BBC questions Global Warming

Amazing. Just amazing to see the BBC of all sources printing a story which questions Global Warming. They rightly point out that indeed there has been zero increase in global temperatures since 1998.

When the BBC starts running stories like this, you have to wonder how long the Global Warming mongers have to pass their prosperity-killing policies.

Crock

Fear-mongering moonbats at their worst:

WASHINGTON — If the Senate doesn't pass a bill to cut global warming, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer says, there will be dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more.

She says there's a huge upside, however, if the Senate does act: millions of clean-energy jobs, reduced reliance on foreign oil and less pollution for the nation's children

I grow beyond weary of this nonsense. The whole story from McClatchy is here.

Global Whining

According to Gallup, an increasing number of Americans think Global Warming is exaggerated:

Although a majority of Americans believe the seriousness of global warming is either correctly portrayed in the news or underestimated, a record-high 41% now say it is exaggerated. This represents the highest level of public skepticism about mainstream reporting on global warming seen in more than a decade of Gallup polling on the subject.

This is good news for common sense, and bad news for L. Ron Gore and the Climate pimps. More and more people are starting to see this nonsense for what it is.

Whenever thinking about this subject it is always good to revisit the classic Confessions of a Global Warming Agnostic by Charles Krauthammer from NRO. A highlight:

For a century, an ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous knowledge class — social planners, scientists, intellectuals, experts, and their left-wing political allies — arrogated to themselves the right to rule either in the name of the oppressed working class (Communism) or, in its more benign form, by virtue of their superior expertise in achieving the highest social progress by means of state planning (socialism).

Two decades ago, however, socialism and communism died rudely, then were buried forever by the empirical demonstration of the superiority of market capitalism everywhere from Thatcher’s England to Deng’s China, where just the partial abolition of socialism lifted more people out of poverty more rapidly than ever in human history.

Just as the ash heap of history beckoned, the intellectual Left was handed the ultimate salvation: environmentalism. Now the experts will regulate your life not in the name of the proletariat or Fabian socialism but — even better — in the name of Earth itself.

Environmentalists are Gaia’s priests, instructing us in her proper service and casting out those who refuse to genuflect. (See Newsweek above.) And having proclaimed the ultimate commandment — carbon chastity — they are preparing the supporting canonical legislation that will tell you how much you can travel, what kind of light you will read by, and at what temperature you may set your bedroom thermostat.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

It's Sunday. Be lazy. Enjoy this informative movie while I continue to recover from a cold.

Doubt about Global Warming is gaining traction

Rightfully so. This is a good article to check out:

At December's U.N. Global Warming conference in Poznan, Poland, 650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis. Said climatologist Dr. David Gee, Chairman of the International Geological Congress, "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?"

I asked myself, why would such obviously smart guy say such a ridiculous thing? But it turns out he's right.

The earth's temperature peaked in 1998. It's been falling ever since; it dropped dramatically in 2007 and got worse in 2008, when temperatures touched 1980 levels.

Meanwhile, the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center released conclusive satellite photos showing that Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels. What's more, measurements of Antarctic ice now show that its accumulation is up 5 percent since 1980.

In other words, during what was supposed to be massive global warming, the biggest chunks of ice on earth grew larger. Just as an aside, do you remember when the hole in the ozone layer was going to melt Antarctica? But don't worry, we're safe now, that was the nineties.

Dr. Kunihiko, Chancellor of Japan's Institute of Science and Technology said this: "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or the other ... every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so." Now why would a learned man say such a crazy thing?

This is where the looney left gets lost. Their mantra is atmospheric CO2 levels are escalating and this is unquestionably causing earth's temperature rise. But ask yourself -- if global temperatures are experiencing the biggest sustained drop in decades, while CO2 levels continue to rise -- how can it be true?

The rest of the article is here.

Gore's revenge?

I had a busy weekend (in more ways than one) so instead of bombarding this blog with what should have been a lot of my brilliant commentary heading into this important election, there's been nada that last few days. I apologize to my 3 readers.

I do have a few thoughts about tomorrow that I wanted to throw out there.

I don't have a prediction about the winner, but I have a feeling The Hero will win my state of North Carolina.

This election has never really been about Barack Obama or The Hero, it's really been about revenge, plain and simple. It's been about the revenge of the Left for the last 8 years.

Let's face it, they've always felt the 2000 election was stolen, and they've never gotten over it. 2004 was supposed to be the big comeback, but they only managed to gain a slight majority in congress, which is nothing to shake a stick at. But they weren't able to push Kerry over the top. They underestimated W. and more importantly, overestimated the public's distaste for his presidency. There have been many failings of the Bush Administration, but the American people don't hate the man in the way the media and the hard left would have us believe. 2004 proved that.

Regardless, the DNC took the last 4 years and focused on one thing: winning back The White House in 2008. They built what will probably go down in history as the most effective political machine in history, and no matter who emerged as the candidate — Obama, Clinton, Edwards — they were going to have a monster of a campaign working for them. Obama's charisma, lack of baggage, centrist rhetoric and perceived status as an agent of 'change' has probably positioned him to win better than the other serious Democratic candidates would have been. Although, to someone of my leanings, Hillary would have been a better, more acceptable alternative.

But now, that's neither here nor there.

Just remember that this election has never really been about the two candidates. It's always been about the Left finally getting Gore's revenge.

I'm not trying to make excuses and I'm not conceding defeat. I'm simply stating a fact that this election was going to be a huge uphill battle for whoever the Republicans nominated.

When you think about where Bush's approval rating is and the current state of the Republican image, it's amazing that this race is even close. The reason? As I've stated before, the Democrats are notorious for nominating the wrong candidate in their primary process. Obama, if he wins, is only barely acceptable to the American people as a whole. Someone who would have been more acceptable, like Hillary, would probably win by 15 points.

But in this election from Hell, I guess 'barely acceptable' is all the Left had to really do, and that's probably the saddest thing of all — look how low our expectations for our leaders have become.

For me, while The Hero may not have been my personal first choice to run from my side, and while he may not have ran the best campaign; he is still a good and decent man, a patriot, and someone who has devoted most of his life to working very hard for the betterment of this country. His record of bipartisanship and proven leadership is deep and cannot be disputed.

When I look back on 2008, that will always be enough for me, and that's why John McCain will get my vote tomorrow.

UN: Eat less meat to fight Global Warming

Here we go. This story from The Observer in the UK reports that the chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is recommending we all eat less meat in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

People should have one meat-free day a week if they want to make a personal and effective sacrifice that would help tackle climate change, the world's leading authority on global warming has told The Observer.

Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which last year earned a joint share of the Nobel Peace Prize, said that people should then go on to reduce their meat consumption even further.

His comments are the most controversial advice yet provided by the panel on how individuals can help tackle global warning.

I don't even have the time and energy to get into what a sham the UN IPCC was. The fact that they shared a Nobel Peace Prize with L. Ron Gore should be sufficient explanation at this point.

So much of Global Warming hype is propaganda designed to create the notion that evil Big Business (like the Meat Industry) is the root cause of this alleged world problem. It's subtle, and effective. But it goes beyond that. It's not just the creeping anti-capitalism that Climate Change hysteria most certainly is, but it's the arrogance of supposed intellectuals who know the best way in which you should live your life. We all need to eat tofu and be skinny and happy and wear our bike helmets; instead of being the fat, lazy resource-suckers that we are now.

And by God you will adhere or be sent to the back of the bus with Michael Crichton.