More like global freezing my booty off

I really wish Al Gore would stop scheduling global warming-related gatherings. Every time he does, the temperature seems to dive.

Case in point:

GORE HEARING ON WARMING MAY BE PUT ON ICE
Mon Jan 26 2009 17:59:26 ET

Al Gore is scheduled before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday morning to once again testify on the ‘urgent need’ to combat global warming.

But Mother Nature seems ready to freeze the proceedings.

A ‘Winter Storm Watch’ has been posted for the nation’s capitol and there is a potential for significant snow… sleet… or ice accumulations.

“I can’t imagine the Democrats would want to showcase Mr. Gore and his new findings on global warming as a winter storm rages outside,” a Republican lawmaker emailed the DRUDGE REPORT. “And if the ice really piles up, it will not be safe to travel.”

A spokesman for Sen. John Kerry, who chairs the committee, was not immediately available to comment on contingency plans.

Global warming advocates have suggested this year’s wild winter spells are proof of climate change.

Trite

I’ve been busy with work this month and haven’t taken the time to do the blogging thing- for the very few who have told me you enjoy reading it (i mean… who knew? certainly not me), I apologize.

As for Obama’s speech tonight- of which I just saw a rerun following a much needed run to Skyline Chili earlier- it was trite, lacking in any wisdom whatsoever, and incredibly fatiguing to watch.  The only enjoyable part for me was the very end, after it was over, when they played the score from the film Remember the Titans.

Obama to the crowd: “This has been about you!”

Great, Barack.  Very JFK of you (“Ask not what your country can do for you…”).

I was not moved one iota by any of his words.  It was full of so many terribly thought out proposals and ideas, I have hard time seeing how a thinking person could have been moved by it.  A long, long list of goals, none of which we have any reason to think are possible to obtain.  It’s all feelings, all bluster, all platitudes.

But then, feelings are what being on the left are about isn’t it?

“So I’ve got news for you, John McCain.  WE ALL PUT OUR COUNTRY FIRST.”

Let me be the first to stand up and say to you, Democrats, as a party: um, no, you don’t.  Every policy Barack Obama endorsed tonight stems from the same selfish, narcessistic, emotionally driven root.  From abortion on demand to taxing the rich, from the phony health care crisis to the fraudulant “repairing of America’s reputation abroad”, from climate change to unconditional withdrawal from Iraq, as Obama said himself:

“It’s all about you.”

It’s all about making you feel good about yourself.  It’s all about making your life easier.  It’s all about how Barack Obama is going to solve all of your problems.

As I said to a friend the other day: All you have to do is open your heart to him; ask Barack Obama to come into your heart, and Barack Obama will come and live there, and Barack Obama will miraculously solve all of your problems.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is not about you; and ironically the sooner you realize this, the more joy, fulfullment and success you will have in life.

We’re all gonna DROWN!!!

Oh dear God in heaven!

“Clean Car Challenge”? Words matter!

When in need of something that animates me enough to write a post, I have to look no further than a global warming- related story.

McCain is apparently selling an idea called the Clean Car Challenge– where the government offers $300 million to anyone who develops a battery for electric cars that meets certain goals set forth by the proposal.  Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for developing new energy technology, and these are very good goals.

However, this is driving me nuts, and I’ll tell you why. The name of the prize is WRONG. There is nothing more vital to public discourse than clarity.  The language we use to communicate is the front line in the battle of clear thought.  This “Cean Car” business- along with “Clean Energy”, “Clean Coal”, and the like- just muddies the waters.  It is not honest discourse, it is not an honest title.

What, exactly, is being rewarded by this prize? Well:

The presumed Republican nominee on Monday proposed a $300 million government prize to whoever can develop an automobile battery that far surpasses existing technology… such a device should deliver power at 30 percent of current costs and have “the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars”.

What the heck does clean have to do with any of that?  This is certainly to be a more efficient car.  It is indeed intended to greatly reduce the “carbon footprint” of the driver.  But is it in any sense more clean than existing electric cars which emit no emissions of any kind into the air?  No!

Now of course well all know that the association intended by those who created the prize title is that this car is “clean” because it will reduce carbon emissions by its energy efficiency. There is just one problem with this. Carbon dioxide isn’t dirt, people.  It’s all around you, all the time.  It is not even a poisonous gas- it is vital to life.  There is a real problem when the language has been manipulated to the degree that people automatically equate clean air with low carbon dioxide levels.  They are two very disparate ideas.  I am willing to acknowledge that, yes, perhaps low carbon emissions are a good thing.  However, the real goal of an initiative such as this should be efficiency and a reduced dependency on oil, thereby creating cheaper energy.

Think about it this way- what if someone, somewhere, developed a battery powered car that emitted no carbon, required no oil, and was very cheap and efficient to operate, allowing you all the freedom of existing gas powered engines, but (for some reason) it spewed a fetid mix of (carbon free) chewing tobacco, baby diapers, and finger nail clippings all over the place?  By the currently employed definition of “clean”, this car would fit to a T.  But would it really be clean?  Of course not.  So why do we equate no carbon with clean? It makes no sense.

Look, I know there is very little common ground between myself and the global warming crowd. But can we at least make an attempt to not make the issue more complicated by bastardizing the English language in this way?

Newt Gingrich sucks now

Spending money to combat climate change could easily be the most ridiculous political proposition around today. It’s definitely worse than making kissy faces at Iran, absolutely worse than McCain or Obama’s economic proposals, and possibly worse than rolling back our relationship with Israel.

Look- even if you believe global climate change caused by man is a major problem, it doesn’t immediately follow that spending large amounts of money to fight it is a good idea. Think about it this way. If you had termites in your home, you would call the local bug guy to come zap them. However, if you were say, George III somewhere around the time of the American Revolution, and you had termites in your summer home in Wessex or Sussex or Dorkshire or wherever, it wouldn’t be the smartest idea to sink large sums of money and effort into combating them. There just isn’t a whole lot you can do about it. You could burn down your house, sure, but that’s pretty drastic. The only option you have is to adapt. Keep an eye on the problem, fix disasters as they occur, and perhaps research any promising ways to address the problem through new technology.

My point is that when it comes to the global climate and our ability to do anything about it, we are more like George III dealing with termites in 18th century England than we are Dr. House combating a mysterious disease. We simply don’t know enough, aren’t powerful enough, and don’t have enough tools to do much about it. Sinking billions of dollars into a problem we can’t fix is, frankly, crazy.

And it doesn’t help matters that Newt Gingrich, former champion of the contract with America, has bought into it.

It’s sad but true:

Another one for the summer reading list: Climate Confusion

If you believe in probable catastrophic global climate change, you should think about reading at least one book in opposition to your opinion. And I have a suggestion for that book.

Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor, by former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, Roy Spencer.

Thank you Dennis Prager for having him on your show today.

Weather Channel founder says global warming is crap

I honestly am not sure which of the following statements are true:

1) Global warming (or more specifically, global climate change) is not happening at all, period, end of story.  Much like the heterosexual AIDS scare of the 80s/90s, it is simply a fabrication of the media and 20 years from now, we’ll be thinking “Whatever happened to the whole global warming thing?”

2) Global climate change IS happening, but it is natural. It is overwhelmingly due to the activity of the sun or other natural phenomena with a microscopic man caused portion, and even if we stopped all carbon related activity whatsoever, there is essentially nothing man can do about it. (Even if this one is true, it doesn’t mean global warming is necessarily a bad thing. There are many reasons to think that global warming would actually be a net benefit for mankind.)

3)  Climate change is happening, it is caused by man, but we shouldn’t do anything about it because it’s either not going to be catastrophic, or at the very least not worth the cost because the benefits of energy use outweigh the costs of rolling back carbon emissions. This is the view of one gentleman of whom I am a big fan, Bjorn Lomborg. (click the link! it’s good!)

I am certain, however, that the following is false:

4) Global warming is happening, it will be catastrophic, it is man’s fault, and we must act to stop it now no matter the cost.

The last statement seems to be the point of view of the most of the world nowadays. It certainly seems to be the view espoused at UK- at least in my Geography 160 class (Dr. PP Karan).

However, the founder of The Weather Channel John Coleman seems to think #1 is true, and he is talking about suing over it.

Can I just ask: if the guy that founded TWC is not convinced global climate change is happening, should you be?

Scores of Gores in Store

Duh:

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.

His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.

“We’re brainwashing our children,” said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. “They’re going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It’s ridiculous.”

At his first appearance since the award was announced in Oslo, Mr Gore said: “We have to quickly find a way to change the world’s consciousness about exactly what we’re facing.”

Mr Gore shared the Nobel prize with the United Nations climate panel for their work in helping to galvanize international action against global warming.

But Dr Gray, whose annual forecasts of the number of tropical storms and hurricanes are widely publicised, said a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures – related to the amount of salt in ocean water – was responsible for the global warming that he acknowledges has taken place.

However, he said, that same cycle meant a period of cooling would begin soon and last for several years.

“We’ll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realise how foolish it was,” Dr Gray said.

I hope that 30 years from now when someone makes a rash prediction, they will no longer be called a “chicken little”; instead, such an action will be dubbed “pulling a Gore”. Then again, maybe not. The dangers of DDT. Heterosexual AIDS epidemics. Global cooling. Overpopulation. All things that certain folks screamed about for a decade or more, and what happened to them? Can I buy a vowel?

There is no justice this side of eternity, apparently.

In other news, the Bush administration lays down. Why, I ask, can’t the (possibly) most arrogant president in US history be on the right side of an issue that is so clear? Watch the video below if you’re not convinced:

Blah. Anyway. Less blogging. More studying.

Vapidity

How is it possible? I am again struck how everything this man says is either utterly empty and meaningless, or obviously contrary to reality.

President Bush has created a partisan atmosphere, eh?  Interesting statement considering no one- on the left or the right- seems to like the guy lately.  You’d think Obama might be a fan, though, since Bush has spent the past year sinking his presidential reputation into an immigration reform bill most Democrats- to hear them talk- would have been thrilled to pass.  Seriously- bringing the parties together, Mr. Obama?  There are only 2 issues on which the parties really ought to be able to come together:

1. Global Warming: As far as I am aware, Democrats and Republicans are equally buoyant,  and therefore equally susceptible to death by drowning; with the possible exception of Barack Obama. His hollow head might keep him afloat awhile yet.

2. Terrorism: As misguided as I believe those on the Left to be, I do not accuse them of being bad people or hating America. Of course Obama and Hillary- even Edwards- love America. So we ought to be able to come together on issues of national safety as well.

Wherever you come down on the issue of global warming- and I make no secret about the fact that I am quite skeptical- it is still true (to my chagrin) that President Bush has done more to address this issue than any president before him.

As far as terrorism goes, one need only look around.  Not one attack on American soil since 2001, and so many foiled attempts that it is obvious someone is doing something right.

I am no fan of the president lately, but please, let’s not get carried away Mr. Obama. I know it’s your job to pander to all the tin foil hat Bush Derangement Syndrome clubs, but salvage what little credibility you have left and lay the partisanship in Washington at someone else’s door.  Like your own party.