I Am Blog-Of-The Week! I so totally (heart) Stephen Green!
PJTV Video (Week In Blogs) - Obama Girl's Crush is Gone: "At least I wasn't the Edwards Girl." I Am Blog-Of-The Week! I so totally (heart) Stephen Green!
5 minutes ago
This isn't the first time OBL has condemned America for contributing to global warming. I wrote the following in The Really Inconvenient Truths:Perhaps Al Gore could take a lesson from one unlikely convert to the cause of global warming alarmism. In his September 2007 rant from the cave, Osama bin Laden repeated what many liberal environmentalists believe:And to those confused about OBL's views on oil, he wants it to remain in the ground in Islamic lands for future Islamic use. According to his logic, selling it to the West, even for exorbitant sums, is selling the family silver.The life of all mankind is in danger because of global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations; yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistics speak of the death and displacement of millions of human beings because of global warming, especially in Africa.Now, unlike Gore, Osama is walking the walk. As my colleague Myron Ebell pointed out, he’s cut down on his air travel, telecommutes from home, and it appears he doesn’t use a car at all. Myron concludes, “Osama appears to have adopted the ideal radical environmentalist lifestyle down to the very last detail — it really is back to the cave.”
You’ve got to like this guy. Senator-elect Scott Brown e-mails donors:I'm eager to get to work in Washington, but before I do I wanted to thank you in person.
Starting this Friday and through Sunday, I will be meeting you and fellow supporters to thank you for your support. I truly appreciate all that you have done for this movement. I will never forget those that were with me even when we were considered a long shot.
Please join me and fellow supporters at:
Friday, January 29
12:00 PM, Hu Ke Lau restaurant, 705 Memorial Drive, Chicopee
7:00 PM, Falmouth Inn, 824 Main Street, Falmouth
Saturday, January 30
1:00 PM, Kowloon Restaurant, 948 Broadway Street – Rt. 1, North Saugus
3:30 PM, Lenzi’s Catering, 810 Merrimack Avenue – Rt. 110, Dracut
6:00 PM, Maxwell-Silverman Restaurant, 25 Union Street, Worcester
Sunday, January 31
5:00 PM, Christina’s Function Facility, 2 Washington Street – Rt. 1, Foxboro
Over at HuffPo, the founder of DeSmogBlog tries to divert attention from the collapsing "consensus" on global warming by saying that it's all the fault of a decades-long "climate confusion campaign" waged by, among others, the Competitive Enterprise Institute. While it is nice of him to give us the credit for the good sense of the American people, his Scooby Doo-style "if it wasn't for those meddling kids" argument actually represents the real attempt to muddy the waters.
Take, for example, his attempts to dismiss two of the many recent scandals to have befallen the seemingly accident-prone climate-science establishment:Leiserowitz points to the damage caused by “Climategate” and “Glaciergate.” He is partially right; those scandals did cause damage. Unfortunately the damage was inflicted on climate scientists.Yes, a crime was committed in Climategate. The Information Commissioner in the U.K. has now confirmed that the University of East Anglia broke the law by failing to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests. The climategate e-mails clearly reveal the complicity of many of the leading names in climate science in that crime. Unfortunately, thanks to a spectacularly badly-worded statute, the Information Commissioner is unable to punish the guilty for this crime. As to whether the e-mails were "hacked" by "thieves," that remains an open question. All we have is the knowledge that the e-mails came into the possession of the public without the express consent of the authors. That may be the work of thieves, or it may be the work of a whistleblower. If there is any under-reporting here, it relates to the failure of journalists to adequately investigate whether a leak, rather than a hack, occurred. The fact that the UEA's own Mike Hulme is referring to the event as a leak might tell you something.
The real let-down was the media’s obsession with the mythology that scientists had somehow made up global warming by cooking the data. Anyone who took the time to review the emails or the glacial records knows that assertion is patently false.
The real damage caused by these scandals resulted from the lazy reporting done by most journalists on the subject. The media failed to report the real story of “Climategate” — that a crime was committed by thieves who stole from a prestigious university in order to further an agenda of harassment against climate scientists. And while “Glaciergate” was an embarrassing screw-up by the IPCC, it didn’t change the fact that glaciers are melting worldwide, causing sea level rise that is already affecting coastal communities.
As for Glaciergate, the hysteria about sea-level rise is overdone. The IPCC itself estimates the current contribution of glacial melt to sea-level rise is 1.19 mm a year. The specific issue at play in glaciergate, the melting of Himalayan glaciers, has been a major factor in Indian politics, and therefore yet another example of supposed scientists hyping pure speculation in order to effect political action they view as desirable, thereby subverting the democratic process. The reaction in India — far from the reach of CEI — has been severe, with the Indian government now distancing itself from Rajendra Pachauri, the Indian national who is head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The real issue here is that climategate, glaciergate, Amazongate, disastergate, Sterngate, and all the other "warmergate" stories that are currently making headlines reveal a consistent pattern of behavior: scientists making unwarranted politically-motivated claims from the data they are supposed to be objectively examining. It should be blindingly obvious that public trust in scientists would slip as a result. But the damage was done by scientists as well as to scientists.
Virtually all the advice from the Left on this subject has been for scientists to improve their communication skills, as if another layer of spin will help. As the British government's new chief scientific adviser notes, perhaps the best advice is simply for scientists to be more honest about the uncertainties in climate-change science. That will allow their advice to be given the correct weight by the public and their representatives in the democratic process. Any other advice is simply confused.
Defensive, hectoring, self-righteous, self-referential, and angry. An astonishing performance. ....
I forgot to add "petulant."
To me, the most blatant thing in the Climategate e-mails was the obvious attempts to circumvent legal requirements under the U.K.'s Freedom of Information (FOI) act. It appears the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) agrees, but has found itself powerless to do anything because the University of East Anglia/CRU scientists stonewalled long enough for the statute of limitations to pass. The ICO told the Sunday Times in the U.K.:The emails which are now public reveal that Mr Holland’s requests under the Freedom of Information Act were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation. Section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information. Mr Holland’s FOI requests were submitted in 2007/8, but it has only recently come to light that they were not dealt with in accordance with the Act.This being the case, I find it hard to believe that the UEA's internal investigation will not recommend severe disciplinary action against the UEA scientists involved. Anything less would demonstrate an appalling disregard for the spirit of the Freedom of Information laws.
The legislation requires action within six months of the offence taking place, so by the time the action taken came to light the opportunity to consider a prosecution was long gone. The ICO is gathering evidence from this and other time-barred cases to support the case for a change in the law. It is important to note that the ICO enforces the law as it stands – we do not make it.
I wholeheartedly agree with Kevin's assessment of the SOTU address and also believe Jefferson got it right. What is interesting in its monarchical design, though, is that it compares unfavorably to its actual monarchical counterpart. The Queen's Speech at the State Opening of Parliament also lays out the priorities of the executive for the year. The difference is that, despite all the splendor (crown, throne, Lords walking backwards, Silver-Stick-in-Waiting, Black Rod, etc.), it actually downplays the content of the speech and provides little glory to the government. Her Majesty reads the speech from paper in a flat monotone, while the chap who actually wrote it has to stand crammed in a small alcove literally rubbing shoulders with his worst political enemy (or, in Gordon Brown's case, the Leader of the Opposition). Advantage the Constitutional Monarchy there, I think