Freezing Out Global Warming
Apr 30, 2008 General
There are millions of people on this planet who have bought into the idea that the Earth is warming up and that mankind is responsible for it. Al Gore has become even richer by making error filled movies and preaching about corkscrew shaped light bulbs (which I happen to like) in order to save our planet, a planet he said had a fever. The global warming movement has a lot of scientists who believe that the Earth is warming and they are sure that man is causing it and that we must do something now. They are willing to bet their government grants that global warming is real.
Of course, there are just as many scientists who have doubts about global warming. Of the scientists on both sides of the issue, many are not geophysicists, or climate specialists, however they do have some idea about the scientific process. That process does not include chanting that something is real over and over until people accept it as fact. Science deals with proving or disproving that which is posited. So far, man made global warming remains a theory because it has yet to be proved. There is no doubt that we have measured an increase in temperature but why is there an increase. The Earth has had cycles where it has been cold and then hot and man has had nothing to do with it. Mars is getting warmer and you can bet the farm that no life form is responsible for that.
The global warming zealots like to point to people who actually deal with the climate as the true authorities and they seem to only pass off those who agree with the issue. Those climate experts who disagree are shunned and castigated because of their views.
While Al Gore and his legions of doom are terrorizing the world with their global warming crusades a geophysicist in Australia says that we might want to rethink the whole warming idea. Phil Chapman states that the Earth cooled in 2007 and that the drop in temperature was the greatest putting our temperature back where it was in 1930. Chapman also states that there has been little to no sunspot activity and that this is the reason we have cooling temperatures. Consequently, increased sunspot activity would cause it to get warmer.
Chapman also discusses what would happen if temperatures continued to decrease and his description of 1.5 m thick ice covering continents for 10,000 years eliminating much of the life on Earth is not appealing at all.
The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000 years.
The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know that glaciation can occur quickly: the required decline in global temperature is about 12C and it can happen in 20 years.
The next descent into an ice age is inevitable but may not happen for another 1000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14C cooler in 2027.
By then, most of the advanced nations would have ceased to exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining. The Australian
Chapman admits that he does not know if this is a trend or a transient temperature drop but given the consequences it should be examined. However, just like global warming, while more study is needed, and it would be foolish to act upon unsubstantiated data, as if man could influence the climate anyway.
The climate debate will press on for some time to come with the global warming believers pushing “their” scientists forward and demanding that we follow in lockstep while they ignore the possibility of an ice age or at least global cooling. They will legislate climate friendly laws that force us to comply while bankrupting us. We will be forced to accept man made global warming as fact despite the lack of proof.
Those who want me to accept the doom and gloom of climate change are asking that I accept as fact a weather prediction for well into the future from people who cannot tell me, for a certain, if it will rain this weekend.
However, if I had my choice I would take a warming trend to an ice age, any day…
Tags: al gore, climate, global warming, ice age
Refocus Debate to Black on Black Violence
Apr 28, 2008 General
In my last post I wrote about the Sean Bell incident and the threats by Al Sharpton and others to close down New York City. The tension is mounting in New York and now Congressman John Conyers of Michigan has flown to Queens to join those who will participate in civil disobedience after the officers involved in the shooting were all found not guilty. Conyers and others are in contact with the US Justice Department asking that they file federal charges against the officers. It seems to me that this is the business of the state of New York and the federal government does not belong meddling in it. If charges are brought, ever cop in New York should walk off the job and let Al Sharpton and John Conyers try to keep the peace.
There was a meeting on Sunday where people noted that Bell was one name on a long list of people who were victims of police brutality. A person named Clarke [not otherwise identified in the article] had an interesting thing to say:
“The scales of justice are out of balance,” Clarke said to applause as some in the audience hissed that the scales were never balanced to begin with. “We will not see another generation of African-American men being shot down without there being justice. We will be focused like a laser until justice rains down.” WCBSTV
Let me clear this up for all the race baiters who are involved in this. The shooting of Sean Bell was, no doubt, tragic but he was drunk and did not obey the police who feared for their lives after Bell rammed one of their cars. His accomplices have been involved in gun crimes before and were believed to have guns. This one case does not equal many cases and while there have been reports of police brutality (against all races) they are rare when compared to the number of encounters police have with criminals.
What these race baiters need to do to keep another generation of African Americans from being shot down is to police their own. The major US cities are filled with young black men who are killing each other every single day. Black on black crime is out of control and blacks are killing hundreds of their own people every single day. There were nearly 300 murders in Baltimore City last year and the overwhelming majority of them were black men killed by other black men.
If these so called leaders want to end the violence against blacks in communities across America all they need do is stop young black men from killing each other. Bill Cosby has tried to address this issue and he was shunned for airing the dirty laundry of the black community. The problem is real and all too common in those very communities. About 70% of black households have one parent and the impact of gangster rap on young black men cannot be discounted.
If Sharpton and Conyers want to make an impact they need to start in the major cities across this country and encourage black men to stop killing each other. More black men will be killed by other black men this year than will be killed by the police.
If you want brutality, look no farther than your own communities.
Tags: brutality, conyers, race baiting, sharpton
Sharpton Stirs Up Trouble in New York
Apr 28, 2008 General
In November of 2006 Sean Bell was attending his bachelor party at an establishment that was under surveillance by the police for alleged prostitution. One of Bell’s friends got into an argument and one of Bell’s friends was heard saying to get his gun and shoot the “white bitch” (the woman with whom the argument took place). They left and were followed by a police officer who had called for his back-up team. The police identified themselves and ordered Bell to put his hands up (while he was in his car). Instead of complying, Bell accelerated and struck an unmarked police car. The police opened fire and Bell was struck by four bullets and died of his injuries. The police shot fifty rounds in the incident.
Three of the officers were indicted on manslaughter and reckless endangerment charges. On April 25th the three officers were found not guilty on all counts. The judge in the case stated that the officer’s account of the evening was more credible than the accounts of Bell’s two friends, Joseph Guzman and Trent Benefield, both of whom survived the shooting.
Reverend Al Sharpton has been involved in this case since just after the shooting and has paid witnesses to discuss what they saw. Their versions contradict police accounts that a fourth man ran from the scene and was believed to have a gun. After the verdict on Friday Sharpton vowed to shut down New York City. He did state that he was not calling for any violence but that he and the black community in New York intended to shut down the city. Of course, Sharpton always says he does not call for violence and then his chants of “no justice no peace” end up inciting people to commit violent acts sometimes leading to the deaths of others.
Sharpton stated:
“We strategically know how to stop the city so people stand still and realize that you do not have the right to shoot down unarmed, innocent civilians,” Sharpton told an overflow crowd of several hundred people at his National Action Network office in the historically black Manhattan neighborhood. “This city is going to deal with the blood of Sean Bell.” My Way News
I was not there and have no way of knowing what really happened any more than Sharpton does. However, Bell was intoxicated and when ordered by police to put his hands up accelerated his car and ran into theirs. His friend had been heard talking about getting a gun and killing a “white bitch” and the two friends have criminal records that involve guns. If Sean Bell had listened to the police and put his hands up he might still be alive today but instead he made an aggressive move that resulted in his death. Bell’s acts, in no way, can be seen as those of an innocent man. He might have been innocent when they ordered him to put his hands up but he lost his innocence when he accelerated and ran into their car.
Al Sharpton will incite a riot and people will probably get hurt. If we are fortunate one of the casualties will be Sharpton and he will no longer be around to incite black hatred. Whites in LA did not riot when OJ was found not guilty because the court had issued its ruling, like it or not.
The incident with Bell was tragic and though I personally think that shooting fifty times is excessive, I was not there. I do not know the neighborhood or the circumstances the officers faced. I do know that a court found them not guilty of manslaughter and that is good enough for me whether I think they are guilty or not. The only thing Sharpton can do is muddy the waters more than they are and promote hatred and racial intolerance.
Thanks to my friend Kender for this bit of humor to end this post:
The Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, while visiting a primary school class, found themselves in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.
The teacher asked both men if they would like to lead the discussion of the word ‘tragedy’. So the illustrious Rev Jackson asks the class for an example of a ‘tragedy’.
One little boy stood up and offered: ‘If my best friend, who lives on a farm, is playing in the field and a runaway tractor comes along and knocks him dead, that would be a tragedy.’
No,’ says the Great Jesse Jackson, ‘that would be an accident.’
A little girl raised her hand: ‘If a school bus carrying 50 children drove over a cliff, killing everyone inside, that would be a tragedy.’
I’m afraid not,’ explains the exalted Reverend Al. ‘That’s what we would call a great loss. ‘ The room goes silent. No other children volunteered.
Reverend Al searches the room. ‘Isn’t there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?’
Finally at the back of the room little Johnny raises his hand. In a stern voice he says: ‘If a plane carrying the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton were struck by a missile and blown to smithereens that would be a tragedy.’
Fantastic!’ exclaim Jackson and Sharpton, ‘That’s right. And can you tell us why that would be a tragedy?’
‘Well,’ says little Johnny, ‘because it sure as hell wouldn’t be a great loss, and it probably wouldn’t be an accident either!”
Other Sources:
WCBSTV
Wikipedia: Sean Bell Shooting
Brazilian Oil Find Might End US Nightmare
Apr 24, 2008 General
Brazil has made a huge discovery of oil and if the initial estimates on quantity hold true, the US might finally be able to reduce or eliminate dependence on oil from the Middle East. The find, some 8 billion barrels would be one of the largest and pales in comparison to another discovery in the region that could yield 33 billion barrels.
There is no indication as to how long it would take to start pumping the oil but there are estimates that by 2020 several million barrels a day could be flowing. This is great news and the US needs to ensure a partnership with Brazil so that we can become a primary customer for their oil. Since our politicians are keeping us from drilling for our own it will be important to work with Brazil to ensure we can buy theirs.
This would strike a blow to the Middle East in that they would then have to rely on China and India as customers which would provide them plenty of cash flow but the US could then reduce the number of warships patrolling the Gulf and keeping the oil flowing. It is possible that the Middle East could become extremely unstable without a US presence.
I am hoping that Brazil is able to get this oil to market quickly. Perhaps we could even get reasonable prices for the oil they provide. This would be a major boost to our economy and would help the economy of Brazil as well.
It is amazing as well, that we keep finding huge deposits of oil when the naysayers keep telling us it is running out. These people are, of course, the same ones that refuse to allow us to drill on our own property for oil or to build new refineries.
Maybe all this will change when they can no longer use dependence on Middle Eastern oil as a reason for decreasing fossil fuel use.
Source:
Bloomberg
Tags: brazil, middle east, oil
Liberal Wants to Abolish All Taxes
Apr 15, 2008 General
New York Times Op-Ed contributor Richard Conniff wrote a piece where he calls for us to abolish all taxes. his method for accomplishing this is to change the word taxes to dues. Conniff writes that this would take a page from the conservative play book where words are changed to reframe the debate. He cites changing the “estate tax” to “death tax” as an example. His rant gives the impression that conservatives are the ones who do this and it is our trick. Liberals would never do such a thing such as change their name to progressives to give the impression that they are on the move and because liberal has been defined as a dirty word.
Conniff said if we call them dues rather than taxes it will give people a sense of belonging.
But the word “dues” also plays into the psychology of group identity, and that can work to the benefit of conservatives and liberals alike. Consider that “tax” comes from the Latin for “appraise” with punitive overtones of “censure” or “fault,” as if wage-earners have done something wrong by their labors. “Dues,” in contrast, is rooted in social obligation and duty. NYT
Let us examine this because he might be on to something but if we change he has to be willing to live by the rules established with everything that is associated with the word dues. First of all, a tax is an appraisal. They appraise our work based upon how much we earn and then they take part of it and how much they take is based upon how much the appraised value is.
Dues are something one pays to belong to an organization. As Conniff puts it; dues are rooted in obligation and duty and I believe that would be an obligation and duty to the organization. In every organization I have belonged to the dues were the same for everyone and they were not based upon the value of my work. I also must note that people only pay dues to organizations they want to join. If they do not want to belong, they do not pay dues. Given this, people will be allowed to choose if they want to belong to the organization and if not they will not be required to pay any dues. Also, dues will be the same for everyone who decides to join. A person making a million dollars will pay the same dues as a person who makes ten thousand. We cannot make people pay different rates based upon salary because that would be an appraisal of their work which is a tax and taxes will have been abolished.
If, for some reason, Conniff advocates for mandatory membership then we need to decide what to do with the people who do not pay any dues. Right now, under the tax system, people who earn too little pay no taxes and yet they receive the greatest number of benefits from those now paying taxes. In an organization where dues are required non dues payers receive no benefits. In fact, people are not allowed to belong if they do not pay their dues. This might not be an issue because our dues will be fixed and not based on income (so everyone will have to pay) but if the powers that be decide that those less fortunate do not have to pay dues then they do not belong and they will not receive benefits of dues paying members. No welfare, no Medicaid, and no voting. If you want the same rights as members you have to pay your dues.
Mr. Conniff has opened a can of worms in his effort to smear conservatives and be cute at the same time. I think he is on to something and that we should switch to dues and follow the customary rules associated with dues. They must be the same for everyone, people may join if they wish, and those who do not join do not get any benefits of membership.
What say you Mr. Conniff, care to reframe this debate further or would you like to continue to be shown as a fool?
Tags: dues, liberal foolishness, NYT, patriotism, taxes