Today I saw a video clip of a news conference held by Lord Monckton in Copenhagen. In the meeting, many young people from the United States stand up and start chanting slogans. Their slogans drown out the person doing the speaking. In trying to regain order, Lord Monckton compares the youth doing the chanting to the Hitler Youth. The source at Townhall.com suggested that a better comparison would be to Mao’s thugs in the Cultural Revolution. Either way the result is the same, a legitimate use of the microphone is overcome by thugs chanting slogans. The youths probably thought they were being clever in using this tactic. They know there will not be any criticism of their actions in the fringe press.

The believers in global warming act like those who believe in a religion. They cannot handle any dissention because that would seriously undermine the authority of the belief in supreme “truth”. The fact that global warming is built on a house of lies is another story, yet also part of this story as well.

In religion, when talking about things that require faith, the best thing to do is bear your testimony of your belief in the truth of the faith. Discussing specific doctrinal questions can sometimes get interesting in religious settings. If the church has a long and spotty history like the Catholic Church, then you can get caught up in defending things that cannot be defended. All religions have some parts that members and believers do not want to talk about because the topics do not show the religion in a good light.

Global warming is a hoax. It was not intended to be an idea that was supposed to have widespread acceptance. The original global warming idea was just to obtain funding for some marine research projects in the South Pacific. After global cooling died out, the believers in global cooling latched onto the idea of global warming to take up the slack. People just kept feeding in information and explanations to answer critics. Eventually it grew all out of the realm of what it originally was intended to do. This mainly happened after the fall of communism in the early 1990’s. As the communists took over the global warming movement, the ideas and goals of global warming gradually morphed into the goals of communism. It is amazing how that worked out like that.

Now the global warming crowd is meeting in Copenhagen, supposedly discussing how to save the planet from the evils of global warming. All you hear coming out of the meetings is talk about how the poorer countries want more money and the rich countries want to maintain control over their money. The only time you hear anything about saving the planet; it is from the people that easily debunk global warming with “real” scientific facts, instead of the fabricated “facts” that have been used by global warming believers. It is obvious to anyone who watches even 5 minutes of this monstrosity being foisted off as a conference, that the purpose of the conference is money and how to get your share.

The entire event would be comical, if it were not so dangerous. Our government is over there participating in the conference. Our President has threatened to sign the agreement that was expected to come out of this monstrosity. From the looks of things the agreement may not happen as originally planned because of the climate gate memos. I am never one to enjoy leaks, but in this case I am making an exception. This is the most delicious case of leaking I have ever seen. The left is in a tizzy and does not know what to do to minimize the damage. The conference is losing a lot of steam because of the memos. Things are looking up, but are still extremely dangerous.

Today, I was reading Phil Brennan at Newsmax.com and learned that man really has caused global warming. Phil was talking about the manipulation of the temperature data in New Zealand and how the early temperatures were reduced and the more current ones were raised. This caused a false upturn in temperature. But, it was entirely man-made. So, the global warming people are right about one thing. Man is the cause of (the appearance of) global warming.

The global warming believers are meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark. They are acting as if the climate gate memos were never found. If the memos are mentioned at all, they are dismissed as thefts and not important to the discussion. Since the world does not believe the last round of fantastic forecasts, we are being treated to a new round of even more fantastic forecasts.

The one thing that nobody ever comments on is the fact that the predictions of the global warming alarmists are ALWAYS wrong. Even when they appear right, they are off by a lot. Not one global warming enthusiast predicted the current cooling trend. All of the global warming enthusiasts dismiss this cooling trend as something very temporary. After the cooling period is over the global warming will reappear as if nothing had intervened. At least that is the story being told by the “true believers”. Fortunately, there are not as many of them today as there were a year ago.

Glenn Beck showed a commercial from Europe showing polar bears falling from the sky. That was one of the more disgusting commercials I have ever seen. The connection to 9/11 was pretty great as at first it appeared the polar bears were jumping from the buildings. The thrust of the commercial was to try and persuade people to stop flying. Glenn’s reaction to the commercial was decidedly negative. Mine was also negative. I am sure that other people had a similar reaction. Glenn and I cannot be that much out of touch with reality.

The purpose of the conference in Copenhagen is the transfer of wealth from the rich countries to the poor countries. There is no global warming. Global warming is the biggest scientific hoax since the Piltdown man in the early 20^th century. In the Piltdown man, the evidence was planted. Then when questioned it was discovered that it was the skull of a human and the jaw of an ape. This global warming hoax has many of the same elements. The evidence was not planted, it was falsified. The Piltdown man influenced scientific thought for about 50 years before it became completely debunked. We do not have 50 years to debunk global warming. It needs to occur within the next 12 months.

In a related event, the EPA decided that one of the essential gases on the planet is a pollutant. The EPA ruled yesterday t hat carbon dioxide is a pollutant and can be regulated by the EPA. Carbon dioxide is something all animals breathe out. All plants take in carbon dioxide to produce oxygen and produce our food. That is not something that is a pollutant. A pollutant is something that is bad, not essential for life. But, the EPA is not really interested in saving the planet or reducing pollution. They are involved in the wealth transfer from wealthy Americans to poorer Americans and the transfer of wealth from America to the rest of the world. That is more important than being scientifically accurate. The EPA is showing itself a political organization, not a scientific organization. It had a reputation of stupidity, but it did show some scientific rigor. Now, all pretense of allegiance to science is thrown out the window. All allegiance to the political ends of the socialist Democrat party is paramount. Science can take a back seat to politics.

We need to get back to an administration that respects science. Right now, we have people spouting scientific terms to justify socialist ends. That is not science, it is politics. As a scientist, I am outraged that science has been politically hijacked. There was a time when a scientist making a statement about science could be trusted. Now, you have to look into that person’s politics before you can believe them. That is terrible. Scientists should stick to science. Politicians should stick to politics. If a politician wants to politicize science, then let them do it all alone. As a scientist I will not stand up and back a politician unless his science is sound. Since most politicians do not know the first thing about science, that means if a politician talks about science, don’t believe them.

A short time ago, the computer files were hacked that contained sensitive emails from Global Warming Pushing Scientists to themselves. These files contained a treasure trove of information that details how the Global Warming Pushers have buffaloed everyone for so long.

Since they know that global warming is a crock, it is easy to “cook the books”. They did this in a number of ways. One was to add data to what they had to make the temperature levels rise or at least level out. Another was to ignore “inconvenient truths” that did not fit the model they wanted. By cooking the books and closing ranks around the false data, they made it extremely difficult to fight against the hoax that is global warming.

Anyone who strayed from the orthodoxy was ridiculed or even destroyed professionally. They played for keeps. They took no prisoners. They gloated when someone who did not believe as they did died and wondered how they could make more die.

They made sure that if you “believed” you got grants to fund research to your heart’s content. They only thing the believers asked in return was that the conclusion of your research supported global warming. Since they were the source of your funding, the scientists involved were very glad to oblige.

Now the fallout begins from the scandal. The leading climate scientist that has led the global warming cry in England for decades has resigned in disgrace. Other shoes will fall as the scandal widens and more people become aware of it. Politicians have to be shaking in their boots. Their grand design on your pocketbook is now in jeopardy. If the public becomes aware of the scandal, the ability to pass any cap and tax system will come crashing down.

Barack Obama is ignoring the scandal. Of course, he has surrounded himself with the most scientifically aware scientists in the world. That was sarcasm. His cadre of scientific advisors does not contain one scientist that believes in the truth. All of them are highly motivated supporters of global warming. As a result, the Obama administration is ignoring the scandal and going to Copenhagen. In Copenhagen, they hope to sign away US sovereignty for a reduction of 17% in greenhouse gases. You know the ones, those that you breathe in and out every breath. They make it sound like a pollutant, but plants require it for life and you produce it every breath. You are not about to produce a pollutant in your own body.

The best thing about the Copenhagen fiasco that Obama is going to commit is that it has to be confirmed by the US Senate. Now, generally that is a good thing, but in this case Democrats have 60 votes. But, I think even Democrats would have second thoughts about destroying the US economy if enough people contacted them. You never know, stranger things have happened. Also, Democrats occasionally do the right thing. I know it is rare, but it has happened. I can’t remember the last time it did happen, but it must have happened at some time during my lifetime.

Since we have not had an update on global warming for a while, I thought it would be a good time. Since our last visit, more and more real scientists have decided that their professional reputation is more important than political correctness. That translates into more scientists coming out to say that global warming is nothing more than a hoax.

The entire basis for global warming has been the predictions of global catastrophe that will occur if we do not take drastic action today. The drastic action is always more government control over our lives. There is never a solution that takes in market conditions, always government control over our lives. That should raise questions in people’s minds. Why won’t market conditions ever produce results similar to that of governmental control over our lives? Why do we always have to have more government? The answer is that we do not always have to have more government control. It is just that the people that believe in big government also believe in global warming. That means a big government solution to the “problem” that does not exist.

Global warming predictions have been computer generated. When I was working for a computer start-up company back when a small computer filled a room, the mantra was “garbage in, garbage out”. That means that if you put bad information into a computer, you would get bad information out of the computer at the other end. The people that programmed the computers believed that global warming would occur in a certain way. They programmed the computer to produce that result. When they put in their information, they were surprised to find out that the computers were telling them exactly what they expected. That was fantastic news because it meant that their theories about global warming were correct. (Not) They then published their findings and told everyone what they found out. All they proved was that they could program computers to give those expected results.

How accurate have these computer models been to the actual data? To say that the computer models were inaccurate is an understatement. You could have had a 6 year old throw darts at a chart with rain, sun and other climate information on it and been more accurate. Wildly inaccurate would be downplaying how inaccurate the computer models have been. You wonder how these “scientists” could believe that they could accurately predict the climate 50 or 100 years into the future, when they could not predict the weather even 7 days away.

One rule in science is to take what has happened and use that to project what will happen in the future. They took a one degree temperature rise and said that would go up to some astronomical figure. There is no evidence to lead them to that conclusion, just that is what they wanted the climate to do to justify their funding. When data was inconsistent with their theory of global warming, they either changed the information or just ignored the data altogether. The big example here is the medieval warming period.

The IPCC (The UN’s group that works on climate change) just ignores the medieval warming period. When you check their temperature charts, the medieval warming period is not there. They just basically draw a straight line through the period. To make it more appealing, they put some peaks and valleys, but overall it is a straight line. This is scientifically unethical. But, since almost the entire IPCC is made up of politicians, not scientists, they do not have a problem with ethics. The IPCC, according to Al Gore, is the scientific community consensus on climate change. Less than 1 in 10 members of the IPCC are scientists and most of them are not in the physical sciences, like physics, chemistry, climatology or biology. Probably only ¼ or less of the scientists on the IPCC is in the physical sciences. That means 1 out of every 40 members is truly a scientist that covers the fields involved in climate change. To call a group like that the leader in climate change is to make a mockery of the term.

In summary, the global climate change hoax is the largest hoax ever presented to human beings. That so many people have bought into the hoax tells you how gullible people generally are. Even scientists were buying into the hoax, until the evidence piled up so much that they had to choose between their credibility and their political correctness. Those scientists that have to rely on their credibility have come out against global warming. There are some scientists that still believe in the hoax. These scientists generally do not have to rely on their credibility to get funding. They are a much tougher nut to crack than the ones that have to rely on their credibility.

Last night on the Glenn Beck Show, Glenn had on Lord Moncton and John Bolton to talk about the climate change treaty that Barack Obama might sign in December. That climate change bill sets up a government that has the power to tax every financial transaction at a rate of 2%. It can force countries that have a carbon debt to pay that debt in the form of money to countries that have a positive carbon footprint. According to Lord Moncton, the government set up is the beginnings of a world government. Each country that signs the treaty would have to give up some of its sovereignty so the government could operate without regard to local laws. The possibilities are truly scary.

But, then Lord Moncton said that he could prove that Global Warming was not happening because of carbon dioxide. That immediately got my attention as I am interested in that topic. In the discussion that followed, Lord Moncton showed a chart with 11 graphs from leading scientists around the world (primarily in the US) that believe in global warming. The graphs are depicting what the scientists say is happening to the upper atmosphere. In the upper atmosphere, if global warming is occurring the temperature would have to go down. Each graph by the leading scientists did show that the temperature of the upper atmosphere was going down. But, Lord Moncton said that those graphs were computer projections of what the scientists were expecting to happen, not actual data. Lord Moncton was dismissive of the efforts of the scientists and said they were using Xboxes.

Then, came the moment I have been waiting for since the idea of global warming became a political football. Lord Moncton unveiled a graph that used actual upper atmosphere data over the last 20 years. The data was collected by Richard Lindzen, head of the Climatology Department at MIT, among other scientists. This graph showed that the upper atmosphere was releasing temperature, just like it has always done. The greenhouse gases had no effect on the upper atmosphere. The upper atmosphere was not trapping the heat in. In other words, carbon dioxide and the other greenhouse gases do not cause global warming. If the earth is warming, it is not because of greenhouse gases.

Since we are facing draconian taxes because of global warming in the “Cap and Tax” bill, this information should make those that support the bill look like fools. They would be supporting a tax to stop something that is not happening. Of course everyone knew that all along, but now we have scientific evidence from a leading scientist at a leading university. All the global warming crowd has are computer models that are subject to the bias of the person or people entering the information. Actual data trumps projections any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

This information should mean that any scientist that expects to be taken seriously will have to become a skeptic of global warming. Those scientists that cling to global warming will be doing so out of political loyalty, not scientific evidence. There is no evidence to support global warming and there never has been any evidence. All they have ever had are those computer models. Those computer models have been shown to be wildly inaccurate by this evidence. That would mean that they would have to incorporate this new data into their computer models. If they incorporate this new data into the computer models, it will show that the world is not warming up.

It will take a while for this evidence to make the rounds of scientific communities. As it does so, the call for controls to stop global warming will necessarily cease. That will make some politicians look real bad because they have staked their lives on global warming being true. It will just point out the politicians that are out for personal reasons. Al Gore will be the chief loser in this whole episode. He has staked his entire post-VP career on global warming being true. He even starred in his own movie and won a Nobel Prize for his efforts. Now, everyone will see the truth and maybe someone will have pity on the poor man. He still has his car companies that are raking in the dough, but that is another column.

The Democrats have called a vote on their Tax on Trade Bill this Friday. It is officially titled Cap and Trade Bill, but it is really a tax on trade bill. It is a massive tax increase on anyone who uses energy in the United States. Since that includes everyone, it is a massive tax increase on the American public. The problem is that most people are not aware that the bill even exists. Of those that are aware that the bill exists only a few really know what the bill would do to us in the form of taxes.

The bill is being sold as a bill to control greenhouse gases. Since greenhouse gases cause global warming, a hoax by the way, controlling greenhouse gases will control global warming. If the bill is made law the change in temperature 50 years from today would amount to less than one degree Fahrenheit. In the process the massive taxes would cripple or destroy the entire economy of the United States. It would make it impossible to use energy in any meaningful way. Commuting would be a thing of the past. Using energy to heat and cool homes would come to a screeching halt. Most people could not afford the taxes. Layoffs would create millions of newly poor Americans. Even the “rich” would not be immune from these higher taxes. They would lose their ability to earn money and suffer economic losses. The United States would become a third world country with an economy below that of 90% of the world economies. We would find out what it means to be poor. Right now our poor are considered rich in many countries.

The increase in taxes on energy is staggering. The amounts range from 54-90%. That amount of increase would cause huge problems for most Americans. The estimated amount of increase for the average family is estimated to be $1500 by the Congressional Budget Office. By independent organizations, I have seen numbers that put the increase for the average family of up to $3500. I don’t know about your family, but my family could not afford to pay out an additional $1500-3500 per year just to pay taxes. That would drive us from the middle class to the poor class in no time flat.

Outside of Congress, the EPA is trying to do much the same thing. The attorney that won the case allowing the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide is now working at the EPA to establish new regulations regulating carbon dioxide. The regulations would basically make the EPA a legislature and executive office at the same time. They would establish laws for you to live under and then enforce those laws. Right now, those powers are split between the legislative and executive portions of government for a reason. That reason is to avoid abuse of the system. EPA is proposing to go around the Constitution and do both functions. This has to stop. The EPA has one type of function and they should stick to that function. They should not be a legislative branch of government. That is reserved for Congress, not the EPA. They also are not an enforcement arm of laws that they make themselves. This abuse needs to be stopped. We do not even know how Congress wants the issue treated and EPA is going to make everyone dance to their tune. That is not right.

Everyone is jumping the gun. First of all, carbon dioxide has little effect on the temperature of the earth. It is a greenhouse gas. It does help the temperature rise to a certain point. After that point, it has no effect at all. For the first third of one percent it has an effect on temperature, however minor. After that level is reached, the increase in carbon dioxide has no effect at all. That has been proven by the increase in carbon dioxide levels since 1970. The carbon dioxide level has increased steadily since 1970 and the temperature went up until 1998. After 1998, the temperature has gone down. If carbon dioxide was as big a player as global warmers believe, the temperature would have continued to rise. It has not risen, but fallen, which disproves their theory.

Global warming is all a hoax anyway. There is no truth to the theories that are proposed for global warming or the new global climate change idea. The climate always changes. It is always going up or down and the actor in whether it goes up or down is the sun, not carbon dioxide. The second biggest player is water vapor. Carbon dioxide comes in on the less around number 10 or 11. If we were serious, we would try and do something about the top ones on the list, not number 10 or 11. Go tell your friendly global warmer to take a flying leap and then tell the Democrat Congressman to vote against the Cap and Trade tax bill. If enough of us do that, we can defeat this monstrosity. That will save our economy to live another day.

The Obama administration just released a memo that flies in the face of all recent scientific evidence. They announced that global warming is even worse than we have imagined. That this report came from the Obama administration is not surprising. Almost all members of the administration have a bias in favor of global warming. The report was put together by 30 members of the administration. There are no reports on whether there is one scientific degree among the 30 people involved in the report. If not, that would be typical of reports supporting global warming for the past four or five years. Scientists have jumped from the global warming ship in huge numbers. About all that are left are journalists, politicians, communists and non-scientists.

The timing of this report was particularly funny. The Northern Great Plains has been setting records for cold for the past three months. Even Chicago has reported the lowest June temperatures that have ever been recorded. England reported the first snowfall in June in over 100 years or since the end of the little ice age. With all the north countries setting records for cold, you have little chance of people agreeing with the premise that the earth is warming at an alarming rate. There has been no evidence that the earth as warmed at all since 1998. My oldest granddaughter is 10 ½. She has never experienced a year where the temperature has been more than the year before. That is starting to be some sort of a trend.

The reason the global warming people want you to believe that the earth is warming is so they can impose regulations to “solve” the crisis. If there is no crisis, you will not allow these rules to be imposed. So, they have to get you to believe that the crisis is imminent and that your action now will solve the problem. The fact that the evidence shows that there is no warming is just an “inconvenient fact”.

The “Cap and Trade” Bill is supposed to come to a vote next week. This bill will increase the average energy bill of every family in America by about $1500. The actual amount will vary by region, but that is supposed to be the average. Since the government never makes any accurate predictions, you can bet that the average will exceed $1500 by a large margin. It will drive up the cost of everything, not just energy. If you like the current recession that we are experiencing, you will really enjoy the big depression that this bill will cause.

The economy is still in the midst of a recession. People are out of work in large numbers. Tax revenues are down. Homes are not selling well because people cannot afford them. Interest rates on home loans are low to encourage home ownership, but homes still are not selling. This is not the time to impose additional taxes. In my estimation, there is never a good time to add taxes. This is an especially bad time to add taxes as the economy has no cushion at all.

The Democrats that support the “Cap and Trade” bill have a plan on what they want to get done. They know that the time to get things done is closing. People are starting to grumble and when that starts, their window of opportunity is shutting. Democrats from vulnerable districts are starting to take notice that these socialist programs are not selling well in their districts. They know that more socialist programs will doom them to defeat in 2010. There may be enough support for the Cap and Trade bill in Democrat circles to pass the bill, but that support will erode with time. The Democrats know they have to pass it now or never see it passed. In fact, it may already be too late. It failed in one try earlier. This is one they are trying to slip through the back door. All Republicans have to do is just highlight the huge tax increase for no reasonable purpose and the idea will die for lack of support. At least, that is what I hope happens.

Last night, I was watching TV and an interesting ad came on. The ad was promoting global warming and trying to get people to stop eating meat. I thought the spot would be from PETA, but I was wrong. It had another web site that I forget. How in the world did they get an ad promoting a hoax on TV, anyway?

Global warming is the biggest hoax ever to confront mankind. To think that it started by a researcher who wanted a premise to get funding for his research in the South Pacific. He thought that if he was studying the effects of something called global warming, that he could get all the funds that he wanted. The idea was successful and he had government funds to do his studies. Other scientists saw that he was having success with his global warming idea, so they jumped on the bandwagon. Soon the feeding frenzy was on and anybody who wanted government funds had to have a global warming angle or they were shut out.

At first, there was no real concept of what global warming was. They just used the general idea. Then, scientists had to come up with some specifics on what they were studying. They could not use the actual primary greenhouse gas, water vapor, because humans obviously have no control over water. They picked on one that humans do have some control over, carbon dioxide. They dreamed up theories on what different amounts of carbon dioxide would do to the global temperature. When they tried to find evidence for their theories, they could not find any evidence.

After they could not find any evidence, they decided to ignore data that did not fit the theories that they have for carbon dioxide. They started changing the data that we had accumulated over hundreds of years for climate. The medieval warm period was a problem for the carbon dioxide theory. The temperature should not go up without humans being the cause, so they threw it out. The UN agency, that is supposedly impartial, produced graphs of historical data that left out the medieval warm period.

Even recent data was giving them problems. Temperatures that should have been rising were not. So, they started moving weather measuring stations from grassy areas to paved areas. The areas had specifications that they had to be on grass and so far from any human made structure. Some were next to exhaust vents. When even that did not work, they started recording summer readings in the fall. That was the last straw. Finally, the watchdogs caught them and NASA was embarrassed publically. That did not stop the director of NASA from still proclaiming that global warming is a catastrophe. Data from NASA now shows that the earth has not warmed at all in any year since 1998. The warmest decade in the last 100 years was the 1930’s, way before the pollution for global warming.

That has not stopped the alarmists from sounding the alarm on global warming. They say that we will have a catastrophe in the next 50 or so years. That is conveniently far enough in the future that the alarmist will not be here to be embarrassed by his/her error. School children are now convinced that the earth will not be livable by the time they reach adulthood, all due to the stupid hoax of global warming.

I know that most of the people that believe in global warming are just trying to do what is right. Every time I get in a discussion with one, they invariably change the discussion from global warming to protecting the planet from pollution. That is an entirely different argument. Global warming is a hoax and is false. Pollution does happen and should be stopped as much as possible.

Even though global warming is shown to be false every time it is discussed intelligently, the believers still believe. Global warming has become a religion. Science can prove global warming wrong. Most scientists are moving away from being global warming believers. Almost all the global warming believers are now people that have little or no knowledge of science. That is because they can be fooled by pseudoscience. Global warming uses pseudoscience a lot to prove it is right. Real science proves it is wrong every time.

This week, a poll came out saying that one-third of pre-teens believe that by the time they reach adulthood, there will not be an earth for them to live on. The amounts are even worse among blacks and Hispanics with 75% of blacks believing there will not be an earth for them and 65% of Hispanics believing it. That is how bad the hysteria is over the lie that is global warming or the now accepted term, global climate change. It is ironic that they chose that new name as the global climate is always changing, so if it changes they can claim it was because of man when man had nothing to do with it.

Today, Dennis Prager had a Dr. Ian Pilar, a Professor of Mining Geology from the University of Adelaide in Australia. I am not sure of the spelling on the professor’s name, so if I misspelled it I am sorry. Dr. Pilar just wrote a book called, “Heaven and Earth”. It is a best seller in Australia and is coming out this week in the United States and England.

In Dennis Prager’s interview I learned some interesting facts that I did not know about the earth. According to Dr. Pilar, for about 80% of the time there were not ice caps in the Arctic or the Antarctic. During those times the earth was much warmer and had an abundance of life during those time periods. During the time that we have had ice caps, the life on earth has struggled for existence. This was a fact that I did not know. I knew about the abundance of life, but I did not know about the lack of an ice cap for 80% of the time.

The other fact that Dr. Pilar mentioned was about the ice sheets in the Antarctic and Greenland. Those ice sheets move over the surface of the ground. When they come to a hill, they build up and go over the hill. When they reach the shore, they fall off into the ocean creating ice bergs. All of that was information that I already knew. What he added was the part that I was not fully aware of. He said that the amount of ice that falls off was determined to fall off thousands or millions of years ago. It is not determined by the temperature of the earth at the time it falls off. In fact, the ice breaks off less when the temperature is hotter than when it is colder. That does make some sense as the ice would be more brittle when it is colder.

Dr. Pilar also backed up the information about carbon dioxide that I already knew and added some new wrinkles. He said that as the earth warms, carbon dioxide is released from the soil and the water raising the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere. As the earth cools, the carbon dioxide is trapped by the soil and the water lowering the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere. He did say that carbon dioxide plays a part in warming the earth as a greenhouse gas, up to a point. When it reaches a certain point, it ceases to make any difference in warming the earth. That is how the earth has had carbon dioxide levels of 5-6% and not been burned to a cinder. That was something that when he said it, I thought that it made perfect sense based on what I knew had happened in the history of the earth and how plants function.

What all this means is that humans could reduce their carbon dioxide emissions to zero and it would make no difference on the climate. Since as the earth warms, carbon dioxide is released from the water and the soil, we have no control over the amount in the atmosphere. Also, carbon dioxide follows climate changes, not leads climate changes.

That means that all this concentration on carbon dioxide is just silly stuff. It would remain silly stuff if the people that believed it did not have the reins of power in our government. They could impose draconian measures on our economy in the name of climate change and have no impact on the climate at all. It would destroy the America that I love and that is why I have to keep speaking out about this issue.

I worked for twenty years for the Federal Government in the US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. I started as a Range Conservationist and worked most of the time as a Soil Conservationist. My primary concern was soil and water erosion. I developed crop rotations, irrigation systems, tree planting plans, terrace systems and grazing systems to name a few. I say this to show that I do know something about the environment.

When I wrote grazing plans, I had to know the climate that the grazing system was in. I had to know the animals that would use the system, both wild and domestic. I also had to know the plants that were on the land and those that would be used by each animal during their yearly grazing.

What difference does this make? When I talk about global warming or global climate change, I do know what I am talking about. I have had to study the different climates in North Dakota, Colorado and Arizona. When I hear many of the global warming crowd talk about climates, I know that they do not know anything about what they are talking about. They do not understand the first thing of climates and how they change over time.

We have only been measuring rainfall and temperature with instruments for just over 100 years here in the western part of the US. In climate terms, that is about one second or less. You cannot make accurate estimates on what a climate is doing by taking short term measurements. You may hit the mark and be spot on or you can be wildly inaccurate. It would be like predicting the outcome of a baseball game based on one pitch. If you got the right pitch, you would be correct. But, more than likely you would not get the right pitch and be wildly inaccurate. To say that our climate is warming or cooling based on the last 10 years is inaccurate. To base it on the last 100 years would be better, but in climate terms you still have missed the mark. Climate changes over thousands of years, not hundreds of years.

There is an ice age every 10-12 thousand years on average. That is based on past data. Since the last ice age was approximately 12,000 years ago, we should be heading into a new ice age very soon. If we do go into a new ice age, there is nothing that we can do about it as humans. We do not have enough knowledge to change the climate if the climate wants to change.

When I saw Al Gore make a fool of himself in that movie of his, I laughed. I could not believe that he could convince anyone that what he said was true. If you looked at the charts he had, it disproved what he was trying to say. He was trying to say that carbon dioxide causes the temperature to go up. When you look at the chart you see that the carbon dioxide levels do not go up until 800 years after the temperature goes up. Also, we have been pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a record pace for the past decade. In the last decade the temperature has gone down or stayed the same every year. Not one year showed an increase in temperature. If Al Gore was correct, the temperature of the earth should go up each and every year because of the amount of carbon dioxide we put into the atmosphere.

What Al Gore and the global warming crowd do not take into account is the fact that plants use carbon dioxide to produce oxygen. The more carbon dioxide that is available for the plants to use to make oxygen, the more they use. The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has not changed very much for over 20 years. This is even with us putting record amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. That is why the EPA making carbon dioxide a pollutant is so stupid.

If the global warming crowd was sincere, they would love nuclear power. They hate nuclear power. If they were sincere, they would go after water vapor. Water vapor accounts for 95% or more of the greenhouse effect. The problem with water vapor is that it is not something that people produce. Therefore they can not blame humans for its production. The global warming crowd is not interested in saving the planet. They want to control your life. The sooner people realize that global warming is not about the planet but about your life, the sooner the global warming crowd will be out on their ear.

The current administration believes in the greatest hoax known to modern man, global warming or its new name global climate change. Because they believe in this hoax, they have to stop it right now. Since the only way to stop global warming is to institute socialism and higher taxes, it is the duty of the administration of Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrat majorities in both houses to do just that. Since they really know that it is a hoax, they hope that you do not realize the tremendous tax increase they will put on you in the form of cap and trade restrictions on energy use. The funds raised from these taxes are to be used to help balance the budget. They do not realize that the tax will be counter productive. The higher the tax, the lower amount of taxes will come into the federal treasury as a result.

My 10 year old grand daughter has never experienced a year in which the temperature has been higher than the year before. The temperature has been the same or decreased every year since before she was born. More and more Americans are beginning to realize that global warming is just a scam designed to take away their freedoms. That is why the Democrats have to institute these fixes as soon as possible. The Democrats say because that will help the planet. The real reason is because public opinion is turning against them and if they wait another year, they will not be able to get these rules passed at all. As it is, there will be a lot of fighting to get them through. They were hoping to ram the rules through before anyone was aware it was happening. They also do not want you to see that different parts of the country will pay different rates and different income groups will pay different rates. In case you were born yesterday, the Democrat supporting areas and income groups will pay less, the Republican areas and income groups will pay more. That is only “fair”, for Democrats.

Hugo Chavez, the socialist leader of Venezuela, said that he thought Barack Obama should follow the socialist road. This may come as news to Hugo Chavez, but Barack Obama is well along the road to socialism. If Hugo Chavez is not careful, the United States will be more socialist than his Venezuela or even Cuba. Hugo Chavez is having some resistance to his implementation of socialism in Venezuela. Let us hope that somewhere there is some resistance to socialism in America.

Barack Obama promised that when he took office as President, he would bring countries together. He seems bent on pushing our friends away and bringing our enemies closer. He snubbed the British when Prime Minister Brown came to visit. He is giving billions to Hamas and calling it aid to Gaza. Everyone in the world knows that it is aid for Hamas, except for Barack Hussein Obama. This is not the way of diplomacy. You are supposed to hold your closest friends in highest positions. When they come, you roll out the red carpet and treat them as royalty. You have policies that support your friends, not anger them. We are going to be in real trouble real quick if this does not change. Our friends will only take this so long before they write Obama off as a socialist kook that cannot be trusted. It will take a long time to regain the trust after it is lost. Obama is trying to lose it in the first 6 months. Trust is easy to lose and hard to gain.

The country is in for more of the same over the next four years. We will be despised by our friends. We will be one of the poorest countries in the world. We may even have bombings in our own cities. We might be living like they do in Israel, worried where the next bombing our attack will take place. But, we will have shown those evil rich people that they cannot enjoy the perks of being rich by taking their perks away. How stupid can we be and still take it. We need to rise up and take the country back before it is gone. If we lose our freedom, freedom will not poke its head above water for a thousand years. We do not need that.

A couple of days ago, there was a news article about Dr. Hanson from NASA who supports global warming. The article was about the person that supervised his projects. The supervisor is now retired and said that James Hanson broke the rules of NASA by supporting man-made global warming in the first place. NASA did not and still does not have the capacity to determine if man is causing any global warming or not. Also, the policy of the agency was to not take a position on controversial issues like global warming.

James Hanson also said that he was shackled in his ability to get out the message of global warming. The supervisor said that was not the case. Dr. Hanson was never told that he could not say what he wanted and the fact that he said it is proof that he was not told otherwise.

To boil the article down to its essence, Dr. Hanson from NASA, is a fraud. He has no evidence that man caused global warming or even if global warming existed. For Dr. Hanson to come out and state that there was proof of global warming was a falsehood or in other words, a lie.

In a related matter, Al Gore finally made it to the Senate to testify how important it was that we impose draconian measures to curb global warming. He had to wade through piles of global warming to get into the building. Many schools were closed the day he appeared at the hearing. He would have appeared earlier, but the global warming kept him from the Senate. The global warming snow storm stopped traffic completely on his first attempt to testify. This time, his limo got through the snow to the Senate.

While Al Gore was there he said that we had to make immediate changes in our laws to curb global warming. When asked why the temperature had not gone up at all in over 10 years, he had no answer. He went on for some time, but said nothing. Politicians are good at talking for a long time and saying nothing.

Since there is no evidence to support global warming, why is there such a rush to institute laws to stop it? Most of the people that are pushing global warming, also believe in socialism. Also, it seems that all of the solutions to global warming involve some sort of socialism. Do you see some sort of a connection forming? The Environmental movement used to be about the environment. I saw an interview of the man who started Green Peace. He said that it was an environmental movement until the communists were overthrown. Shortly after the communists were overthrown, they got a lot of volunteers. Then a lot of the people that started running the movement started wearing communist supporting gear. Then all of the solutions to any environmental problem became a problem needing socialism to solve it. At that point he got out of the program because he did not recognize Green Peace any longer.

The only way to look at the environment is to look at countries that have socialism and countries that are free. Which countries treat the environment better? There is no contest, the countries that are free treat the environment better because they have more money to work with. Communist countries have little money to spread around. Nobody really does any more than they really need to. In free countries, people do as much as they can and that leads to people doing things to help the environment. That would mean that if you wanted to stop the myth of global warming, you should institute free market principles. If you did that, global warming would be solved by the free market. The free market would not want the environment to deteriorate because it needs it to succeed. A communist country on the other hand does not care what happens to the environment because everyone is just looking out for where the next meal is coming from.

The next time your neighborhood environmental whack job comes to you and says we need to regulate this or that, remind them that it is free countries that improve the environment, not communist countries. That will set them back a bit. It will have no effect on their beliefs as they only care about their socialist ideals. But it would be fun to see their faces when you give them the real facts.

In Barack Obama’s speech yesterday, he mentioned how important it is to act to stop global warming. He also mentioned how important science is and that we should listen to the voices of science. Those two statements coming from the same person make absolutely no sense. If he is serious that we should listen to the voices of science and that science is important, why is he pushing the myth of global warming? If he is pushing the myth of global warming, why would he want his head confused with the voices of science? I am in a real quandary as to exactly what he meant by those two mutually exclusive statements. He cannot have both within his administration. He either has the myth of global warming and no voices of real science or he has the real voices of science and no myth of global warming. He has to make up his mind.

He may think that those pushing the myth of global warming are the voices of science. If he thinks that, he is not interested in the voices of science. He is only interested in what science can do to advance the cause of socialism. The myth of global warming has been advanced to advance the cause of socialism. They pretty up the myth with scientific sounding terms and buy scientists to push the myth with large sums of money. But, there are scientists who consider science more important than money. Those scientists are speaking out and have more credibility than all of the pseudo “scientists” who push the myth of global warming.

In my classes, I teach my students about the Scientific Method. That is a method that science uses to study the natural world. The process calls for peer review of information so that others can confirm or expose your discovery. The myth of global warming never went through any peer review situation. It went straight to the government trough and started gobbling up huge sums of money. That gobbling up of huge sums of money has starved real scientists who do real scientific research on climate. They have to lie about their goals to get any funding at all. Sometimes they even have to lie about their results to get more funding. Their results will say one thing, but they will draw a conclusion that is not in accordance with the facts. When a scientist sees that, he/she is appalled. When a Politian sees that he/she sees someone who can be used for a goal. In global warming research we have two types of research: Real research where real results are published and research where the results are whatever the politician wants them to be. Global warming alarmists fall into the second category.

Any scientist that takes any time to look at the research involved can see the flaws in global warming alarmist research. They rely on computer models. Computer models are great if you put in accurate data and ask it legitimate questions. The people that believe in global warming use computer models to justify their theory. The computer models used assume that global warming is occurring. They also assume that global warming will get worse, no matter what the conditions turn out to be. Then they run their computer models and, surprise, the computer models say that global warming is a problem and it will get worse. When real data is used and the models do not assume that global warming is occurring the models do not show any global warming at all. Computer models are only as good as the information put in and as good as the questions that you ask of that particular model.

Global warming people do not look at real evidence. They only look at what they want to see. When they see the Midwest having record temperatures, they see an anomaly. When they see cold weather all over the world for the past few years, they see that as an anomaly. When you point out that the earth has been cooling now for over 10 consecutive years, they see that as an anomaly. The reason they believe it is an anomaly is that it disagrees with their theory. They will continue to discount the evidence even as the ice builds up around them.

I have said many times that there is no evidence for global warming. There is lots of evidence that contradicts global warming, but none that confirms it. So, when Barack Obama said he was going to listen to Science I cheered. When he said we have to combat global warming, I groaned because there is no scientific evidence to support it.  

Yesterday I read that Barack Obama has selected as his science advisors, two men who support junk science over real science. It does not matter what credentials a person has if they reject real science and embrace junk. A science advisor should have impeccable credentials, but should also support real science. These two gentlemen do not and are quite proud that they do not support real science.

Why do I say that these two men do not support real science but support junk science? The answer is simple; they both were early supporters of global warming and remain so today. That they were early supporters of global warming is not the problem. Everything was looking like global warming had to be true back in the 1980’s when it was originally proposed. That it was a man-made phenomenon was always debatable, but that it was occurring was not really debatable at the time.

Things are quite different now. Global warming stopped at least 10 years ago. There has not been one year where the temperature increased since before 1998. Now, I know that NASA has been screaming that we are in a warming period. But, every time someone checks their figures they find out that they are wrong. They do things like use September figures in October and claim that October is the warmest on record. Then they take those incorrect figures and use them to indicate that a particular year is one of the warmest. According to NASA, seven of the ten warmest years have occurred since 1998. When NASA’s figures are corrected to use actual data, none of the years they claim are the warmest show up in the top 50.

Why are NASA’s figures so bad? The reason is that the director of NASA is one of the people that came up with the idea of global warming and he wants his theory to be correct. If global warming is not occurring, then his theory is incorrect. Nobody wants to be wrong. So, he “cooks” the books at NASA and incorrectly reports climate data. NASA has become a joke among those that know anything about climate data as being the most incorrect data source available. That is a sad story for a government agency. But it is a government agency and that is all that can be expected. NASA moved its recording instruments into locations that will give higher readings than is the generally accepted way of gathering weather data. They put their boxes in the sun; this raises the temperature during the day time. They put the boxes next to heat vents; this increases the temperature during the winter. They put their boxes on asphalt, which raises the temperature in the day time. A box is supposed to be located in a protected site away from areas with asphalt or heat ducts. The boxes should be located in the shade and on grass. At least that is the preferred way, if possible.

Since we all know that global warming is junk science, anyone who believes in global warming should be disqualified from becoming a science advisor to the President. The President should get the best science information possible, not junk science. Having advisors who believe that junk science is real science will necessarily cloud their judgment when it comes to evaluating scientific information. Any scientific information that disagrees with their pre-conceived notion that global warming is occurring will be rejected and not passed on. They will only pass on the hype they receive from non-scientists like Al Gore. To have a non-scientist like Al Gore telling supposed scientists what to tell the President scares me. Al Gore knows nothing about science. To watch his movie is to see someone who knows nothing and is trying to impress us with his lack of knowledge.

I for one do not want Al Gore advising the President on scientific issues. Al Gore is a failed journalist, minister, attorney, vice-President and everything else he has done. He should not be given any position of authority, except for maybe in a mental hospital in one of the wards. Al Gore is hysterical and delusional. We do not need delusional people advising the President.

There were a lot of things that were interesting over the weekend. There was the nut case that threw his shoes at President Bush and the Secret Service agents that stood and watched. There was the continuing saga in the selling of Obama’s Senate seat. But, for me, the biggest bit of news was that Barack Obama has a short window of opportunity to solve global warming.

You may say that I have already addressed the issue, but this person has a new argument. The person said that because the earth has been cooling for the past 10 years that it proves that man-made global warming is true. I found that to be a completely fantastic statement. That is like saying that because the stock market has been falling, my investments should give me a million dollar return. In other words, the statement makes no sense if you look at it logically. But, the statement was not meant to be taken logically. The statement was meant to answer the question about the fact that the temperature has gone down for ten consecutive years and how could that square with global warming. To deflect that argument, the author put that statement in there. Then, when the question comes up, the author can point to that statement and say they already addressed that issue.

There is no logical way that saying that something that is going down points to the truth of something that should be going up. If man-made global warming were true according to their theories, the temperature of the earth should be rising dramatically during the past ten years. That is because we have been putting carbon dioxide into the air at a record rate each and every year for the past ten years. So, if the theory was correct that when the carbon dioxide level goes up, the temperature of the earth goes up, the temperature should be going up. Since the temperature has been going down, that would put the theory that man is causing global warming by pumping carbon dioxide into the air into the dumpster. Only a fool would believe in the theory after the past ten year period.

Since the people that believe in global warming are not fools, there must be something else driving their issue. If you look at what they propose as a solution to the problem, you see what their goal is. Their solution to solving global warming is to reduce carbon dioxide output. They do that by placing restrictions on carbon dioxide production. That effectively eliminates most of the industry in the western world. Most industries produce carbon dioxide as a by product of production. Reducing or eliminating carbon dioxide production from those industries would effectively close them down.

If the western civilization industrial production was hamstrung by industrial regulations, the public would also have to have restrictions put on their production of carbon dioxide. This would involve many public restrictions on movement. These restrictions would require a large government program to implement the solution.

There you have the complete goal of those that are pushing global warming. They want complete control over people. They propose to get people to agree to those restrictions by selling them the idea as saving the planet. The ideas did not work when they were just implemented from above. But, by selling a “save the planet” mentality, they hope to get people to voluntarily give up their freedom. This is because the old communists just took over the environmental movement and started to use it to achieve what they could not any other way.

Michael Savage has a term he uses for this type of socialism, it is Fabian Socialist. We elected a Fabian Socialist as our new President. He hopes to get us to voluntarily give up the freedom our ancestors fought and died for by telling us we would be saving the planet. We would not be saving the planet; we would be just becoming communist. We have no ability to change the planet’s environment in any major way. We can change it in local situations, but not over the entire planet. The earth is too large and our efforts too puny to have the impact that the global warming people believe.

Environmentalists say that because we can change conditions in one local area that it proves we can change the climate world wide. That is preposterous. If I had unlimited funds and was told that I had to change the planet’s climate using those funds, I could not do so within the lifetime of my great-great grandchildren. To think that we can do so is ignorance run rampant or the height of arrogance.