Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 08/24/2011 5:30:52 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Last week Rick Perry questioned the prevailing orthodoxy on global warming. There was, as is easy to imagine, no shortage of warmists waiting to pounce. Remarkably, one of the first questions later put to Governor Perry was whether he accepted the correctness of evolution — as if the science behind global warming was supported by even a tenth as much evidence as we have for evolution. What is troubling, however, is that some of the other candidates for the Republican nomination still accept the theory of man-made warming. Worse, they are apparently prepared to act on their beliefs if elected president.
First, allow me to be clear about one thing. The planet is warming. Well, it was until 1998, when the warming trend abruptly ceased. In truth, it has been warming since 1850, when the last mini–Ice Age ended. In the 161 years since then, the earth’s temperature has increased . . . wait for it . . . 0.7 degrees. But we can’t even be sure of that, as all the major temperature records have been altered to the point of uselessness.
The scientists at Great Britain’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) admit to using statistical sleights of hand to change the temperature record, so as to show more warming. And then, in a total flouting of the scientific method, they tossed out all the original raw data so that no other scientist could check their work. Remarkably, a panel — including a number of persons who stood to gain financially from a global-warming panic or who were personal friends of the accused — found nothing wrong with what the CRU scientists did. Move along; nothing to see here.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is responsible for feeding data into the United States’ Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) temperature record has been caught in a number of “unintentional” mistakes. One of my favorites is replicating Russia’s September temperatures as October’s, thereby significantly increasing the global average. In this regard, I have often wondered how it is that every “mistake” the high priests of global warming make is in the direction of increased warming. Why don’t they ever make a mistake that shows any cooling? My presumption is that after altering the laws of physics, altering the law of averages was child’s play.
Still, tampering with the data in such a way is a relatively minor fraud compared to the data manipulation the GISS gets away with every day. You see, although the GISS receives temperature readings from thousands of global stations, it uses only a fraction of them. Unbelievably, the GISS still fills out the thousands of spreadsheet cells, using figures from other sources. So what does the GISS put in a cell that used to have actual data readings? Well, it is using a smoothing technique that allows it to use any temperature reading taken within 750 miles of the location the empty cell represents. For instance, rather than use a temperature reading from a mountaintop in Bolivia, the GISS can substitute a reading from the coast of Peru or from a steamy Brazilian jungle. Does no one in government see how a warming bias might, therefore, be baked into the global record?
The graph below shows how damaging this smoothing is to the data record. Note the warming in the Arctic region. It seems like reason for concern, until one realizes that almost no actual data were used to create those dangerous-looking red zones. Instead, readings from almost 1,000 miles south of the polar regions were substituted for the missing data. How does such a substitution make sense unless one can convince oneself that it gets colder the closer one gets to the equator?
What does it mean if the major recent data sets are unreliable? First and foremost, it is a catastrophe for climate scientists, since they use these data as the basis of nearly every study they do. If the data are garbage, then every one of the thousands of studies using those data are also garbage. ........ Continued
Jim Lacey is professor of strategic studies at the Marine Corps War College. He is the author of the recently released The First Clash and Keep from All Thoughtful Men.
Roll that one around in your brain a little bit. The scientific method demands questioning and reliance on objective observations. Being asked to believe in a scientific consensus, in spite of observations to the contrary, is the exact opposite of science.
It makes me feel like Norman in Star Trek (I, Mudd - Episode #37 TOS). An illogical contradiction.
I consider Global Warming to be junk science.
I consider Evolution to be junk science also.
Both topics inspire a religious ferocity in their adherents who cannot comprehend that anyone hasn't "seen the light". There is the notion for each of these that we're dealing with "settled science". An awful lot of scientists disagree.
Jon Huntsman in particular. BTW Huntsman is just Charlie Crist running for President.
The author asks:
“Make no mistake about it, the warmist agenda aims at nothing less than a curtailment of individual freedoms and the further destruction of our economy. You can’t be rich if you’re energy poor. When did this become something Republicans could support? For that matter, when did it become something thinking Democrats could support? “
The assertion that I love out of Warmists (and Darwinists) is that if you reject their theories, you are rejecting the “science” that allows for all our present technological advancements.
That’s like saying if you use fire to cook your food, you must become an arsonist.
No? hm... then ask yourself why not? because, they don't actually care about this global warming nonsense, they are just using the issue to push their agenda. And the second the issue changes and no longer supports their agenda, they will lose all interest in it.
I’m wondering if Perry believed the science when he bragged about Texas leading the nation in wind energy.
> as if the science behind global warming was supported by
> even a tenth as much evidence as we have for evolution.
Neither Evolutionism nor Global Warming/Climate Change are observable, falsifiable, repeatable, testable, verifiable, science.
They are congruent in all these aspects, so it is not surprising the rabid Warmists are also rabid Evolutionists.
Same source. Humanism. Rejection of God, and worship of the creation (see Romans 1).
Warmists believe that humans are just another evolved-from-goo critter and therefore shouldn't be using more resources from the planet than any other evolved-from-goo critter. Warmists also need a "reason to be" since they are nothing special. "Saving the erf" is their "reason to be", it's why they matter.
Perry environmental stance would transform EPA ....>>>>>Perry "approaches the issues from a very libertarian bent," said Jim DiPeso , policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection. "The EPA would be in for some significant budget reduction. There would be no new intiatives, no regulatory programs that would be initated. There'd be litigation from environmental groups that believe he's not enforcing the Clean Air Act and Water Act as robustly as the law provides."
"Any regulatory programs would be really throttled back," he said. "He has shown no interest in climate policy at all. He doesn't accept the science."
With the governor's blessing, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is challenging at least six EPA greenhouse gas-related regulations. The state's underlying argument: The fundamental finding that greenhouse gases are a public health threat is scientifically flawed.
The federal government is pushing "hastily enacted, cascading regulations" on states and businesses, Abbott argued in a June brief filed on behalf of nine states in federal court.
Perry's approach to energy, DiPeso said, "would be to produce more," rather than discourage the development of energy projects, such as coal plants, that emit greenhouse gases associated with global warming.
"In terms of energy, (Perry) would pursue what many Republicans call the 'all of the above' strategy, with more energy development offshore and onshore," DiPeso said. <<<<<
Finding middle ground on EPA-Texas electric squabble [EPA doesn’t do “middle” ground] “Texas' grudge match with the Environmental Protection Agency is getting nastier and riskier, with the fallout threatening to reach the state's power grid. Want another reason to worry about the lights staying on? Or how about another hit to the economy? You've heard lots of political posturing about Texas' way of life being threatened by an overreaching federal government. This time, Gov. Rick Perry has a point. …………..
Don't be surprised if the attorney general jumps in after Perry slammed the rule for threatening Texas jobs and families and putting reliable, affordable electricity at risk. Late last week, 31 members of Congress from Texas, including eight Democrats, signed a letter to the White House asking for relief. The utility commission also filed objections with the EPA.
MONTANA: Legal gamesmanship threatens our energy future “Texas Gov. Rick Perry is able to boast about job growth under his watch, noting that over 265,000 jobs, or nearly 37 percent of the jobs created nationwide since the summer of 2009, have been created in the Lone Star state.
Recent headlines highlight two major resource development projects slogging through endless legal and regulatory challenges. Investment flees this kind of uncertainty, so Montanans interested in the future economic stability of this state should be wary of the signals we send…” --- [relates short history of 2 outrageous examples] --
“The common experience for Tongue River Railroad and Tonbridge Power is this: Even if you play by the rules, even if you follow the letter of the law, even if you engage with the public during a planning process, even if you get formal approval from the regulatory authorities, you are certain to face organized opposition whose sole intent is to frustrate project development to the point of financial starvation…...................”
CALIFORNIA: …..“Texas Gov. Rick Perry has become a folk hero for people like Stewart as he's marketed his state as a low-cost and business-friendly alternative to California, which is fertile job-hunting ground for Perry.
Texas has added 929,000 jobs since 2001, while California has lost approximately 635,000 manufacturing jobs in that same time, Stewart said.
Answering questions after his speech, Stewart told the story of Perry sending programmed cellphones to CEOs in California with a simple message: "If you're interested in growing your business, please call me. I'm here to help."
"They're doing something right down there," Stewart said of what he dubs the "Texas miracle." "Gov. Perry will go anywhere, any time, to try to recruit companies into Texas."
Perry has taken the state's regulatory process and managed it himself, Stewart said………
[CA Economic Development Corporation President Mark] Lascelles emphasized that it does no good to belabor California's regulatory environment.
"Unfortunately, we can't avoid it. We have to deal with it," he said. Speaker focuses on job creation
Rick Perry: Al Gore's gone to Hell
Good and accurate analysis in http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2768279/posts?page=10#10
Thank you.
I really don’t care about your pre written justifications or your lack of moral courage.
Lets talk about a little science. Does the moons orbit around the earth have variations? Does the earths orbit around the sun have variations? Does the energy output of the sun have variations? Are any of these a lesser or greater effect on our planets temperature than a few parts per million more or less of atmospheric CO2? Are any of these factors something man can change?
I am sorry that evolution theory and global warming have been compared and brought together in this article.
They are two different areas, widely separated.
Global Warming is verifiably a fraud.
You can support alternative energy for conservation and pollution reasons, and reject AGW, as is the case with Perry.
> If you take a strain of some bacteria that is susceptible
> to an antibiotic and subject it to that antibiotic you will
> find that you can generate bacteria that over time have
> resistance to the antibiotic.
So, was there any new information created in the DNA, or was information that made the bacteria susceptible lost?
Was the bacteria anything other than bacteria after the experiment?
And after tens of thousands of generations of mutated fruit flies, did we ever get anything other than a fruit fly?
This is just a microbiology repeat of the long discredited “Pepper Moth” case for evolution.
I used to be an evolutionist, but the evidence against it is simply too abundant and compelling.
If you’re curious ...
see http://www.icr.org/
and http://creation.com/
If you will remember, it was the Left that wanted to teach “Ebonics” in school.
It was the Left that wanted to teach “alternative math” because the little morons couldn’t add and subtract.
The Left holds NO high ground when it comes to REAL education.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.