Investment and other financial matters

Archive for February, 2012

How to Expose a Warmist: Andrew Bolt Interviews Australia's Al Gore

The reason Al Gore doesn’t do interviews …

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/06/20/how_to_expose_a_…

June 20, 2010 By Tom Minchin
Introduced by Tom Minchin

The global warming movement is in heavy retreat in every Western country.
But, as we have learned
from the rise of leftist leaders like President Obama and Australia’s Prime
Minister Kevin Rudd,
modern collectivists are resilient. If they can recover from the collapse of
Communism, they can
certainly rebuild the environmental movement. Now is not the time to
celebrate, but to press home
the exposure of their bogus claims and hidden interests.

TIA Daily readers will therefore appreciate the uncompromising interview
style of Australian
journalist Andrew Bolt as he eviscerates one of the world’s leading warming
alarmists, Tim
Flannery-a man in the mold of Al Gore. The interview took place on radio in
Melbourne, Australia on
June 9.

Andrew Bolt has given TIA Daily permission to reproduce the interview in
full.

The debate begins with Bolt asking Flannery about his disillusionment with
the Australian
government over its ditching of Cap and Trade:

Flannery: I’m unlikely to vote for him [Rudd] because my trust has been
eroded away…. He promised
to deliver an emissions trading scheme and he’s then withdrawn that with
very little
justification….

Bolt: He said he wouldn’t move now until the rest of the world did something
which is a direct
repudiation of what he said before. But, Tim, part of the reason, of course,
that he’s backed down
is that there’s been a great swing in sentiment against this kind of thing,
there’s a rising tide
of skepticism. How much are you to blame for some of that?

Flannery : There is some swing in sentiment. And I think it’s very hard to
maintain any issue with
that sort of very high level of support for a long time. So there’s some,
but what is happening
around the world should give us all heart. We’ve seen China now pledged to
reduce is emissions
intensity by over 40 per cent.

Bolt: It’s still going to build a coal-fired power station every week or so.

Flannery: And what that is going to do if that’s achieved by 2020 is put us
on track to avoid
dangerous climate change. But for us to do that, places like Australia and
the US, the wooden
spooners in this debate, actually have to do their part.

Bolt: But, Tim, I’m just wondering, there has been a rise in skepticism.
That’s precisely why the
Liberals [the Australian Liberal party is closer to the classical pro-free
market 19th-century
meaning of that term rather than its modern sense], for example, have
switched from supporting an
ETS to opposing it…and they dumped their leader over it. Now I’m wondering
to what extent are you
to blame for rising skepticism about some of the more alarming claims about
global warming.

Flannery : Well, many of the things that scientists highlight may happen are
very alarming. They’re
not alarmist but they are worrisome. Rises in sea-levels, for instance, are
a significant issue.

Bolt: Well, let’s go through some of your own claims. You said, for example,
that Adelaide may run
out of water by early 2009. Their reservoirs are half full now. You said
Brisbane would probably
run out of water by 2009. They are now 97 per cent full. And Sydney could be
dry as early as 2007.
Their reservoirs are also more than half full. How can you get away with all
these claims?

Flannery: And thankfully, Andrew, governments have taken that to heart and
been building some
desalination capacity such as in Perth.

Bolt: Only in Perth.

Flannery: No, there’s plans in every capital city.

Bolt: No, no, no, you said Brisbane would run out of water possibly by as
early as 2009. There’s no
desalination plant, there’s no dam.

Flannery: What I have said is that there is a water problem. They may run
out of water. And …

Bolt: 100 per cent full, nearly! 100 percent full.

Flannery: That’s a lie, Andrew. I didn’t say it would run out of water. I
don’t have a crystal ball
in front of me. I said Brisbane has a water problem.

Bolt: I’ll quote your own words: "Water supplies are so low they need
desalinated water urgently,
possibly in as little as 18 months." That was, on the timeline you gave, by
the beginning of 2009.
Their reservoirs are now 97 per cent full.

Flannery: Yeah, sure. There’s variability in rainfall. They still need a
desal plant.

Bolt: You also warned that Perth would be the 21 century’s first ghost
metropolis.

Flannery: I said it was…may.

Bolt: It’s all "may." Right?

Flannery: Because at that stage there had been no flows into that water
catchment for a year and
the water engineers were terrified.

Bolt: Have you seen the water catchment levels here, see, they’re tracking
above the five year
level. I’m showing you now.

Flannery: You know what I came in here to talk about, Andrew, here? It’s our
farm day we’re doing
with our Deakin lecture series in Bendigo, at the Bendigo town hall today.
And it’s a really
exciting event…

Andrew: All that’s lovely, Tim. But I think you need to be held to account
for the alarmism that is
in part your stock in trade, your shtick, and is responsible for what you
now see-the retreat from
global warming policies.

Flannery: You want to paint me as an alarmist.

Bolt: You are an alarmist.

Flannery: I’m a very practical person.

Bolt: I’m asking you to defend these quotes.

Flannery: Well, I’ve done that already

Bolt: You said the Arctic could be ice free two years ago. [Actually, last
year.]

Flannery: No I didn’t…

[The show host, Steve Price interrupts, and they argue over the
questioning.]

Bolt: I’m asking Tim whether he repents from all these allegations about
cities running out of
water, cities turning into ghost cities, sea level rises up to an
eight-story-high building. Don’t
you think that is in part why people have got more skeptical?

Flannery: I don’t, actually, because some of those things are possibilities
in the future if we
continue polluting as we do. And we’ve already seen impacts in southern
Australia on all of those
cities. Everyone remembers the water restrictions and so forth. Just because
we get a good, wet
year doesn’t mean we should forget about the problem. We actually have to
deal with this long term
drying trend and that means securing our water supply.

Bolt: You warn about sea level rises up to an eight-story building. How soon
will that happen?

Flannery: Asking that question is it’s a bit like asking a stock analyst
when the next stock market
crash is going to happen and how big it’s going to be. No one can. We can
all see the underlying
weakness in the market in the months before the crash.

Bolt: Thousands of years?

Flannery: Could be thousands of years.

Bolt: Tens of thousands of years?

Flannery: Could be hundreds of years.

Bolt: Hundreds of years?

Flannery: It could be hundreds of years. The thermo- dynamics of ice sheets
are very, very
difficult to predict, but what we do know when we look back is the fossil
record is that when the
world is a degree or two warmer than it is now seal levels rise very
significantly-between four and
14 meters above where they are. We can’t say how long it takes for that rise
to happen because the
fossil record just isn’t good enough, it isn’t accurate enough…

Bolt: Should we also have nuclear power plants?

Flannery: In Australia I don’t think so. We’ve got such a great load of
assets in the renewable
area that I don’t think there’s an argument here that they are ever going to
be economic.

Bolt: Four years ago you did. What changed your mind?

Flannery: No, I never did. I’ve always had the same argument.

Bolt: No, no, no. Here’s your quote: "Over the next two decades Australians
could use nuclear power
to replace all our coal-fired power plants. We would then have a power
infrastructure like France
and in doing so we would have done something great for the world." That was
your quote.

Flannery: I don’t recall saying that at all.

Bolt: You wrote it. You wrote it in The Age. There it is, highlighted.

Flannery: Well ,very good.

Bolt: That’s the point, you know, you make these claims and when people
confront you, you walk away
from them.

Flannery: But that was about "may." No, no, you said "may." And Australia
may be able to do that.
It’s not what I recommend and I never have recommended it. But what I do
say…

Bolt: "We would have done something great for the world."

Flannery: But what I do say, nuclear power, right, getting away from coal
would be great for the
world. Why should we take the most expensive option in this country, which
has always been
recognized as having the most expensive and difficult option. We are going
to see a whole lot of
other technologies and innovations which are now well under way which we
could use instead of
nuclear power.

Bolt: Such as?

Flannery: Such as concentrated PV technology, geothermal technology, wave
power, wind power…

Bolt: You’re an investor in geothermal technology , aren’t you? [Flannery’s
investment in
geo-thermal technology received a $90 million grant from the Australian
government last year.]

Flannery: Yeah, I am. Indeed.

Bolt: How come you don’t declare that.

Flannery: Well, I’ve just done it.

Bolt: You just did because I told you. You said that geothermal, which you
are an investor of,
you’ve got a plant, you’ve invested in a plant in Innamincka and you said
the technology was really
easy. How come that plant…

Flannery: Not really that easy.

Bolt: Well, yes. It’s actually had technological difficulties and it’s been
delayed two years
because it’s not that easy, after all, is it?

Flannery: Well, any new technology is going to be difficult to bring to
fruition. It’s a bit like
generation for nuclear. There’s challenges all the way. But in terms of
geothermal there are many
places in the world where you can actually drill down and get into a hot
rock body such as…

Price: Andrew, we’re going to have to go.

Tom Minchin is a contributor to TIADaily.com and a writer, researcher, and
businessman in
Melbourne, Australia.

.
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Faking Polls To Show Nonexistent Support For Global Warming "Action"

Faking Polls To Show Nonexistent Support For Global Warming "Action"

June 21 2010

QUOTE: "There are many different questions about climate change, none of
them perfect, but almost all, except Mr. Krosnick’s, show a significant
decline in belief in manmade climate change."

QUOTE: Gallup’s classic "Most Important Problem" question: "What do you
think is the most important problem facing this country today?"

When public opinion pollsters ask the public this question or variants of
it, global warming invariably comes in dead last.

Sometimes the surveys find that not one person answers "global warming."

QUOTE: Krosnick gets different results to other pollsters by asking
questions that some might consider bizarre.

For example, when people told him that they didn’t believe global warming
was happening, he asked them to pretend they did by asking them, "Assuming
that global warming is happening, do you think a rise in the world’s
temperature would be caused mostly by things people do, mostly by natural
causes, or about equally by things people do and by natural causes?"

Stanford University’s Jon A Krosnick, a communications guru and advisor to
the global warming camp, scored a coup in a New York Times oped last week
that discredits polls by firms such as Gallup and Pew Research Center.

The highly cited oped, entitled "The Climate Majority," claims that these
pollsters and others have it backwards and that "huge majorities of
Americans still believe the earth has been gradually warming as the result
of human activity and want the government to institute regulations to stop
it."

For example, Krosnick’s own poll shows, "When respondents were asked if they
thought that the earth’s temperature probably had been heating up over the
last 100 years, 74% answered affirmatively. And 75% of respondents said that
human behaviour was substantially responsible for any warming that has
occurred."

Krosnick, an expert in questionnaire design, produces studies geared to
explaining why people answer the way they do, and how to get them to answer
differently.

One recent paper dealt entirely with one of the biggest embarrassments to
the global warming camp, Gallup’s classic "Most Important Problem" question:
"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?"

When public opinion pollsters ask the public this question or variants of
it, global warming invariably comes in dead last.

Sometimes the surveys find that not one person answers "global warming."

To get a better result, Krosnick lumped "global warming" in with "the
environment" and didn’t limit the question to the US, asking "What do you
think is the most important problem facing the world today? 7% then answered
"Global warming/the environment."

Krosnick then found he could double that result by shifting the problem away
from today, with the following question: "What do you think will be the most
important problem facing the world in the future?"

The best question of all, Krosnick found, came from adding an assumption of
pessimism:" What do you think will be the most serious problem facing the
world in the future if nothing is done to stop it?"

When put this way, 25% of the public responded with "Global warming/the
environment."

Krosnick doesn’t tell us how many of that 25% choose global warming versus
the myriad of other environmental issues, such as air pollution, food and
drinking water safety, wildlife and species protection, farmland or
woodlands protection.

Krosnick recommends that pollsters ask his 25% question, believing it will
obtain a result more useful for policy makers.

He also chastises the press for interviewing global warming sceptics along
with global warming advocates, saying this creates in the public mind the
impression that the science is not settled on global warming. 6% of articles
on global warming last year included the views of sceptics, a percentage
Krosnick evidently views as too high.

Krosnick gets different results to other pollsters by asking questions that
some might consider bizarre.

For example, when people told him that they didn’t believe global warming
was happening, he asked them to pretend they did by asking them, "Assuming
that global warming is happening, do you think a rise in the world’s
temperature would be caused mostly by things people do, mostly by natural
causes, or about equally by things people do and by natural causes?"

He then lumped the pretend response from people who don’t believe in global
warming with a similar question asked of people who weren’t pretending about
their belief in global warming.

The result of the merger of these two groups was: 30% blame global warming
on humans, 25% blame global warming on natural causes, and 45% believe
humans and natural causes are about equally to blame.

In the New York Times oped, Krosnick summarized this finding by pretenders
and believers as "75% of respondents said that human behaviour was
substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred," even though
many of those 75% didn’t believe that global warming was happening at all.

To see some of Krosnick’s questions, albeit in an odd format, click here

Krosnick did not release the full report to public scrutiny; neither did he
show the public the context for his questions.

What do the major polling firms think of Krosnick’s work?

Not much.

Here’s a response from the President of Pew Research:

"Mr. Krosnick posits that his question is more legitimate than others. It is
but one approach and hardly ideal. The question’s preamble is ‘you may have
heard about the idea that the world’s temperature may have been going up
slowly’ and then asks whether this is ‘probably’ happening.

Such wordings often encourage a positive response: this is known in the
polling world as acquiescence bias.

"There are many different questions about climate change, none of them
perfect, but almost all, except Mr. Krosnick’s, show a significant decline
in belief in manmade climate change."

Pew Research not only found fewer in 2009 seeing solid evidence of global
warming, but also fewer calling it a very serious problem and fewer naming
warming a top priority for the president and Congress.

"Mr. Krosnick unfairly faults Gallup for asking whether climate change has
been exaggerated, saying that it taps into views of media coverage.

But Fox’s rather direct question – "Do you believe global warming exists?" –
shows the same trend:

a 19 percentage point decline in belief in global warming between 2007 and
2009.

"And while Mr. Krosnick cites ABC News/Washington Post survey results as
similar to his, he doesn’t note that this poll also found a 12 percentage
point decline in the number saying global warming is occurring.

"Far from being definitive, Mr. Krosnick’s finding is but one indicator and
an outlier at that."

And here is Gallup’s conclusion: "Mr. Krosnick’s article gave the
impression . of an attempt to dismiss certain survey trend results because
they did not fit his overall thesis."

The media-savvy Krosnick, of course, knows all this without advice from Pew
and Gallup.

As he also knows, a winning communication strategy and an accurate one are
entirely separate things.

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/06/21/lawrence-solomon-global-w…

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

Blind Ideology Is Dancing On The Grave Of Reason

The greens believe they will save the planet.

The leftists believe they will create the brotherhood of man. The
anti-Zionists believe they will turn suicide bomb-belts into cucumber
frames.

The atheists believe they will create the Garden of Reason. And the
Islamists believe they will create the kingdom of God on earth.

15 May 2010

QUOTE: Across a broad range of issues, the progressive intelligentsia
appears to have junked the rules of evidence, objectivity and rationality in
favour of fantasy, irrationality and upside-down thinking.

QUOTE: Take man-made global warming, for example.

The belief that the planet is on course for carbon Armageddon is now
embedded in Western politics. Yet the evidence that the climate is warming
to an unprecedented and catastrophic degree just isn’t there.

QUOTE: Rather than going where the evidence leads, ideology wrenches the
evidence to fit a prior idea. Not only is ideology inimical to reason, it
sacrifices truth to power as it attacks those who try to uphold reality in
the face of dogma

QUOTE: Contemporary secular ideologies identify the sins committed by
humanity – oppression of the people of developing nations, despoliation of
nature, bigotry, poverty, war – and offer salvation by a return to
righteousness.

Thus the greens believe they will save the planet. The leftists believe they
will create the brotherhood of man. The anti-Zionists believe they will turn
suicide bomb-belts into cucumber frames. The atheists believe they will
create the Garden of Reason. And the Islamists believe they will create the
kingdom of God on earth.

QUOTE: By turning truth and lies, victim and aggressor, justice and
injustice upside down, the West cannot even recognise, let alone deal with,
the threats being mounted to its own values and civilisation.

In Britain, the benefits of diversity are apparently boundless. Now that the
Pagan Police Association has received government recognition, police
officers can take a string of pagan festivals as official holidays.

These include celebrating the festival of lactating sheep, and drinking mead
and dancing naked to celebrate the harvest. In court, pagan officers will be
allowed to pledge to tell the truth not before God but by what ‘they hold
sacred’, including, presumably, the Sun God or Kriss Kringle, the Germanic
god of yule.

In Australia, as historian Keith Windschuttle has chronicled in his new book
The Stolen Generations – volume three of his tireless evisceration of The
Fabrication of Aboriginal History – the allegedly monstrous theft of 100,000
Aboriginal children by Australian officials just because they were
Aboriginal never actually happened.

In the US, when a car bomb was planted recently in New York’s Times Square
by a man later revealed to be a Muslim trained in bomb-making in Pakistan’s
Waziristan region, there was an initial stampede to declare the attempted
atrocity was unconnected to Islamic terrorism.

It was said to be most likely the work of a Tea Party member, right-wing
militiaman or lone nut. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg even suggested the
bomb could have been placed by ‘somebody with a political agenda who doesn’t
like the healthcare bill or something’.

What has Britain come to when its police officers are given leave to dance
about naked?

How can generations of Australians have been taught the egregious falsehood
of the Stolen Generations as fact?

And how many times have Tea Party members or people opposed to a piece of
legislation tried to commit mass murder against their fellow Americans,
compared with the number of recent attempts by Muslim terrorists?

Such intellectual perversity can be understood only in the context of a far
wider and profound retreat from reason throughout the West.

Across a broad range of issues, the progressive intelligentsia appears to
have junked the rules of evidence, objectivity and rationality in favour of
fantasy, irrationality and upside-down thinking.

Take man-made global warming, for example.

The belief that the planet is on course for carbon Armageddon is now
embedded in Western politics. Yet the evidence that the climate is warming
to an unprecedented and catastrophic degree just isn’t there. The seas are
not rising, the ice is not shrinking, the polar bears are not vanishing, and
there has been no significant climate warming since 1995.

Or take the Middle East. Israel is the victim of six decades of
exterminatory aggression from the Arab and Muslim world. Yet it is Israel
that is expected to make concessions to its attackers, who are said by the
West to deserve a state of their own. Meanwhile, the US extends its hand of
friendship to Iran, which is building a nuclear bomb to commit another
Jewish genocide.

Closer to home, ‘minority rights’ mean activities previously marginalised or
considered transgressive are now privileged through ‘family lifestyle choice’
or multiculturalism.

Dissenters from these creeds are socially and professionally ostracised.
Academics are hounded as racists for upholding the true historic origins of
Western civilisation. Scientists sceptical of man-made global warming find
funding is withheld. And those sounding the alarm about the true scope of
the Islamic jihad are demonised as warmongering neo-cons or part of a Jewish
conspiracy.

Such irrationality, intolerance and, indeed, bigotry run counter to the
cardinal tenets of a free society based on reason and the toleration of
dissent.

This is because these dominant ideas are all rooted in ideologies:
environmentalism, anti-racism, anti-Americanism, anti-imperialism,
anti-Zionism, egalitarianism or scientism, the belief that scientific
materialism alone explains everything.

Rather than going where the evidence leads, ideology wrenches the evidence
to fit a prior idea. Not only is ideology inimical to reason, it sacrifices
truth to power as it attacks those who try to uphold reality in the face of
dogma.

This is because the progressive mindset believes it is synonymous with
virtue itself. All opposition is therefore not just wrong but evil. Since
progressives also believe anyone who opposes them is a right-winger, it
follows that all dissent is right-wing and evil, and so must be shut down.

In other words, these are not propositions to be debated in a rational way
but are seen as self-evident truths with the infallibility of religious
dogma.

They also smack of the political totalitarianism of communism and fascism,
as well as resembling, ironically, the fanatical doctrines of militant
Islam. Curiously, they also display religious motifs of sin, guilt and
salvation.

Odder still, they all exhibit features of millenarianism: the religious
belief in the perfectibility of life through the collective redemption of
sin.

Contemporary secular ideologies identify the sins committed by humanity –
oppression of the people of developing nations, despoliation of nature,
bigotry, poverty, war – and offer salvation by a return to righteousness.

Thus the greens believe they will save the planet. The leftists believe they
will create the brotherhood of man. The anti-Zionists believe they will turn
suicide bomb-belts into cucumber frames. The atheists believe they will
create the Garden of Reason. And the Islamists believe they will create the
kingdom of God on earth.

Dissenters are dismissed because they deny the unchallengeable truths of
anti-imperialism, environmentalism and scientific materialism. The
explanation for the frustration of Utopia must therefore lie in conspiracies
by the neo-cons or the Jews, Big Oil or the Creationists.

The result is not merely that the West has become irrational.

By turning truth and lies, victim and aggressor, justice and injustice
upside down, the West cannot even recognise, let alone deal with, the
threats being mounted to its own values and civilisation.

With ideology eroding the principles of rationality and freedom, truth and
justice on which it rests, the West is failing to understand what it is that
it cannot understand, and so cannot grasp the mortal danger in which it
stands.

The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power by
Melanie Phillips is published by Encounter, New York.

http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new/?p=738

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (5)

One Cool Mayor Derails The Council Gravy Train!!

Go Peter Davies and show up the rest of them as greedy pigs with their
snouts in the trough.

June 23 2010

QUOTE: He disregards all "green claptrap", is creating more parking spaces
to encourage traffic in the town for the benefit of business  "I’m not green
and I’m not conned by global warming".

QUOTE: He is ending Doncaster’s twinning with five towns around the world,
an arrangement which he describes as "just for people to fly off and have a
binge at the council’s expense".

Gerald Warner hails the counter-revolution that’s broken out in the
Yorkshire town of Doncaster, thanks to the new directly elected mayor, Peter
Davies:

In his first week in office he cut his own salary from 73,000 to 30,000,
which is putting one’s money where one’s mouth is.

He also scrapped the mayoral limousine.

He is ending Doncaster’s twinning with five towns around the world, an
arrangement which he describes as "just for people to fly off and have a
binge at the council’s expense".

He intends now to reduce (that’s right, reduce) council tax by 3 per cent
this year.

The "diversity" portfolio has been abolished from the council’s cabinet.
From next year no more funding will be given to the town’s "Gay Pride"
event, on the grounds that people do not need to parade their sexuality,
whatever it may be, at taxpayers’ expense.

Black History Month, International Women’s Day and the Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Transgender History Month are similarly destined to become
history.

Council funding of translation services for immigrants has been scrapped
because he believes incomers should take the trouble to learn English.

He aims to abolish all non-jobs on the council, as epitomised by "community
cohesion officers".

He is taking advice from the Taxpayers’ Alliance and the Campaign Against
Political Correctness.

He disregards all "green claptrap", is creating more parking spaces to
encourage traffic in the town for the benefit of business ("I’m not green
and I’m not conned by global warming").

He has asked the Electoral Commission to reduce the number of Doncaster’s
councillors from 63 to 21

"If Pittsburgh can manage with nine councillors, why do we need 63?".

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/com…

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Re: Greenland temperature much higher during MWP

"gordo" <grmerr…@shaw.ca.remove> wrote in message

news:14d526t0m6hdnnotee1rv53ul9ntdopr8k@4ax.com…

- — -

> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:26:45 -0700 (PDT), richp
> <travelingman95…@gmail.com> wrote:

>>On Jun 23, 2:32 pm, "bw" <bweg…@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Kobashi et al. (2010) constructed a history of the last thousand years
>>> of
>>> central Greenland surface air temperature, based on values of isotopic
>>> ratios of nitrogen and argon previously derived by Kobashi et al. (2008)
>>> from air bubbles trapped in the GISP2 ice core that had been extracted
>>> from
>>> central Greenland (72 36′N, 38 30′W). The results, shown in the figure
>>> below, reveal that the latter part of the Medieval Warm Period was
>>> approximately 1.67 C greater than the temperature of the last decades of
>>> the
>>> 20th century, which climate alarmists claim to have been the warmest of
>>> the
>>> past millenniumhttp://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/studies/l1_gisp2.php

>>CO2SCIENCE IS A BULLSHIT SITE YOU MORON
> The most recent editorial in CO2SCIENCE has in its second line
> "Climate alarmists".This is not how scientists talk but it is about
> how propaganda is done.

Right then!

"Climate Denialists" This is not how scientists talk but it is about
how propaganda is done.

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."
Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"
"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Gillard the lizzard faces barrage of tax questions

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/24/2936070.htm

Newly sworn in Prime Minister Julia Gillard has faced a concerted Opposition
attack over the Government’s proposed mining tax in her first Question Time as
leader.

Just hours after she was sworn in Ms Gillard faced off against Opposition Leader
Tony Abbott in what may be the last sitting day before the election.

Ms Gillard and her new deputy Wayne Swan were forced to answer questions about
their loyalty to Kevin Rudd after he was dumped by his party in favour of Ms
Gillard.

The Parliament was also rocked by Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner’s announcement
that he will quit at the next election.

The proposed tax and Mr Rudd’s inability to find a resolution to the fierce
resistance from the resources industry has been causing angst amongst some Labor
MPs anxious about retaining their seats.

In her first media conference as Prime Minister, Ms Gillard said the Government
would suspend its ads about the tax and urged mining companies to do the same in
a bid to break the deadlock.

BHP has since announced it will suspend its ads and there are reports the
Minerals Council of Australia will do the same.

But Ms Gillard faced a series of questions from Mr Abbott over the tax, which
will apply to companies’ super profits at a rate of 40 per cent.

"Given the Prime Minister’s claim to want genuine negotiations over the design
on her great big new tax on mining, I ask as a sign of good faith, will she
remove from the budget the $12 billion in net revenue estimated to be generated
by the tax in its current form?" he said.

Ms Gillard replied that the Government was committed to negotiating in good
faith over the design of the tax.

"I have said to the mining companies of this nation that the Government is
opening the door and we are asking them to open their minds," she said.

Midnight knock

Ms Gillard and Mr Swan also faced several accusations that they were disloyal to
Mr Rudd, who watched the proceedings from the backbench.

Opposition education spokesman Christopher Pyne took the opportunity to question
whether Ms Gillard was too busy securing the leadership to pay attention to
allegations of waste and mismanagement in the Building the Education Revolution
program.

"Rather than delivering her programs successfully, has she been more focused on
delivering the bloodstained knock on the door at midnight?" he said.

Ms Gillard defended her decision to run for the leadership because she felt the
Government had "lost its way".

"I did also form the view that the best way of making sure that this Government
was back on track, providing to the Australian people the leadership they
deserved… was to take the course that I took last night and this morning," she
said.

She also acknowledged that she was responsible for all of the Government’s
decisions to date, including the mistakes made.

And she sought to turn the focus back on Opposition policies by accusing Mr
Abbott of wanting to bring back WorkChoices if he was elected as prime minister.

As debate continued well into the afternoon Ms Gillard declared it was "game on"
between her and Mr Abbott while the Opposition accused the Government of being
run by union bosses.

Before the Opposition commenced its attack both sides of politics paid tribute
to former prime minister Kevin Rudd, who still looked emotional as he sat on the
backbench following his teary press conference earlier today.

"I believe that every member of this place would be full of admiration for the
remarkable and dignified way he has conducted himself today," Ms Gillard said.

Earlier today Ms Gillard pledged to lead a more inclusive Government after
criticisms the "gang of four" dominated decision making.

She also indicated she would revive the Government’s climate change policy after
the Government’s decision to shelve its emissions trading scheme was seen as a
major contributor to the dive in Mr Rudd’s popularity.

The party’s decision to dump Mr Rudd for Ms Gillard was executed in less than 24
hours after factional leaders and key unions last night switched their support
to Ms Gillard.

Key powerbrokers were convinced that under Mr Rudd Labor could not win the next
election. He is the first Labor leader to be dumped before the end of a first term.

Ms Gillard says she will call an election in the "coming months" and will not
live in the Lodge until after the election if she is returned as prime minister.

Mr Abbott says Ms Gillard’s ascension to the leadership does not change the
policies of the Government and the only way to get rid of the mining tax is to
vote Labor out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
  – KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
  – Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
  – Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
  – Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
  – Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees …"
  – Borke, pissed as a newt again.

"Well may we say ‘God save the Queen’ because nothing will save the governor
general!"
  – Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.

"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!"
  – FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour’s economic capabilities.

"I don’t care what you fuckers think!"
  – KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.

"We’ll just change it all when we get in."
  – Garrett the carrott

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (5)

Re: Artic sea ice anomaly increasingly more negative

Arctic Ocean Warming, Icebergs Growing Scarce

"The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some
places the seals are finding the water too hot," according to a Commerce
Department report published by the Washington Post. Writes the Post:
"Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers. . . all point to a
radical change in climate conditions and . . . unheard-of temperatures in
the Arctic zone . . . Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of
earth and stones . . . while at many points well-known glaciers have
entirely disappeared."

More evidence of human-caused global warming?

Hardly.

The above report of runaway Arctic warming is from a Washington Post story
published Nov 2 1922 and bears an uncanny resemblance to the tales of global
warming splattered across the front pages of today’s newspapers.

It is one of many historical accounts published during the past 140 years
describing climate changes and often predicting catastrophic cooling or
warming.

Here are excerpts from a few of those accounts, appearing as early as 1870:

"The climate of New-York and the contiguous Atlantic seaboard has long been
a study of great interest. We have just experienced a remarkable instance of
its peculiarity. The Hudson River, by a singular freak of temperature, has
thrown off its icy mantle and opened its waters to navigation."

- New York Times, Jan. 2, 1870

"Is our climate changing? The succession of temperate summers and open
winters through several years, culminating last winter in the almost total
failure of the ice crop throughout the valley of the Hudson, makes the
question pertinent. The older inhabitants tell us that the winters are not
as cold now as when they were young, and we have all observed a marked
diminution of the average cold even in this last decade."

- New York Times, June 23, 1890

"The question is again being discussed whether recent and long-continued
observations do not point to the advent of a second glacial period, when the
countries now basking in the fostering warmth of a tropical sun will
ultimately give way to the perennial frost and snow of the polar regions."

- New York Times, Feb. 24, 1895

Professor Gregory of Yale University stated that "another world ice-epoch is
due." He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress
and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great
Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be "wiped out."

- Chicago Tribune, Aug. 9, 1923

"The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and southward advance of
glaciers in recent years have given rise to the conjectures of the possible
advent of a new ice age"

- Time Magazine, Sept. 10, 1923

Headline: "America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line
Records a 25-year Rise" – New York Times, March 27, 1933

"America is believed by Weather Bureau scientists to be on the verge of a
change of climate, with a return to increasing rains and deeper snows and
the colder winters of grandfather’s day."

- Associated Press, Dec. 15, 1934

Warming Arctic Climate Melting Glaciers Faster, Raising Ocean Level,
Scientist Says – "A mysterious warming of the climate is slowly manifesting
itself in the Arctic, engendering a "serious international problem," Dr.
Hans Ahlmann, noted Swedish geophysicist, said today.

- New York Times, May 30, 1937

"Greenland’s polar climate has moderated so consistntly that communities of
hunters have evolved into fishing villages. Sea mammals, vanishing from the
west coast, have been replaced by codfish and other fish species in the
area’s southern waters."

- New York Times, Aug. 29, 1954

"An analysis of weather records from Little America shows a steady warming
of climate over the last half century. The rise in average temperature at
the Antarctic outpost has been about five degrees Fahrenheit."

- New York Times, May 31, 1958

"Several thousand scientists of many nations have recently been climbing
mountains, digging tunnels in glaciers, journeying to the Antarctic, camping
on floating Arctic ice. Their object has been to solve a fascinating riddle:
what is happening to the world’s ice?

- New York Times, Dec. 7, 1958

"After a week of discussions on the causes of climate change, an assembly of
specialists from several continents seems to have reached unanimous
agreement on only one point: it is getting colder."

- New York Times, Jan. 30, 1961

"Like an outrigger canoe riding before a huge comber, the earth with its
inhabitants is caught on the downslope of an immense climatic wave that is
plunging us toward another Ice Age."

- Los Angeles Times, Dec. 23, 1962

"Col. Bernt Balchen, polar explorer and flier, is circulating a paper among
polar specialists proposing that the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that
the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two."

- New York Times, Feb. 20, 1969

"By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching
earth by one half …"

- Life magazine, January 1970

"In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large
areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead
fish."

- Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day, 1970

"Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is
taken against problems facing mankind. We are in an environmental crisis
which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable
place of human habitation."

- Barry Commoner (Washington University), Earth Day, 1970

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor, "the planet will
cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born."

- Newsweek magazine, Jan. 26, 1970

"The United States and the Soviet Union are mounting large-scale
investigations to determine why the Arctic climate is becoming more frigid,
why parts of the Arctic sea ice have recently become ominously thicker and
whether the extent of that ice cover contributes to the onset of ice ages."

- New York Times, July 18, 1970

"In the next 50 years, fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere
by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the
Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions
over five to 10 years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age."

- Washington Post, July 9, 1971

"It’s already getting colder. Some midsummer day, perhaps not too far in the
future, a hard, killing frost will sweep down on the wheat fields of
Saskatchewan, the Dakotas and the Russian steppes. . . ." – Los Angles
Times, Oct. 24, 1971

"An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of
climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30
years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere."

- New York Times, Jan. 5, 1978

"A poll of climate specialists in seven countries has found a consensus that
there will be no catastrophic changes in the climate by the end of the
century. But the specialists were almost equally divided on whether there
would be a warming, a cooling or no change at all."

- New York Times, Feb. 18, 1978

"A global warming trend could bring heat waves, dust-dry farmland and
disease, the experts said. Under this scenario, the resort town of Ocean
City, Md., will lose 39 feet of shoreline by 2000 and a total of 85 feet
within the next 25 years."

- San Jose Mercury News, June 11, 1986

"Global warming could force Americans to build 86 more power plants-at a
cost of $110 billion-to keep all their air conditioners running 20 years
from now, a new study says…Using computer models, researchers concluded
that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two
degrees by 2010, and the drain on power would require the building of 86 new
midsize power plants

- Associated Press, May 15, 1989

"New York will probably be like Florida 15 years from now."

-St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 17, 1989

(actually Florida was more like New York 20 years later)

"[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of
North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and
food riots . . . [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while
a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on
interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers . . . The
Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico
seeking work as field hands."

- "Dead Heat: The Race Against the Greenhouse Effect," Michael Oppenheimer
and Robert H. Boyle, 1990.

"It appears that we have a very good case for suggesting that the El Ninos
are going to become more frequent, and they’re going to become more intense
and in a few years, or a decade or so, we’ll go into a permanent El Nino. So
instead of having cool water periods for a year or two, we’ll have El Nino
upon El Nino, and that will become the norm. And you’ll have an El Nino,
that instead of lasting 18 months, lasts 18 years," according to Dr. Russ
Schnell, a scientist doing atmospheric research at Mauna Loa Observatory.

- BBC, Nov. 7, 1997 (followed immediately in late 1998 by three straight
years of La Nina)

"Scientists are warning that some of the Himalayan glaciers could vanish
within ten years because of global warming. A build-up of greenhouse gases
is blamed for the meltdown, which could lead to drought and flooding in the
region affecting millions of people."

-The Birmingham Post in England, July 26, 1999

"This year (2007) is likely to be the warmest year on record globally,
beating the current record set in 1998."

- ScienceDaily, Jan. 5, 2007

Arctic warming has become so dramatic that the North Pole may melt this
summer (2008), report scientists studying the effects of climate change in
the field. "We’re actually projecting this year that the North Pole may be
free of ice for the first time [in history]," David Barber, of the
University of Manitoba, told National Geographic News aboard the C.C.G.S.
Amundsen, a Canadian research icebreaker.

 - National Geographic News, June 20, 2008

"So the climate will continue to change, even if we make maximum effort to
slow the growth of carbon dioxide. Arctic sea ice will melt away in the
summer season within the next few decades. Mountain glaciers, providing
fresh water for rivers that supply hundreds of millions of people, will
disappear – practically all of the glaciers could be gone within 50 years. .
. Clearly, if we burn all fossil fuels, we will destroy the planet we know .
. . We would set the planet on a course to the ice-free state, with sea
level 75 metres higher. Climatic disasters would occur continually."

 - Dr. James Hansen (NASA GISS), The Observer, Feb. 15, 2009.

Climate change? Yes, there has been plenty of that during the past 140
years. Despite warnings by "experts of the day" of approaching climate
disasters, mankind somehow managed to survive.

A decade or so from now, after earth’s climate changes once again, those who
are old enough will recall with amusement the time, early in the 21st
century, when the world went crazy over an imaginary threat called "global
warming."

Kirk Myers is one of the few environmental reporters who is bothering to
look at actual data – not reading from the guidelines provided by the
Society of Environmental Journalists.

We applaud him for his boldness.

http://www.examiner.com/x-32936-Seminole-County-Environmental-News-Ex…

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

Warmest Regards

Bonz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Re: Will Gillard be any better?

fasgnadh wrote:
> B J Foster wrote:
>> Malcolm Farr:
>> "If Kevin Rudd has made clunky decisions over the past six months, so
>> has Julia Gillard".

> Not as many as Tony Abbott, the Howard WorkNoChoices Clone.

Reported in the WSJ:
"for markets, this should not be a destabilizing event because Mr. Rudd
and Ms. Gillard aren’t far apart on policy".

And in fact, the sharemarket hardly moved. Julia Gillard was a member of
the caucus that decided to dump

Also reported in the WSJ:
Anglo’s Tropicana gold project in western Australia, has been dumped
from the company’s top-10 list of most important projects. The reason is
that "the Australian government is proposing to impose a 40% tax on
miners that could endanger the economic viability of the project"

Plus ca change…

Don’t expect any change in funadmentals – just a change in tone, a touch
conciliatory, a smile a wink – less agreesion maybe and the appearance
of being willing to talk – but *no* *change* in the fabian/marxist
nationalisation agenda.

Prove me wrong!

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (6)

Your managing account chance

Hello

By God’s Will, You can join our managing account service at one of our
well trusted brokers right now joining our results and the chances in
the forex market on just 20% performance fees and 1 pip commission
with no imposed management fixed fees. The trading can start for you
on a power of attorney agreement which enable the broker to execute
our deals and distribute the profits sharing each month directly. You
can ask for joining this service or for our trading results via
sending m…@fx-recommends.com to watch what we have had recently from
the forex market which exceeded over 100% in less than 3 months in a
conservative trading attached to this email to have an idea about the
used trading exposure strategies for managing for dealing with this
market which is really risky and rewarding in the same time and needs
a lot of experiences for dealing with it. To join the managing account
service, You can just open your own account by yourself at one of our
recommended brokers. Our contact appointed person at one of these
brokers will contact you to help you on your request to join this
service officially easily on. The initial monthly target of this
program is from 5% to 10%. You can add more funds or withdraw any
amount of funds or quit the trading at anytime.

Regards
FX Consultant
Walid Salah El Din
E-Mail: m…@fx-recommends.com
http://www.fx-recommends.com

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

The Climate Change Scam Is Part Of A Wider Movement Towards Irrationality And Ideology

The Climate Change Scam Is Part Of A Wider Movement Towards Irrationality
And Ideology

An inversion has occurred:

Ideology takes precedence over facts and lies trump truth.

A review of "The World Turned Upside Down"

by Melanie Phillips

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED READING!

May 9 2010

QUOTE: Ms. Phillips lives up to her reputation for tackling political and
social issues in this attempt to create an overarching thesis for why we
have seen such absurdities as climate change fraud, political correctness
run amok, unbalanced portrayals bordering on propaganda regarding Islam and
Israel, and the war in Iraq.

QUOTE: Climate change is the hot topic of the day, and Phillips methodically
charts the rise of the "movement."

A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming.

QUOTE: Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is
to show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result.

QUOTE: AGW, it is "a quasi-religious belief system; and the only reason it
was sustained for so long was through the abuse of authority and
intimidation of dissent."

QUOTE: We truly do live in a world upside-down, whether we see it in the
world of science, on the airwaves of Britain, or in the streets of America.
An inversion has occurred: Ideology takes precedence over facts and lies
trump truth.

QUOTE: Paul Johnson, the English historian, wrote a fine epitaph of the
final years of the 20th century that also served as a prophecy for how the
21st century would devolve:

"One of the keys to understanding the twentieth century is to identify the
beneficiaries of the decline in formal religion. The religious impulse, with
all the excesses of zealotry and intolerance it can produce, remains
powerful, but expresses itself in secular substitutes."

Melanie Phillips, the columnist for the British newspaper the Spectator, has
written a fine new book: The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle
Over God, Truth and Power.

Ms. Phillips lives up to her reputation for tackling political and social
issues in this attempt to create an overarching thesis for why we have seen
such absurdities as climate change fraud, political correctness run amok,
unbalanced portrayals bordering on propaganda regarding Islam and Israel,
and the war in Iraq.

This is a challenge that Phillips meets head-on and masters.

Climate change is the hot topic of the day, and Phillips methodically charts
the rise of the "movement."

A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming.

There is more than a taint of ideology involved:

Many of the advocates of AGW view the Western world and its way of living as
the culprits. Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The
goal is to show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce
such a result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the
data and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result.

An example of this is the infamous "hockey stick" developed by Michael Mann
that purports to show a steep rise in global temperatures coincident with
the rise of industry. In fact, the hockey stick is now seen to have been the
result of creative misuse of numbers and data by Mann

(now the subject of investigation in the wake of Climategate — the release
of e-mails from a research center in England revealing efforts by climate
change advocates to suppress opposing views).

The models may be wrong (after all, it is fiendishly complicated to try to
model the complex world of weather), but all too often, so is the data that
is fed into them. The maxim of "garbage in, garbage out" holds true in
climate research. Advocates dummy up data to feed their already fragile
models.

One example:

data regarding temperatures come from data collected from old machinery
located close to heat sources. This distorts the accuracy of the results.
Instead of ground stations, satellites can be used to give a more accurate
view of the world’s temperatures — which show far less "climate change"
than that claimed by advocates of AGW. But of course, that data is not used.

Skeptics of AGW are suppressed and ridiculed. Plots are hatched to punish
them. They are ostracized and cursed. Their arguments are shunted aside. All
these attacks are focused on creating the hysteria needed to bring about
massive change in the Western world — as well as help out the budgets and
bank accounts of groups formed to promote the AGW myth.

Al Gore and his rapidly growing fortune, and number of lavish mansions,
constitute just one manifestation of the get-rich-quick schemes hatched by
purveyors of the myth of man-made climate change.

As Phillips writes of AGW, it is "a quasi-religious belief system; and the
only reason it was sustained for so long was through the abuse of authority
and intimidation of dissent."

Ms. Phillips then tackles more political issues: the Iraq War and the
Israel-Arab conflict.

Her vantage point is London, where she lives and works.

We are given an insight into how Europe views America — particularly how it
viewed George Bush (not well, unsurprisingly). The same fictionalizing of
history displayed by liberals in our media was exhibited by liberals in
British media. As in the section of her book regarding AGW, Phillips
compiles an exhaustive — and stimulating — record of foolishness on the
part of liberals.

But there was an additional dynamic at work.

Anti-Israel animus is far more widespread in Europe than in America, and
that undoubtedly played a role in how the invasion of Iraq was perceived
from those shores.

The animus towards Israel is, like AGW, inexplicable if one looks only at
facts. But facts don’t animate as much as ideology does.

The Arabs-as-victims narrative is pervasive on all levels of society. There
is an inversion at work: Despite the onslaught that Israel has experienced
even before its creation and the anti-Semitism that has swept through the
Arab world, Jews are pictured as oppressors, and Arabs (more numerous than
Israelis by a multiple of fifty) are the victims.

This is regardless of the fact that England itself has been subject to
terror attacks, not just from the Irish during the days of the troubles, but
from Muslim terrorists themselves. This is the result of political
correctness from on high being broadcast to the entire citizenry of England.

The BBC, once regarded as a sterling source of honest news, has been
tarnished by its outright propaganda regarding the Middle East. This bias is
not just anecdotal; it is based on independent studies

But will there be a change in the BBC coverage?

After reading Phillips’ analysis of the facts on the ground — and the
weakness and moral emptiness at the top of British leadership — one may not
have high hopes for a reversion to reason.

We truly do live in a world upside-down, whether we see it in the world of
science, on the airwaves of Britain, or in the streets of America. An
inversion has occurred: Ideology takes precedence over facts and lies trump
truth.

Even religion has undergone a radical change, and Phillips takes a brief
foray into the world of "exotic" religions that seem to be proliferating at
a rapid clip.

But this points out the fundamental cause, as Ms. Phillips sees it, of why
the world flipped around.

Judeo-Christian religions, based on the core values of Judaism, have been
downgraded in our lives.

The precepts that other generations have lived by have been cast aside, or
perhaps cast onto the junk heap. These values are what provided a foundation
for the scientific method and of rationality. Now they are disparaged by
many (church attendance is almost non-existent in England).

When that foundation was removed, what moved into the moral vacuum? Feelings
and ideology, with a big slug of irrationality.

Paul Johnson, the English historian, wrote a fine epitaph of the final years
of the 20th century that also served as a prophecy for how the 21st century
would devolve:

"One of the keys to understanding the twentieth century is to identify the
beneficiaries of the decline in formal religion. The religious impulse, with
all the excesses of zealotry and intolerance it can produce, remains
powerful, but expresses itself in secular substitutes."

These are the zealots who control much of our world now and who are driving
us down very perilous roads.

These are the zealots that Melanie Phillips has done a superb job
identifying and battling in her superb new book.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/the_world_turned_upside_down.html

Warmest Regards

Bon_0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments