Well, now that The Won has rewon control he is showing his true statist, elitist, Marxist and collectives colors... And, of course so-called man made global warming, which offers an excellent way to destroy the economy, which is Obama's goal, is at the top of the list.
And we hear more and more of carbon trading and "revenue neutral." Which are just two words describing something that is pure bull shit. But, something that our more ignorant populace will but into. But, being forever the optimist, I thought I would post some notes to "John," a mythical yet very real member of the low information voter population that elected Obama.
John, tell us more about this "revenue neutral" thing. Do you mean the government takes money from us and gives it to someone else? Why yes. That's what you mean.
You are being played for a fool and that's a shame. But you don't have to let it happen.
"The physics of how carbon dioxide traps infra-red radiation is well known. But there are other molecules in the atmosphere that also trap infra-red radiation. Water vapour is the predominant “greenhouse gas”. What is not so clear is the extent to which the trapping of energy causes heating. There are wonderful mathematical models that claim to show how heating occurs.
Unfortunately, all the models suffer from identifiable flaws, a point considered later."
Read the article. And consider this. Models are statistical COMPUTER programs and they are based on data. The question is, is the data accurate or does GIGO apply? (Garbage In Garbage Out) And even worse, data can be changed to get a desired result.
And when asked for the data.
"I received a letter back from CRU stating that I couldn't have the data because "we do not hold the requested information."
'I found that odd. How can they not hold the data when they are showing graphs of global temperatures on their webpage? However, it turns out that CRU has in response to requests for its data put up a new webpage with the following remarkable admission:'
Here is what the CRU wrote:
"We are not in a position to supply data for.....we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data".
Think about that, John. England's prestigious East Anglia University and home of the Climate Research Unit which is a huge proponent of alarmist man made global warming (MMGW) admits they don't have the original data, just the DATA THEY HAVE CHANGED.
John, remember the old joke? Trust me? I'll respect you in the morning...The check's in the mail.... And speaking of money...
"Whether the billions of promised aid dollars will really materialize is another matter. But a lot of people have already gotten rich – including Al Gore, hundreds of climate scientists, and thousands of environmental activists and government bureaucrats – and others are trying to cash in. "
And to be more specific let's look at Mann. You know, the guy who developed the "hockey stick" graph. The one that left out the Medieval Warming period and is now discredited...
"Prominent global warming alarmist Michael Mann, who often asserts that scientists who are skeptical of his alarmist global warming theories are motivated by making money, charges $10,000 plus expenses for speaking fees, Media Trackers Florida has learned. The revelation about Mann’s exorbitant speaking fees comes as Mann prepares to give a global warming presentation at a taxpayer-funded Florida public college. Mann will be speaking at Valencia College Thursday, January 17, at 1:00 pm."
Yeah, John. That's $10K of TAXPAYER money. You know. Money that could go on education...
But let's return to the issue of, can we trust the people who are pushing this? First, let's go back a few years and see what was being said:
"To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest."
- Leading greenhouse advocate, Dr Stephen Schneider ( in interview for "Discover" magagzine, Oct 1989).
Look, John that is just a plain and simple justification for lying to the public. You can't make it out to be anything else. Tell me, do you like to be lied to?
Now let's skip forward and see what Dr. Phil Jones, of East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit... Remember them? You know, the ones who didn't save the original data, just the CHANGED data?.... wrote in an email. An email, by the way, that he thought would remain private. So he was writing what he believed to a friend.
"The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant."
Now that's true, but that was 2005 and the change has continued. Let's look at some more Jones' emails.
"As you know, I'm not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn't being political, it is being selfish.
What? "see climate change happen?" John, Jones' just admitted IT HASN'T HAPPENED. (Remember, he's speaking of MMGW, not the natural change that has been happening for millions of years.)
So there you go, John. Study. Think. And try and disconnect "environment" from "climate change." We can have a clean environment without destroying our economy by tripling the cost of the energy that runs our world.
"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." - Karl Popper
“It’s the presumption that Obama knows how all these industries ought to be operating better than people who have spent their lives in those industries, and a general cockiness going back to before he was president, and the fact that he has no experience whatever in managing anything. Only someone who has never had the responsibility for managing anything could believe he could manage just about everything.” - Thomas Sowell in Reason Magazine