Tag Archives: climate change


It is interesting to observe how an entire political faction will change the words it uses to further its agenda. Advocates move in unison as though some central agreement had been published forbidding the use of the prior term. For example, using consistent sources for measurement our planet’s warmest year in recent history was in 1998. That’s fourteen years ago and long enough to weaken the political case for global warming. So the “global warming” mantra is dropped in favor of the term “climate change”. It’s a safe bet that the warmers cause will never be threatened by climate stability in the future. Climates simply aren’t stable.

On another point, have you noticed the Democrats are no longer in favor of raising taxes? The public doesn’t take kindly to having taxes increased. Raising taxes on the other fellow is ok of course, but not on me. Democrats now talk about revenue increases.
And the Dems aren’t spenders anymore either. They have given that up. Now they invest. They invest it in things like food stamp programs, stimulus plans and corporate bailouts. It takes a willful suspension of disbelief to call spending “investment” but willful suspension is what they do.

There is however, one thing Democrats do call spending. And that is saving. When the government allows you to save more of your own money than they allowed in the past, it’s called a “tax expenditure”. Confused? Let me explain; your mortgage deduction is called a government expense, the Bush tax relief was called a government expense. Anything that allows you to keep more of your earnings than the government would like you to keep is called a government expense (actually the preferred word is “expenditure”). If you listen carefully you will hear it.

The mindset that views your mortgage deduction as a government expense is a mindset that believes your money belongs first to the government. How else could you explain that a reduction in what the government takes away from you could considered to be a government expense?
You can not stop the world from choosing words inappropriately to distort your thinking, but you can learn to recognize and guard against it when it happens.


Poor Al Gore, his schtick is losing its oomph.  The temperature stats are in for 2011 are in.  NASA has declared that global warming ended in 1997.  And a report from the British meteorological authorities at the infamous East Anglia University laboratories agrees.  For the alarmists out there I would point out these reports are not from Rush Limbaugh.  They are from NASA and East Anglia, the United Nation’s most favored source for climate change data.

The UK Daily Mail reports,

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met [Meteorological] Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997. 

There were some warming deniers but the serious debate over the last decade or more was about the cause, not the temperatures.  The cautionary side said “We think the reason the planet is warming is because the sun is emitting more heat.  It’s a cycle.  It’s not because there are too many lawn mowers and farting cows.  We know that scientists disagree over whether or not the warming is anthropological.  Let us not be rash lest we wind up playing Don Quixote to the sun.

The alarmists, on the other hand, stated flatly that the warming was man-made.  They said the science is settled, which it is not.  The warming alarmists also claimed there is a consensus and that proves their point of view.  But consensus has no standing in science.  Consensus once held that the sun revolves around a world that is flat.  Science politicized is science polluted.

The hoax is still running.  There is still money to be made.  But when the mantra changes from the Global Warming Crisis to the Climate Change Crisis it’s a sign the easy money has already been made.


Measuring greenhouse gases on conservation agr...


Shawn Domagal-Goldman, a NASA affiliated scientist, joined with colleagues at Pennsylvania State University to complete a study that warns of possible dire consequences from extra extraterrestrials if they sense how we are destroying the planet.  I kid you not; it’s in the report.

From the UK Guardian

Humanity may just now be entering the period in which its rapid civilisational expansion could be detected by an ETI [Extra Territorial Intelligence] because our expansion is changing the composition of the Earth’s atmosphere, via greenhouse gas emissions,” the report states.

“Green” aliens might object to the environmental damage humans have caused on Earth and wipe us out to save the planet. “These scenarios give us reason to limit our growth and reduce our impact on global ecosystems. It would be particularly important for us to limit our emissions of greenhouse gases, since atmospheric composition can be observed from other planets,” the authors write.

Are there any sane scientists left or have they all gone Gore?


You have seen the headlines: Europe Closed Again Due to Winter Storms, Snow in Baghdad Second Time Ever, Record Cold Reported Here, Record Cold Reported There, Polar Bears Cuddle with Cubs to Keep Them From Freezing. Now fast forward a couple of years.

April 1, 2017.
Today the New York Times published an article entitled “Hudson Tunnels to Be Abandoned When River Dries Up.” UN scientists predict global cooling will cause water levels to drop 48 feet by 2040. As temperatures cool, much of the precipitation that normally falls will remain in a solid form called ice. The more water that remains in this solid form, the less there will be to feed future precipitation (rain and snow). As this vicious cycle proceeds, oceans will begin to recede and the world will begin to reveal itself. There is little hope for change in the outlook, scientists say.

A minister who recently moved to Florida blamed it on the government. “They lied! They lied!” he repeated. “The government had a program to stop the warming so certain people would die! Now the chickens have come home to roost.”

Economists worry that declines in the value of prime property could precipitate a financial crisis if rich people who own waterfront property default on their mortgage payments. Republicans are holding Obama responsible, while Democrats are blaming Bush. Truthers say Bush wanted to dry up the Gulf coast so Texas would be bigger and Obama wanted Kenya to be a little cooler so he could retire to his home in comfort. We say its because the sun has lost some of its spots. It’s not anthropogenic at all. The climate change issue is just like this post, a lot of nonsense.


ABC reports from Cancun:

Encroaching seas in the far Pacific are raising the salt level in the wells of the Marshall Islands. Waves threaten to cut one sliver of an island in two. “It’s getting worse,” says Kaminaga Kaminaga, the tiny nation’s climate change coordinator.

The rising ocean raises questions, too: What happens if the 61,000 Marshallese must abandon their low-lying atolls? Would they still be a nation? With a U.N. seat? With control of their old fisheries and their undersea minerals? Where would they live, and how would they make a living? Who, precisely, would they and their children become?                    (Emphasis ours)

However, the oceans around the Marshalls haven’t risen since the 1930’s and salt in the wells is due to excessive depletion by the pineapple growers, not from “encroaching seas.” According to world renowned sea level scientist Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, the claim that this sea level is rising is a total fraud and he presents the science to back up his assertion.

Further down the ABC report we find this:

This week in Cancun and in the months to come, the Marshalls’ representatives will seek international aid for climate adaptation. They envision such projects as a Jaluit causeway, replanting of protective vegetation on shorelines, and a 3-mile-long (5-kilometer-long) seawall protecting their capital, Majuro, from the Pacific’s rising tides.

It’s always about the money, isn’t it? In fact it’s only about the money, isn’t it?


Harold Koh put it well when he said global warming is a tool “to level the playing field”. The global warming issue is not only a tool of local government, it is also a tool of international socialism, one world government. The leveling Koh referred to was leveling between nations, a bringing down of the strong and bringing up the weak. Equality of status is the goal.

The failure of the Copenhagen conference to get a treaty signed was a crushing blow to the Left. The treaty as written would have established a transnational government agency with control over all signatory nations in matters deemed to affect the environment. It also would have legitimized the concept of pre-established “climate debt”, the idea that successfully functioning nations owe a debt to the lesser prosperous nations on the grounds that the former have emitted more carbon dioxide. Two major goals would have been reached in one treaty, as both power and wealth would have been “spread around” between nations.

Transnationalism is the term for the advocacy of a one world power. The United Nations is a transnational agency. Transnationalism is by its nature a darling of the Left as it melds the strong with the weak, the accomplished with the dysfunctional and the noble with the rogue. Proponents of socialism think big. They are not constrained by reality. Given a one world government the bliss of socialism could be brought to the whole world in one fell swoop.

Man-made global warming, or “climate change” as it is now called, is the tool du jour. Unfortunately, there is no scientific analysis that rises to the level of proof as to the cause of the current warming cycle. Certainly there is no proof the warming that has occurred is man-made. But proof doesn’t matter. What matters is does the tool work. And it does.