we will introduce all of the various players in leadership roles at these organizations, what they said in instructing their members in how to fight back against the Town hall protesters, and how these individuals all connect to each other and to the Obama Administration. As I said, we’ve been waiting for the “Real” journalists to do this, we’ve waited long enough.
Well, combine this with dirtbag level prosecutors, and there's another fumigation job needed.
Let's see, burning fossil fuels is baking the planet, but Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, flew 443,243 miles in a 19 month period while speaking against global warming. Sort of like Algore using how much energy per month? In one of his mansions?
These words do not mean that I think anthropogenic climate change is a hoax. On the contrary, it is a question which we have to be very well aware of. But I am also aware that in this thick atmosphere -and I am not speaking of greenhouse gases now- editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations,even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. In this atmosphere, Ph D students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the 'politically correct picture'. Some, or many issues, about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of the attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture. I had the 'pleasure' to experience all this in my area of research.
I need to eat. And figure out what I need to buy tomorrow before the next front comes in(20's & 40's the rest of the week it looks like). Bye.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
I have a category, 'PC at any cost';
part of the cost is lives.
Actually, the opposite is true: a constrained and regulated culture policed by politically correct enforcers leads to slaughter. I’m not being speculative here, as Commissar Lynch is about my murderous prose style. It’s already happened, just a couple of weeks back. Thirteen men and women plus an unborn baby were gunned down at Fort Hood by a major in the U.S. Army. Nidal Hasan was the perpetrator, but political correctness was his enabler, every step of the way. In the days that followed, the near parodically absurd revelations piled up like an overripe satire, but a two-panel cartoon at the Toronto blogger Scaramouche’s website provided the pithiest distillation:
“This is your brain. This is your brain on political correctness”—a small and shrivelled thing.
Major Hasan couldn’t have been more straightforward about who and what he was. An army psychiatrist, he put “SoA”—i.e., “Soldier of Allah”—on his business card. At the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, he was reprimanded for trying to persuade patients to convert to Islam and fellow pupils objected to his constant “anti-American propaganda,” but, as the Associated Press reported, “a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.”
This is your brain on political correctness.
...
Oh, well. If U.S. military personnel make insufficiently appealing victims, consider the three sisters and an “aunt” drowned in their car in the Rideau Canal in Kingston in what a remarkably uncurious media reported as a midnight driving lesson gone wrong. And even when their parents were arrested, there was little appetite to discuss “honour killing.” When 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez was strangled, allegedly by her father with her brother’s help, for refusing to wear a hijab, Citytv ran a lunchtime call-in poll:
“Do you think society discriminates against women who wear a hijab?”
This is your brain on political correctness: dead. But not as dead as poor Aqsa Parvez and the ever swelling ranks of Western “honour killing” victims.
Actually, the opposite is true: a constrained and regulated culture policed by politically correct enforcers leads to slaughter. I’m not being speculative here, as Commissar Lynch is about my murderous prose style. It’s already happened, just a couple of weeks back. Thirteen men and women plus an unborn baby were gunned down at Fort Hood by a major in the U.S. Army. Nidal Hasan was the perpetrator, but political correctness was his enabler, every step of the way. In the days that followed, the near parodically absurd revelations piled up like an overripe satire, but a two-panel cartoon at the Toronto blogger Scaramouche’s website provided the pithiest distillation:
“This is your brain. This is your brain on political correctness”—a small and shrivelled thing.
Major Hasan couldn’t have been more straightforward about who and what he was. An army psychiatrist, he put “SoA”—i.e., “Soldier of Allah”—on his business card. At the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, he was reprimanded for trying to persuade patients to convert to Islam and fellow pupils objected to his constant “anti-American propaganda,” but, as the Associated Press reported, “a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.”
This is your brain on political correctness.
...
Oh, well. If U.S. military personnel make insufficiently appealing victims, consider the three sisters and an “aunt” drowned in their car in the Rideau Canal in Kingston in what a remarkably uncurious media reported as a midnight driving lesson gone wrong. And even when their parents were arrested, there was little appetite to discuss “honour killing.” When 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez was strangled, allegedly by her father with her brother’s help, for refusing to wear a hijab, Citytv ran a lunchtime call-in poll:
“Do you think society discriminates against women who wear a hijab?”
This is your brain on political correctness: dead. But not as dead as poor Aqsa Parvez and the ever swelling ranks of Western “honour killing” victims.
I don’t believe that journalistic objectivity is a fraud.
I was a journalist for a time, at a once-great, now-diminished newsmagazine. I’ve seen good men and women work according to a set of professional standards I respect — standards that serve the public. Professional journalism is not like the buggy-whip industry, outdated by economic progress, to be mourned but not missed. This profession has a social value that is currently not reflected in its market value.
What profession could he possibly be talking about? Certainly not the same profession who set out to destroy Clarence Thomas, circled the wagons to save President Clinton, summoned all their resources to lose the war in Iraq, told us more about the background of an unemployed plumber than our current President, dragged Sarah Palin’s family through the mud, and on this very day refuse to investigate three of the biggest stories of the year (if not the decade): ACORN, CzarGate and ClimateGate.
And yet in the face of all this, Gerson writes of we bloggers:
And the whole system is based on a kind of intellectual theft. Internet aggregators (who link to news they don’t produce) and bloggers would have little to collect or comment upon without the costly enterprise of newsgathering and investigative reporting. The old-media dinosaurs remain the basis for the entire media food chain.
Foul on the play. That might have been true a few years ago, but since the whole of the MSM put their blinders on and jumped in the tank for President Bows-A –Lot, it’s been the MSM following the lead of the Internet and cable news. Time and again, like Sergeant “I know nothing!” Schultz, they’ve been caught off guard and found guilty of their own kind of “intellectual theft” as they grudgingly report on Dan Rather’s forged documents, Van Jones’ resignation, the Tea Party movement, and the latest ACORN developments.
The shift towards online investigative journalism has only begun and look at the impact already. And maybe, just maybe, had our ink-stained dinosaurs picked up on and owned these stories they might have, I don’t know, sold more ink?
If the 'scientists' at CRU don't hide their faces in shame at this point,
they ought to be fired. And marked as NO RESEARCH FUNDS FOR YOU forever.
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
...
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”
The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.
Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said. .
This is absolutely inexcusable. And indefensible. And, in at least some cases, criminal.
And every politician who wants to shove Cap & Tax down our throats- all the while chanting "The science is settled"(yes, I mean YOU, Browner)-, and every other statist power grab they're pushing on us, should have a copy of this shoved down THEIR throat. Preferably coated with super glue.
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
...
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”
The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.
Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said. .
This is absolutely inexcusable. And indefensible. And, in at least some cases, criminal.
And every politician who wants to shove Cap & Tax down our throats- all the while chanting "The science is settled"(yes, I mean YOU, Browner)-, and every other statist power grab they're pushing on us, should have a copy of this shoved down THEIR throat. Preferably coated with super glue.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
From the Geek
AGW has always smelled of the smoke of the Reichtstag fire, and even now, as the rivets pop out of the bridge they were building and as the girders squeal and bend, the fraudsters are boldy forging ahead anyway as if nothing happened, betting that a combination of inertia, bravado and public confusion will carry them through.
Sometimes, miracles do happen.
To the whistleblower: I salute you. The free people of humanity are in your debt.
No crap. We may never know who it is: someone who's had problems all along and finally hit a breaking point, or a believer(full or semi-) who ran into information they just couldn't ignore while their leaders were 'leading' us into disaster; one or the other would be my guess. In any case, yeah, we owe them.
Sometimes, miracles do happen.
To the whistleblower: I salute you. The free people of humanity are in your debt.
No crap. We may never know who it is: someone who's had problems all along and finally hit a breaking point, or a believer(full or semi-) who ran into information they just couldn't ignore while their leaders were 'leading' us into disaster; one or the other would be my guess. In any case, yeah, we owe them.
Quote of the day
Brought to us by Keith in comments:
"So AGW was Mann made"
I wish he knew where he read it so we could give credit where due
"So AGW was Mann made"
I wish he knew where he read it so we could give credit where due
Steyn's take on the corrupted peer-review process
The trouble with outsourcing your marbles to the peer-reviewed set is that, if you take away one single thing from the leaked documents, it's that the global warm-mongers have wholly corrupted the "peer-review" process. When it comes to promoting the impending ecopalypse, the Climate Research Unit is the nerve-center of the operation. The "science" of the CRU dominates the "science" behind the UN IPCC, which dominates the "science" behind the Congressional cap-&-trade boondoggle, the upcoming Copenhagen shakindownen of the developed world, and the now routine phenomenon of leaders of advanced, prosperous societies talking like gibbering madmen escaped from the padded cell, whether it's President Obama promising to end the rise of the oceans or the Prince of Wales saying we only have 96 months left to save the planet. But don't worry, it's all "peer-reviewed".
Here's what Phil Jones of the CRU and his colleague Michael Mann of Penn State mean by "peer review". When Climate Research published a paper dissenting from the Jones-Mann "consensus", Jones demanded that the journal "rid itself of this troublesome editor", and Mann advised that "we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers."
So much for Climate Research. When Geophysical Research Letters also showed signs of wandering off the "consensus" reservation, Dr Tom Wigley ("one of the world's foremost experts on climate change") suggested they get the goods on its editor, Jim Saiers, and go to his bosses at the American Geophysical Union to "get him ousted". When another pair of troublesome dissenters emerge, Dr Jones assured Dr Mann, "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
Which in essence is what they did. The more frantically they talked up "peer review" as the only legitimate basis for criticism, the more assiduously they turned the process into what James Lewis calls the Chicago machine politics of international science. The headline in The Wall Street Journal Europe is unimproveable: "How To Forge A Consensus." Pressuring publishers, firing editors, blacklisting scientists: That's "peer review", climate-style. The more their echo chamber shriveled, the more Mann and Jones insisted that they and only they represent the "peer-reviewed" "consensus". And gullible types like Ed Begley Jr and Andrew Revkin of The New York Times fell for it hook, line and tree-ring.
Somehow, you just knew there were more of Obama's people
involved in the climate fakery mess:
You haven’t heard it from America’s mainstream media yet – even Fox News hasn’t covered it – but the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. John P. Holdren, is a key player in the Climategate e-mails flap, which is shaping up as the biggest scandal in the history of modern science.
...
But the Canada Free Press this week revealed that the former Harvard professor and Al Gore global warming adviser features prominently in the thousands of e-mails and other files made public after the hacking last week of a computer server used by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit.
The most embarrassing item for the Obama Administration may be a 2003 exchange between Holdren and TCSDaily.com editor-in-chief Nick Schulz. Schulz challenged Holdren on whether downplaying the significance of the Medieval Warm Period required “what lawyers call the burden of proof.”
Holdren’s retort contained a remarkable assertion coming from a scientist: “In practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing – it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.”
Canada Free Press columnist and Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball says of the correspondence with Schulz that Holdren’s “entire defense and position devolves to a political position.”
Wonderful, isn't it? And, yet again, there's more!
The CRU documents also find Holdren disparaging solar physicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, contrarians regarding surface temperatures over the past millennium, who were colleagues of Holdren at Harvard, and Ball wonders if Holdren may have intimidated the two scientists before they “suddenly and politely withdrew from the fray,” as Ball describes it.
That is a guess; wouldn't surprise me, considering Holdren.
Not long before the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion-on-demand throughout America, Holdren co-authored “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions,” which seems to argue that even years after birth a baby is not yet a human being.
“The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth,” claims the book’s “Population Limitation” section, “and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being.”
Which sounds disturbingly like the "Until it's considered an actual human, you can 'abort' it at any time" argument from the real screwballs. Which Holdren seems to be.
Pointed to by Sondra
You haven’t heard it from America’s mainstream media yet – even Fox News hasn’t covered it – but the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. John P. Holdren, is a key player in the Climategate e-mails flap, which is shaping up as the biggest scandal in the history of modern science.
...
But the Canada Free Press this week revealed that the former Harvard professor and Al Gore global warming adviser features prominently in the thousands of e-mails and other files made public after the hacking last week of a computer server used by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit.
The most embarrassing item for the Obama Administration may be a 2003 exchange between Holdren and TCSDaily.com editor-in-chief Nick Schulz. Schulz challenged Holdren on whether downplaying the significance of the Medieval Warm Period required “what lawyers call the burden of proof.”
Holdren’s retort contained a remarkable assertion coming from a scientist: “In practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing – it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.”
Canada Free Press columnist and Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball says of the correspondence with Schulz that Holdren’s “entire defense and position devolves to a political position.”
Wonderful, isn't it? And, yet again, there's more!
The CRU documents also find Holdren disparaging solar physicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, contrarians regarding surface temperatures over the past millennium, who were colleagues of Holdren at Harvard, and Ball wonders if Holdren may have intimidated the two scientists before they “suddenly and politely withdrew from the fray,” as Ball describes it.
That is a guess; wouldn't surprise me, considering Holdren.
Not long before the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion-on-demand throughout America, Holdren co-authored “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions,” which seems to argue that even years after birth a baby is not yet a human being.
“The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth,” claims the book’s “Population Limitation” section, “and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being.”
Which sounds disturbingly like the "Until it's considered an actual human, you can 'abort' it at any time" argument from the real screwballs. Which Holdren seems to be.
Pointed to by Sondra
Friday, November 27, 2009
I think this has to be one of the more damning quotes
from the CRU e-mails:
What appears to be the case is that these scientists did not set out to mislead the world so much as try to force data which did not correspond to their ideology of anthropogenic global warming to support that ideology. For me, one of the most telling emails was this one from Phil Jones on the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
What appears to be the case is that these scientists did not set out to mislead the world so much as try to force data which did not correspond to their ideology of anthropogenic global warming to support that ideology. For me, one of the most telling emails was this one from Phil Jones on the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
Bottom line - their is no way the MWP (whenever it was) was as warm globally as the last 20 years. There is also no way a whole decade in the LIA period was more than 1 deg C on a global basis cooler than the 1961-90 mean. This is all gut feeling, no science, but years of experience of dealing with global scales and varaibility. (My emphasis)
In other words, despite the fact that science (or history) tells us that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today, thus destroying the basis of the AGW myth that we are living through an unprecedented warming of the climate caused by carbon dioxide arising from industrialisation, it cannot be true – because the Hadley CRU Director’s ‘gut’ tells him so.
Read the whole piece, it's very good. And I do have to point out: they may not have set out to mislead the world, but that's damn well what they did. Even to the point of violating law to prevent non-believers from seeing their data.Honduras wins,
and the commies and socialists lose. And another one's under the bus[/Queen riff].
By hanging Zelaya out to dry -- leaving him powerless and languishing in the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, possibly facing trial for illegally seeking re-election -- the administration saves face in Honduras and ultimately does the right thing. The Honduran Congress will vote on Dec. 2, after the next president has been elected, whether to reinstate Zelaya as a lame duck, and with the election already decided, they won't be under any pressure to do so and reverse their earlier decision.
So all's well that ends well. But even so, as we recently opined, a happy ending is still no excuse for Obama's half-cocked diplomacy, and no number of low bows to Honduras's next president will make up for the damage he has caused there. Again, his legendary inexperience in world matters shows.
Hey, Zelaya, you were stupid enough to trust another little socialist like yourself, and this is the price.
I wonder when the striped-pants clowns at the State Department will get around to letting Honduran officials have visas again?
By hanging Zelaya out to dry -- leaving him powerless and languishing in the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, possibly facing trial for illegally seeking re-election -- the administration saves face in Honduras and ultimately does the right thing. The Honduran Congress will vote on Dec. 2, after the next president has been elected, whether to reinstate Zelaya as a lame duck, and with the election already decided, they won't be under any pressure to do so and reverse their earlier decision.
So all's well that ends well. But even so, as we recently opined, a happy ending is still no excuse for Obama's half-cocked diplomacy, and no number of low bows to Honduras's next president will make up for the damage he has caused there. Again, his legendary inexperience in world matters shows.
Hey, Zelaya, you were stupid enough to trust another little socialist like yourself, and this is the price.
I wonder when the striped-pants clowns at the State Department will get around to letting Honduran officials have visas again?
And here in the US, we have wilfull blindness to the facts revealed
in the ECU documents:
Obama administration climate czar Carol Browner on Wednesday rejected claims that e-mails stolen from a British university show that climate scientists trumped up global-warming numbers, saying she considers the science settled.
"I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real," said Ms. Browner, whom President Obama has tapped as his chief of policy on global warming.
And you want a blunt demonstration of "We'll do it because we want to, screw the facts",
Ms. Browner said the only people who still doubt global warming is happening and that humans are to blame are "a very small group of people who continue to say this isn't a real problem, that we don't need to do anything."
'A very small group' of one hell of a lot of scientists who've been arguing against this crap for years, but they're not saying the right things so they're 'deniers' and not to be listened to.
Especially by power-hungry politicians.
She also said the e-mails are only trickling out, and that the entire set hasn't been released.
Uh, you mean the whole damn set that's been available online for a while? Why, Ms. Browner, a flat-out lie?(another, that is)
Ms. Browner initially shrugged when asked about the e-mails, saying she didn't have a reaction. But when a reporter followed up, she said she will stick with the consensus of the 2,500 climate scientists on the International Panel on Climate Change who concluded global warming is occurring and is most likely being pushed by human actions.
Hey, her boss is planning to shed the Obama Light on Copenhagen to bring healing to the world; we expect a clown bureaucrat with desire for authority to say anything else?
Obama administration climate czar Carol Browner on Wednesday rejected claims that e-mails stolen from a British university show that climate scientists trumped up global-warming numbers, saying she considers the science settled.
"I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real," said Ms. Browner, whom President Obama has tapped as his chief of policy on global warming.
And you want a blunt demonstration of "We'll do it because we want to, screw the facts",
Ms. Browner said the only people who still doubt global warming is happening and that humans are to blame are "a very small group of people who continue to say this isn't a real problem, that we don't need to do anything."
'A very small group' of one hell of a lot of scientists who've been arguing against this crap for years, but they're not saying the right things so they're 'deniers' and not to be listened to.
Especially by power-hungry politicians.
She also said the e-mails are only trickling out, and that the entire set hasn't been released.
Uh, you mean the whole damn set that's been available online for a while? Why, Ms. Browner, a flat-out lie?(another, that is)
Ms. Browner initially shrugged when asked about the e-mails, saying she didn't have a reaction. But when a reporter followed up, she said she will stick with the consensus of the 2,500 climate scientists on the International Panel on Climate Change who concluded global warming is occurring and is most likely being pushed by human actions.
Hey, her boss is planning to shed the Obama Light on Copenhagen to bring healing to the world; we expect a clown bureaucrat with desire for authority to say anything else?
I think Hans Christian would approve
Take Rudd. Our vain emperor was told by activists the world was warming, thanks to man’s gases, and they could make for him a cause so fine that he would seem the saviour of the world.
They gave him graphs they said showed this heating, and warned that only stupid “deniers” would see in them a cooling trend since 2001.
Rudd was too afraid to admit he actually saw that cooling in the satellite data and so dressed himself instead in the holy robes of a planet saviour - robes he’ll now pay for with a new emissions tax even he says will raise at least $114 billion by 2020.
His ministers, equally scared to seem stupid or bad, agreed his robes were fantastic. And journalists cheered.
Oh, there were doubts, but who in that crowd dared speak? Yet in emails leaked last weekend we find that even the men who’d sold our emperor his new threads fretted that we’d find out they’d sold Rudd a dud.
Kevin Trenberth, who co-wrote two United Nations IPCC reports in which Rudd had found his cause, admitted: “The fact is that we cannot account for the lack of warming at the moment.”
What? The boy had spoken. The spell was broken. Only there’s a problem with this retelling. Our emperor Rudd is still strutting starkers, crying that this cooling world is warming, and he, first among all leaders, must save it.
Or I could have told this tale with Malcolm Turnbull as the emperor, since he bought this same cause from the same shysters, and never once checked why his bared backside felt so windy.
And one of the consequences,
ANGRY resignations from the Shadow Cabinet last night propelled Malcolm Turnbull closer to a leadership showdown which opponents to an ETS could ensure he loses.
Four MPs quit the front bench so they could fight the amendments to legislation creating an Emissions Trading Scheme negotiated with the Government by Mr Turnbull and senior colleagues.
A lot of these people were unhappy with the scheme before; for it to be shoved forward now, after these revelations and without review, just took it over the edge.
They gave him graphs they said showed this heating, and warned that only stupid “deniers” would see in them a cooling trend since 2001.
Rudd was too afraid to admit he actually saw that cooling in the satellite data and so dressed himself instead in the holy robes of a planet saviour - robes he’ll now pay for with a new emissions tax even he says will raise at least $114 billion by 2020.
His ministers, equally scared to seem stupid or bad, agreed his robes were fantastic. And journalists cheered.
Oh, there were doubts, but who in that crowd dared speak? Yet in emails leaked last weekend we find that even the men who’d sold our emperor his new threads fretted that we’d find out they’d sold Rudd a dud.
Kevin Trenberth, who co-wrote two United Nations IPCC reports in which Rudd had found his cause, admitted: “The fact is that we cannot account for the lack of warming at the moment.”
What? The boy had spoken. The spell was broken. Only there’s a problem with this retelling. Our emperor Rudd is still strutting starkers, crying that this cooling world is warming, and he, first among all leaders, must save it.
Or I could have told this tale with Malcolm Turnbull as the emperor, since he bought this same cause from the same shysters, and never once checked why his bared backside felt so windy.
And one of the consequences,
ANGRY resignations from the Shadow Cabinet last night propelled Malcolm Turnbull closer to a leadership showdown which opponents to an ETS could ensure he loses.
Four MPs quit the front bench so they could fight the amendments to legislation creating an Emissions Trading Scheme negotiated with the Government by Mr Turnbull and senior colleagues.
A lot of these people were unhappy with the scheme before; for it to be shoved forward now, after these revelations and without review, just took it over the edge.
Why a 'journalist' won't cover Climaquiddick
We make decisions every day [based] on our own opinions about what we think are the main stories. And what we leave out is often as important as what we put in, and that was my judgement of this issue..
That was my assessment of whether this was actually of any significance or not, and I decided that it wasn’t and we wouldn’t spend time on it. It suits the conspiracy theorists beautifully...
It was a small, even a tiny fragment of a sidebar of a secondary issue to the edge of the periphery of something people were talking about other than the main game. That’s how I saw it.
It suits the “conspiracy theorists beautifully”. In other words, it suits the sceptics - and that must not be allowed to happen.
Unprofessional doesn’t quite cover it. Scandalous is much closer.
From Andrew Bolt
Two important things to list, and one piece of idiocy
The important things are on the Climaquiddick mess going on. First, A French scientist’s temperature data show results different from the official climate science. Why was he stonewalled? Climate Research Unit emails detail efforts to deny access to global temperature data
...
Courtillot asked Phil Jones, the scientist who runs the CRU database, for his raw data, telling him (according to one of the ‘Climategate’ emails that surfaced following the recent hacking of CRU’s computer systems) “there may be some quite important information in the daily values which is likely lost on monthly averaging.” Jones refused Courtillot’s request for data, saying that CRU had “signed agreements with national meteorological services saying they would not pass the raw data onto third parties.” (Interestingly, in another of the CRU emails, Jones said something very different: “I took a decision not to release our [meteorological] station data, mainly because of McIntyre,” referring to Canadian Steve McIntyre, who helped uncover the flaws in the hockey stick graph.)
More anti-scientific hiding of data because they feared someone finding conflicting results, and they couldn't have that, now could they?
Second,
In 1999, I had a stroke of luck. I asked one of the IPCC officials for the data from which one of their maps was compiled, and I received it. I wrote a paper analyzing the results, and submitted it to Geophysical Research Letters. They just sat on it. I instead published it on John Daly’s website. Today, it is still the only paper recognized by Google on “Regional Temperature Change.”
I now know my paper was not critical enough, since we have proof that the basic data and its processing is far more dubious than I had envisaged.
I tried to update my paper and resubmit it. Nothing doing. Since the small group — revealed within the CRU emails — control most of the peer reviewers, very few peer reviewed papers which criticize that group are allowed to appear in the most prominent published literature which dominates the academic establishment.
We keep hearing about the value of peer-reviewed science, which is absolutely true; what the defenders of these clowns don't mention is that when the peer-review people don't allow people with conflicting information or views t be published then the peer-review process isn't worth crap. The last line of this piece, which has to be driving the CRU people(and a whole lot of others) up the walls,
I have only been able to find a place to release my criticisms on the internet, now the only realm where unfettered scientific discussion is possible.
Add 'unfettered political and news discussion' to the list, which is why newspapers and most major media are falling down a hole; they publish only the news they want you to hear, or how they want you to hear it, and people are tired of it.
WHich brings me to the idiocy; Insty posts this on who a lefty wants to save us, and lists some of the reasons that's a very bad idea. No link to the post in question; I'll just note that when one of the things in it is that 'there needs to be a liberal takeover of the Democrat party', well... Note that if classical liberals DID take it over, this lady would have screaming fits.
...
Courtillot asked Phil Jones, the scientist who runs the CRU database, for his raw data, telling him (according to one of the ‘Climategate’ emails that surfaced following the recent hacking of CRU’s computer systems) “there may be some quite important information in the daily values which is likely lost on monthly averaging.” Jones refused Courtillot’s request for data, saying that CRU had “signed agreements with national meteorological services saying they would not pass the raw data onto third parties.” (Interestingly, in another of the CRU emails, Jones said something very different: “I took a decision not to release our [meteorological] station data, mainly because of McIntyre,” referring to Canadian Steve McIntyre, who helped uncover the flaws in the hockey stick graph.)
More anti-scientific hiding of data because they feared someone finding conflicting results, and they couldn't have that, now could they?
Second,
In 1999, I had a stroke of luck. I asked one of the IPCC officials for the data from which one of their maps was compiled, and I received it. I wrote a paper analyzing the results, and submitted it to Geophysical Research Letters. They just sat on it. I instead published it on John Daly’s website. Today, it is still the only paper recognized by Google on “Regional Temperature Change.”
I now know my paper was not critical enough, since we have proof that the basic data and its processing is far more dubious than I had envisaged.
I tried to update my paper and resubmit it. Nothing doing. Since the small group — revealed within the CRU emails — control most of the peer reviewers, very few peer reviewed papers which criticize that group are allowed to appear in the most prominent published literature which dominates the academic establishment.
We keep hearing about the value of peer-reviewed science, which is absolutely true; what the defenders of these clowns don't mention is that when the peer-review people don't allow people with conflicting information or views t be published then the peer-review process isn't worth crap. The last line of this piece, which has to be driving the CRU people(and a whole lot of others) up the walls,
I have only been able to find a place to release my criticisms on the internet, now the only realm where unfettered scientific discussion is possible.
Add 'unfettered political and news discussion' to the list, which is why newspapers and most major media are falling down a hole; they publish only the news they want you to hear, or how they want you to hear it, and people are tired of it.
WHich brings me to the idiocy; Insty posts this on who a lefty wants to save us, and lists some of the reasons that's a very bad idea. No link to the post in question; I'll just note that when one of the things in it is that 'there needs to be a liberal takeover of the Democrat party', well... Note that if classical liberals DID take it over, this lady would have screaming fits.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
It should be noted that one of the people dancing in the blood
of the Fort Hood wounded and dead is John Rosenthal. Who is a God-cursed liar.
Yes, my language is degrading, and this isn't a good day for that. I plead being sick to death of these parasites.
Yes, my language is degrading, and this isn't a good day for that. I plead being sick to death of these parasites.
Is it something trained into high-ranking officers, or
does the rank somehow attract people who like to make up "See, I'm DOING SOMETHING!!" idiot rules?
Soldiers assigned to Fort Hood will have to register their personal firearms with the director of emergency services, he added. Fort Hood is home to some 50,000 active-duty soldiers and 18,000 of the soldiers' family members.
Hell, he even admits what good this is:
But, Cone said, had the changes been in place on November 5, they might not have been enough.
"I don't think necessarily they would have had an effect on this event," he said.
Absolute effing bullcrap.
But wait! There's MORE!!
A 24-hour "behavioral health hot line" is available, and a surveillance program "to identify and monitor areas of concern" will be started soon, he said.
"These findings may lead to targeted interventions for certain populations as we address these issues," Braverman said.
Plans call for construction of an 82,000-square-foot facility in which behavioral health facilities would be consolidated, Braverman said.
Soldiers in need of care can also make appointments with their primary care providers, he said.
The objective, Braverman said, is "to restore trust and confidence in Army medicine."
Well, I've got news for you, guy; the problem was a fucking jihadi in your midst that nobody wanted to DO anything about because they were afraid of having their career ruined by you effing tolerance junkies. So until you bastards do something to make it crystal-clear that reporting a muslim working his way up to mass murder won't cause the reporting party to be screwed over YOU'RE ARRANGING THE EFFING DECK CHAIRS ON THE TITANIC.
Oh, and apparently it hasn't occurred to you geniuses that somebody who obtains a weapon for illegal purposes just- just maybe, y'know?- might not register it with you?
I don't know what to worry about the most anymore; the open enemy the son is facing, or the idiots in uniform with a lot of rank on their shoulders and the politicians they suck up to.
Despite the availability of resources, many soldiers have expressed reluctance to seek mental health care, fearing that doing so would adversely affect their careers.
"There is a perception of stigma," Cone said.
But Braverman said treatment need not hinder anyone's career.
"If you are seen in our system, while there's information in the medical records, that's not allowed to be used for any determination of security levels or future assignments," he said.
Well, people finding out that the jihadi-in-training turned some of his patients in for 'war crimes' didn't exactly help, now did it?(Note to Braverman: KEEP THE DAMNED ENEMY FROM TREATING OUR TROOPS, YOU JACKASS.)
Damn. Just effing dammit.
Soldiers assigned to Fort Hood will have to register their personal firearms with the director of emergency services, he added. Fort Hood is home to some 50,000 active-duty soldiers and 18,000 of the soldiers' family members.
Hell, he even admits what good this is:
But, Cone said, had the changes been in place on November 5, they might not have been enough.
"I don't think necessarily they would have had an effect on this event," he said.
Absolute effing bullcrap.
But wait! There's MORE!!
A 24-hour "behavioral health hot line" is available, and a surveillance program "to identify and monitor areas of concern" will be started soon, he said.
"These findings may lead to targeted interventions for certain populations as we address these issues," Braverman said.
Plans call for construction of an 82,000-square-foot facility in which behavioral health facilities would be consolidated, Braverman said.
Soldiers in need of care can also make appointments with their primary care providers, he said.
The objective, Braverman said, is "to restore trust and confidence in Army medicine."
Well, I've got news for you, guy; the problem was a fucking jihadi in your midst that nobody wanted to DO anything about because they were afraid of having their career ruined by you effing tolerance junkies. So until you bastards do something to make it crystal-clear that reporting a muslim working his way up to mass murder won't cause the reporting party to be screwed over YOU'RE ARRANGING THE EFFING DECK CHAIRS ON THE TITANIC.
Oh, and apparently it hasn't occurred to you geniuses that somebody who obtains a weapon for illegal purposes just- just maybe, y'know?- might not register it with you?
I don't know what to worry about the most anymore; the open enemy the son is facing, or the idiots in uniform with a lot of rank on their shoulders and the politicians they suck up to.
Despite the availability of resources, many soldiers have expressed reluctance to seek mental health care, fearing that doing so would adversely affect their careers.
"There is a perception of stigma," Cone said.
But Braverman said treatment need not hinder anyone's career.
"If you are seen in our system, while there's information in the medical records, that's not allowed to be used for any determination of security levels or future assignments," he said.
Well, people finding out that the jihadi-in-training turned some of his patients in for 'war crimes' didn't exactly help, now did it?(Note to Braverman: KEEP THE DAMNED ENEMY FROM TREATING OUR TROOPS, YOU JACKASS.)
Damn. Just effing dammit.
The more I think about this idiocy, the madder I get
First at Nanny Bloomberg for the idiocy coming about in the first place(Hey, NYEffin'C, hope you're happy); second is the fucking moron who doesn't say "Screw the law" and give the food to the hungry.
Mr. Bastile, you're the fucking moron referred to; I truly hope you read this. And Bloomberg, you deserve to be dragged from that office and treated to tar and feathers.
Added: I just keep getting more pissed. They've got hungry people asking for food, and they threw chicken away? Because of fucking TRANS-FATS? "Yes, I know you're starving, but Nanny Bloomberg doesn't allow food with trans-fats so you'll have to wait until something he approves of comes along.
What's that? Oh, he's stuffing on steak and shrimp or something. You don't expect him to live by the rules Nanny sets for everyone else, do you?"
Damn you, Bloomberg. And damn you Bastile, and any other de-balled little clown who'd throw away food because it's not 'healthy' enough.
Mr. Bastile, you're the fucking moron referred to; I truly hope you read this. And Bloomberg, you deserve to be dragged from that office and treated to tar and feathers.
Added: I just keep getting more pissed. They've got hungry people asking for food, and they threw chicken away? Because of fucking TRANS-FATS? "Yes, I know you're starving, but Nanny Bloomberg doesn't allow food with trans-fats so you'll have to wait until something he approves of comes along.
What's that? Oh, he's stuffing on steak and shrimp or something. You don't expect him to live by the rules Nanny sets for everyone else, do you?"
Damn you, Bloomberg. And damn you Bastile, and any other de-balled little clown who'd throw away food because it's not 'healthy' enough.
While I'm on the subject of crookedness,
The U.S. Senate recently released its long-awaited proposal for a government-run hostile takeover of the entire U.S. health care system. Predictably, it includes a barrage of higher taxes to pay for the bill’s immense price tag. [...]
All these increases, combined with state and local income taxes, would raise the average top marginal rate in the U.S. to over 52 percent. This would be higher than traditionally high-tax countries such as Italy, Spain, and even France. [...]
I'm going to note four:
•An excise tax on high-cost “Cadillac” health insurance plans that cost more than $8,500 a year for individuals or $21,000 for families,[2]
•An excise tax on medical devices such as wheelchairs, breast pumps, and syringes used by diabetics for insulin injections,[3]
•A value-added tax, which would tax the value added to a product at each stage of production,[7]
•An increase in the estate tax,[24]
If Harry Reid had any honor, any sense of shame, he'd be hiding under a rock mumbling "Forgive me" for this crap. You'll note that the current Death Tax just isn't enough for them: they truly believe that just because you die they have some right to tax you AGAIN on everything you own. And it's not enough to be stuck in a wheelchair, or be diabetic; they want to tax you on the things you need to get around and stay alive.
That the Senate rolled over to debate this piece of crap is bad enough(as Dick says, where's a torch?) If they pass this horrible piece of reeking garbage, they ought to be dragged out of those taxpayer-supplied offices, taken to the town square and flogged. Or hanged. Maybe both.
Oh, and how about this message to Louisiana and Sen. Landrieu(Political Whore-LA)?
I regret to inform you that as the result of your accepting what’s widely seen as a financial offer to throw your vote on healthcare — and notwithstanding your unusual logic about the economic plight of your constituents — should this measure pass the Senate and eventually be signed into law, I will probably never again visit New Orleans. I don’t know your motives nor are they important; it’s that appearance of impropriety thing.
In fact, I might go out of my away to avoid Louisiana entirely.
Based on the figures I cited from the New Orleans Tourism Marketing Corporation for 2009, (PDF) those seven million-plus annual tourists spend an average of $700. A former employer once sent a half dozen of us there for four days apiece.
So. If we divide these recent legislative earnings by $700, and then assume a local average gross profit margin from food, lodging, and entertainment of say 50%, we find that 1,000,000 tourists could, if they adopt this thinking, actually completely negate Louisiana’s short-term net proceeds from whatever it was that somehow uniquely sent $300,000,000 to your state.
Over two years that number could wipe your state’s windfall from the books and replace it with a comparable loss.
Then we could do this for either your entire term, year by year, or forever. Year by year.
All these increases, combined with state and local income taxes, would raise the average top marginal rate in the U.S. to over 52 percent. This would be higher than traditionally high-tax countries such as Italy, Spain, and even France. [...]
I'm going to note four:
•An excise tax on high-cost “Cadillac” health insurance plans that cost more than $8,500 a year for individuals or $21,000 for families,[2]
•An excise tax on medical devices such as wheelchairs, breast pumps, and syringes used by diabetics for insulin injections,[3]
•A value-added tax, which would tax the value added to a product at each stage of production,[7]
•An increase in the estate tax,[24]
If Harry Reid had any honor, any sense of shame, he'd be hiding under a rock mumbling "Forgive me" for this crap. You'll note that the current Death Tax just isn't enough for them: they truly believe that just because you die they have some right to tax you AGAIN on everything you own. And it's not enough to be stuck in a wheelchair, or be diabetic; they want to tax you on the things you need to get around and stay alive.
That the Senate rolled over to debate this piece of crap is bad enough(as Dick says, where's a torch?) If they pass this horrible piece of reeking garbage, they ought to be dragged out of those taxpayer-supplied offices, taken to the town square and flogged. Or hanged. Maybe both.
Oh, and how about this message to Louisiana and Sen. Landrieu(Political Whore-LA)?
I regret to inform you that as the result of your accepting what’s widely seen as a financial offer to throw your vote on healthcare — and notwithstanding your unusual logic about the economic plight of your constituents — should this measure pass the Senate and eventually be signed into law, I will probably never again visit New Orleans. I don’t know your motives nor are they important; it’s that appearance of impropriety thing.
In fact, I might go out of my away to avoid Louisiana entirely.
Based on the figures I cited from the New Orleans Tourism Marketing Corporation for 2009, (PDF) those seven million-plus annual tourists spend an average of $700. A former employer once sent a half dozen of us there for four days apiece.
So. If we divide these recent legislative earnings by $700, and then assume a local average gross profit margin from food, lodging, and entertainment of say 50%, we find that 1,000,000 tourists could, if they adopt this thinking, actually completely negate Louisiana’s short-term net proceeds from whatever it was that somehow uniquely sent $300,000,000 to your state.
Over two years that number could wipe your state’s windfall from the books and replace it with a comparable loss.
Then we could do this for either your entire term, year by year, or forever. Year by year.
"We had good reason to make adjustments; no
you can't see the data!"
Reeling from claims that it has massaged data to show a 150 year warming trend where there isn't one, NIWA's chief climate scientist David Wratt, an IPCC vice-chair on the 2007 AR4 report, issued a news release stating adjustments had been made to compensate for changes in sensor locations over the years.
While such an adjustment is valid, it needs to be fully explained so other scientists can test the reasonableness of the adjustment.
Wratt is refusing to release data his organisation claims to have justifying adjustments on other weather stations, meaning the science cannot be reviewed. However, he has released information relating to Wellington temperature readings, and they make for interesting reading.
Reeling from claims that it has massaged data to show a 150 year warming trend where there isn't one, NIWA's chief climate scientist David Wratt, an IPCC vice-chair on the 2007 AR4 report, issued a news release stating adjustments had been made to compensate for changes in sensor locations over the years.
While such an adjustment is valid, it needs to be fully explained so other scientists can test the reasonableness of the adjustment.
Wratt is refusing to release data his organisation claims to have justifying adjustments on other weather stations, meaning the science cannot be reviewed. However, he has released information relating to Wellington temperature readings, and they make for interesting reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)