Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Most American taxpayers found a significant chuck of change missing from the recent paycheck thanks to a last-minute congressional scramble to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, but for many alternative energy companies the deal was a Tax Break Bonanza that will cost the federal government $18 billion in lost revenues over the next decade. Money that could've and should've been spent on aging infrastructure like highways and bridges. Once again Obama's ignorance of the failure of global warming to materialize after 17 years of flat temperatures, has him spending like a drunken sailor on dubious ventures.
Companies still experimenting with wind to power electricity were the biggest winners landing an obscene $12 billion in tax credits! Another victory was scored by algae growers, yes...algae growers! They will get $59 million in tax breaks to encourage production of cellulosic biofuel, which still doesn't actually exist but has been mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use by refineries. This is despite that recent coal shale deposits that will yield more oil than Saudi Arabia and be a resource for hundreds of years to come. Adding insult to injury, the algae tax break was passed just days before the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufactures (AFPM) petitioned the EPA, again, to waive the cellolosic biofuel mandate because no domestic supply has existed more than 5 years ago. Get this...there's even $7 million for the makers of electric motorcycles and three-wheel plug-in vehicles.
Congress never fails to disappoint, even in times of fiscal crisis,'' said Charles T. Drevna, president of the AFPM. ''In this case, by using taxpayers' money to prop up a politically correct renewable energy industry that would otherwise be non-existent without government subsidies." Drevna continued, ''Furthermore, this administration has clearly and openly favored its version of 'all-of-the-above' energy sources, by handing out millions in subsidies to wind, solar, biofuels and other forms of dubious renewable energy that will to higher energy prices for all Americans.'' I am quite sure Al Gore is not only rubbing his hands together but holding them out for more. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) on Senate floor last month said the tax credit for the wind turbine industry is fleecing American taxpayers. He said, ''This is a proposal that is as brazen as a mid-day bank robbery on Main Street! The wind industry, comprised of multi-billion dollar companies (like G.E.), can and must be able to stand on its own two feet.''
A report on the use of wind power in California in the L.A. Times last month showed that mandated solar and wind power is so unreliable that the demand on power plants using fossil fuels has actually increased. The Times stated, ''Wind and solar energy are called intermittent sources, because the power they produce can suddenly disappear when a cloud bank comes across or the wind stops blowing. in just a half an hour, a thousand megawatts of electricity - the output of a nuclear reactor - can disappear and threaten stability of the grid.'' Now more than 30 states foolishly now mandate that wind power be used to generate power. No one thinks to build more nuclear reactors. The Heritage Foundation says the wind industry has become too dependent upon government subsidies and is spending too much time and resources lobbying government for tax breaks, rather than creating new innovations to lower the cost of power.
The Way I See It....Congress and Obama's warmist mania are prolonging some of the worst energy policy. The extra cost to consumers using just 3.5% of electricity generated from wind is enormous, at an estimated $10 billion a year, according to the American Tradition Institute. Interestingly, the construction of massive wind turbine farms across miles and miles of country has also created controversy within an important segment of President Obama's base of supporters....the dreaded environmentalists.
The American Bird Conservancy filed a lawsuit last summer against the Department of the Interior claiming that wind power projects are killing large numbers of bats and birds. On July 27, last year I posted a article entitled, "The Green Movement's Inconvenient Truth'' exposing this very problem with wind farms and their dire consequences, obviously not only in the United States, but it's happening worldwide.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Michelle Obama's obesity obsession has gotten her to pressure the Department of Agriculture to release nutrition standards for ''competitive'' foods and has outlawed snacks considered unhealthy by the nanny-state federal government. ''Regular soda is out,'' she says, ''though the school may serve diet versions.'' The FLOTUS has spoken! That's right -- the government is recommending school children drink soft drinks laden with the deadly neurotoxin ....aspartame. As usual, the right hand of government has no idea what the left is doing....or maybe it does.
Discovered by chemist James M. Schlatter in 1965 by pure accident, aspartame and its intrigue-laced approval tells many a tale about corporate America, the contingent blessings brought by the cyclamate and saccharin bans, and the arbiters of government power. For 20 years the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) gave aspartame products the thumbs down mainly for the following safety issues and reasons: flawed data - high cholesterol levels - body fluid loss. But pharmaceutical giant G.D. Searle - the makers of NutraSweet and Equal brands - did not back down and knew all it took was flexing political muscle. Eventually, it was Donald Rumsfeld, a powerful political figure in the Bush administration, that proved instrumental in the FDA approval of aspartame in 1981.
Despite the dismissive stand of aspartame producers that it is safe for human consumption, various studies over the years have shown that aspartame is actually linked to headaches, migraines, dizziness, fatigue, anxiety, and even tumors. The FDA reported 92 symptoms attributed to aspartame and is getting a bad reputation as a dangerous ''excitotoxin.'' An excitotoxin means it has the ability to ''excite'' the cells of the body into overproducing a particular chemical, thus burning them out prematurely. When aspartame is digested, the body breaks it down into phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol. Methanol then breaks down to toxic formaldehyde and travels through your blood vessels, like a Trojan Horse, into sensitive areas like your brain and eyes to do damage.
Stocking up on diet foods is the best way to gain weight. The latest research by Quig Yang, a faculty member at the Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology on aspartame has revealed that it actually increases the risk of putting on weight, no keeping it off. Being 200 times sweeter than sugar, aspartame appears to be the perfect answer to diet since it contains few calories. Unfortunately, phenylalanine and aspartic acid (major components of aspartame) trigger the release of insulin and leptins. The latter are hormones that stimulate storage of body fat. A shocking outcome from a study, spanning 22 years, found a clear association between aspartame consumption and leukemia relating to diet soda intake in both sexes.
Moreover, large doses of phenylalanine lowers serotonin levels and lead to food cravings. Since both real and artificial sweeteners stimulate the taste buds, they affect the same taste and pleasure pathways in the brain. Fake sweeteners however merely activate but do not satiate the pleasure-related region of the brain, proving to be inferior in preventing sugar and food cravings. This is over and above the fact that aspartame is also highly addictive! The phenylalanine and methanol components increase the dopamine levels in the brain and cause a certain high.This further creates an addiction that is only made worse by the release of methyl alcohol which is considered a narcotic.
The Way I See It....chemical dependency begins to form when aspartame is consumed regularly and it is hard to break. Most people know at least one person who can't seem to kick their diet drinks. Keeping this in mind, it''s time we reconsider the ''health benefits'' aspartame is supposed to give. From yogurts to cereals , from chewing gum to sweet-filled baked goods and now even Bereroca (a high-potency B fizzy-tablet) - this damn sweetener is everywhere.
The above mentioned popular products are just a few of many containing aspartame. Despite the rising reports of its toxicity, a re-investigation by the FDA as well as by key regulatory bodies worldwide doesn't seem to be coming anytime soon. You can only protect yourselves by making a conscious choice to check the label of every product you buy at the market.
By 1997, (similarly duped) proactive global politicians negotiated the Kyoto Protocol with its legally binding emissions limits for industrialized countries, though the United States wisely didn't participate. Ten years later, the Forth Assessment Report of the United Nation's IPCC was released and predicted calamity for species, ecosystems, human infrastructure, societies and livelihoods unless we drastically cut emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide and methane. In the wake of his failed presidential bid in 2004, Gore became the public face and global evangelist for climate-change alarmism. His calls for increasing government control over economies and for individuals and businesses to slash energy consumption was featured in his flawed ''documentary'' An Inconvenient Truth which contained 32 errors and omissions but still led to his being awarded, undeservedly, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
That same year the Tennessee Centre for Policy Research (TPCR) branded him a ''hypocrite'' after discovering that his eight-bathroom house in Nashville ( photo above) consumed nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity the previous year - more than 20 times the national average! Mr Gore responded by saying he was in the process of giving the house an energy efficient make over. However, the TPCR had got hold of his electricity bill again, this time comparing electricity consumption after he said he installed the new technology. They found the Gore residence uses an average of 17,768 kWh per month -- 1,640 kWh more energy per month before the renovations! By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 in am entire year!
Last year, Gore testified before an incredulous Congress, saying that he is partner at the venture-capital firm of Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, which has invested about a billion in about 40 companies that will benefit directly from cap-and-trade legislation and the those popular Obama government subsidies. Gore claims all of the money he makes from such environmental investments, along with all the profits from his books and DVDs goes to the nonprofit Alliance for Climate Protection. But as Bloomberg News discovered, Gore, who left the White House a decade ago with less than $2 million in assets, now has enough money to put $35 million in hedge funds and other private for-profit partnerships.
Aside from Gore's immersion in all things climate-wise he is up-to-his-neck in another controversy that will no doubt have negative effects on the United States and Americans as a whole. Gore was on the David Letterman show this month promoting his new book, The Future, which mentions the television entity Al Jazeera as the ''relatively independent network'' that played a role in the so-called Arab Spring. It was interesting that this phrase became ''very highly respected network'' when he spoke to Letterman. It's apparent that Gore was talking about the channel in glowing terms in order to justify his receipt of $100 million from a $500 million deal. Gore doesn't want to admit the truth because then he would be exposed for selling the U.S. Current TV channel to Al Jazeera not only for ''dirty oil'' money, but also for blood money! The American blood on the hands of Al Jazeera is real.
Every time that you see a wounded member of the American military, or attend a service for those who died defending America, there is the distinct possibility that the death and destruction was carried out by Jihadists egged on by Al Jazeera. This is a very serious matter. This sale will allow Al Jazeera to reach English-speaking Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. with its incendiary messages, where you could see suicide bombings on the streets of America and the development of more al Qaeda cells plotting 9/11-type terrorist attacks. The purpose of ''Al Jazeera America'' is to reach English-speaking Muslims who don't speak Arabic with inflammatory words and images making America out to be the enemy and villain in the Middle East. Now thanks to Al Gore, it is establishing a permanent base on U.S. soil, possibly reaching 40-50 million homes.
The Way I See It....despite what Al Gore implies, the Arabic and English versions of Al Jazeera are paid for by the same dictatorship. Even Hillary Clinton's State Department admits that, adding that Qatar controls the news policies and personnel on the channel. Jerry Kenney, an American television producer, said this about Gore, ''He talked about how many awards Al Jazeera has been given. That is no surprise to me. The arsonist is always the first to see the fire. Al Jazeera lights it and then reports it. There is no reason to believe the new Al Jazeera America will be any different. And the inevitable result will be more cases of terrorist violence and murder on American soil.''
Despite this looming threat and questions about the legality of the purchase, members of Congress are silent. A hearing into this deal would make things difficult for Republicans who want to pursue a bipartisan agenda and do not want to irritate Obama and the Democrats. The co-owners of Current TV - Al Gore and Joel Hyatt - are prominent Democrats. The way I figure...selling their television channel to Al Jazeera is somewhat comparable to turning over American broadcast facilities during World War II to Tokyo Rose and Axis Sally, the propagandists for the Japanese and German enemies, who were convicted of treason for broadcasting against America. It's a shame no one thinks Al Gore should be convicted as a traitor for this sale as well as being shunned as the voice of warming hysteria. Thankfully the warming backlash has begun with hundreds and hundreds of climate scientists taking up the cause in an effort to wrest their profession back from warming ideologues.
Friday, February 22, 2013
The Q Society has gotten mentioned in the media this past week as the organisers of the Dutch politician, Geert Wilders' speaking tour warning Australians of the danger of creeping Islamisation. So who are these people? Are they a secret society with violence in their hearts, that we need to be worried about. Firstly, let me say there is no need for fear or worry. The Q Society is a grassroots Islam-critical organisation run exclusively by a group of dedicated individuals. The not-for-profit association was incorporated in Victoria in December, 2010, but is now active with state chapters, local groups and supporters in all states. The prolific Islamic researcher, blogger and best selling American author Robert Spencer is the international patron of the association. The Q-Society is aligned with the international SION (Stop Islamisation of Our Nation) movement.
In their own words:
Our members and supporters are concerned about the socio-political problems associated with the rise of Islamic Sharia Law in Australia; as well as religiously motivated human rights abuses against women and indigenous religious minorities in Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member countries. The Q Society seeks to inform and lobby for a free and open discussion about the present and future impact of Islam in Australia. Our members oppose the Islamisation of our country as well as attempts to silence critical debate about the socio-political aspects of Islam under the pretence of multicultural tolerance and political correctness. The aggressive or stealth infiltration and brazen imposition of special favours by Islamic organisations and Islamic religious fanatics were our ''call to arms.'' In upholding and defending Australian cultural values, we use reasoned words and ideas, not violence, as well as political and democratic processes.
We seek to educate our citizens and politicians to the fact that Islam is not just a religion. It is also a political, legal and military dogma that extends to all facets of a Muslim's life, the cultural landscape of where they live and a Muslim's relationship with non-Muslims. It's a medieval concept of religious absolutism that makes a society controlled by despotic clergy; which maintains suppression of freedom of expression with a tainted world-view that embraces segregated communities. We are against this model of a parallel unassimulated lifestyle and a judiciary based on barbaric Islamic ''justice'' called Sharia Law and the Halal certification schemes being used to finance Islamic radicals and terrorist groups while the Halal ritual itself causes large-scale inhumane slaughtering and animal-cruelty.
For too long Islam has enjoyed immunity from necessary analysis, due criticism and debate because of its phony status a another ''peaceful'' religion. Unfortunately, if we continue to tolerate Islam with our Judeao-Christian open-heartedness without understanding it, Australia as a free, secular democracy will be lost. How so? History has shown that Muslims will not embrace other cultures or join a ''melting pot''. Many European leaders are now resigned to the fact that multiculturalism has failed with Muslims. England, France, Spain, Germany, Sweden and The Netherlands are finding they are part of a region called EURARABIA! This is because Islam teaches Muslims to avoid friendship or integration with the infidels (or kafirs), leading to division of the host country's public spaces....like Muslim-only lavatories, swimming pool sessions and prayer rooms; even calls for Muslim-only housing projects. All showing a contempt for Australia's values of respect, tolerance and equality.
The Way I See It....if you are concerned now about Islam, you have come to the right place. So far Australians relied mostly on what Muslim apologists and islamophiles had to say about Islamic doctrine, Islamic history and the efforts of Islamic supremacists to establish a global Islamic theocracy (a new Caliphate). Q Society has found this imbalance disturbing, akin to foxes lecturing on the management of the hen house. They also believe no ideology or religion can be beyond criticism. And here we thought the West had the Enlightenment 300 years ago, and now it's all coming back in the name of absurd political correctness and self-flaggelating multiculturalism.
After all, Australia is based on individual hard-fought liberties, Western democracy and self-evident rights and freedoms which flow from the Judeao-Christian heritage of Australia's constitution founders. While Q Society is a secular and non-party political organisation, they acknowledge the wisdom and benefits flowing from both the Constitution and traditional Australian values. These benefits and values are what they seek to uphold, against moral relativism, political correctness and divisive multiculturalism. Many civil-minded migrants from all corners of the world came to Australia to enjoy these very rights and freedoms in a real multi-ethnic country. But a tolerant society must not become a suicidal society reflecting the seventh-century, Arabian desert-living practices of Mohammad.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
An amazing double standard has appeared in Australia this week with Geert Wilders, the Dutch political leader now on a speaking tour of the country. I wrote in my last posting that not only had his speeches tried to be blockaded by violent ultra-leftist scum trying to stop freedom-loving citizens from hearing him. He has not only been vilified in the ignorant leftist media for trying to warn that Islam as an ideology is a menace to Western values and cultural norms - but from the freedom to speak. Also, God forbid you identify yourself as a gay person under Islam. I'm sure there were delusional gays in the mob of demonstrators not realising they would be killed under Sharia Law..
Depressingly, he has even been shunned by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and even Jewish community leaders. All gutless and afraid to even debate the man for fear of agreeing with him. It seems to me that political or community advantage is being put before principle - and fear is prevent a rational discussion of Wilders' message. It's driven Abbott to misrepresent what Wilders is in fact saying and playing blind to the issue he actually raises - which is about the nature of Islam....not its followers.
This hypocrisy and fear is exposed best by what is misleadingly called a ''Peace Conference and Exhibition'' being allowed to organise in Melbourne in March. (see photo) The conference is advertised on billboards all over south Melbourne and is organised by the Islamic Information Services Network of Australasia and Islamic Research and Educational Academy. It is also backed by the Islamic Council of Victoria and a range of other Muslim groups, mosques and communities. It is fronted by Melbourne Muslim activist Wazeem Razvi, who in a recorded speech, boasted of a range of 15 international speakers and getting Prime Minister Julia Gillard to agree to be present at the conference. Looks like the conference will radiate all that's peaceful and light. NOT!
With such a wide backing and so many prominent speakers, it would be fair to say it represents Muslim thought today in Australia and the world. And when you check precisely what a number of speakers have said, you come up with a picture of Islam remarkably similar to the one Geert Wilders is trying to warn against. Take that main organiser himself. in a lecture recorded last December in Melbourne, Waseem Razvi, said he supports Sharia law in Australia and said Islam allowed violence in defence of the faith (and that includes criticism). He ranted, ''Yes, Jihad is very Islamic, so you don't have to retreat from that."
Here are some facts you should know about the other invited speakers.
- Al-Azhar Sheikh Abdur-Rahman Al-Sudais: Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca (highest ranking cleric in the Sunni Muslim world) is a virulent anti-Semite to judge from his sermons. This turd says, ''Jews are the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets and the offspring of apes and pigs. read history and you will understand that the Jews of yesterday are the evil fathers of the Jews of today.''
- Sheikh Assim Al-Hakeem: He says, ''Homosexuality is unnatural and forbidden and in Islam the punishment for that is stoning to death. It is an abnormality which should be treated and is not accepted as a normal thing.''
- Sheikh Zahir Naik: He says a person who changes his religion from Islam to other religion is considered an apostate which is punishable by death. He also said he was a supporter of Osama bin Laden and says every Muslim should be a terrorist. He has also pronounced that the September 11 was an attack done by George Bush himself!
- Abu Hamza: In a lecture titled ''The Keys to a Successful Marriage'' he said men could beat their wives ''to shape them up.'' He also said women ''must respond'' if their husbands wanted to have sex and ridiculed laws that prohibit rape within marriage. He qualified the beating by saying, ''you are not allowed to make them bleed.''
- Sheikh Yee: This idiot claims that Jews celebrated the 9/11 attack, which weren't the work of Muslims and Jews are the real extremists. He says, ''Jews should go to Hell!''
- Sheikh Abu Ayman: A Melbournite who long defended Osama bin Laden; ''I dispute any evil linked to bin Laden. He was a good man in many ways.''
- Bilal Philips: He has been linked to jihadists and terrorist groups. The U.S. named him as an ''inidicted co-conspirator'' over the 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Center and Australia's own security agency judged him a threat and banned him from coming here. Odd?
- Shekh Muhammad Sayyid: He will recite the Koran to the conference visitors and read verses in Arabic that call for the annihilation of the Jews and Christians if they get in the way.
How can anyone with two halves of his brain connected face the obvious and open animosity of a people bent on exterminating your culture, your religion and your hard won freedoms? It is a jihad-by-stealth as I wrote in a posting on MAY 18th, 2011. Read it and weep! Almost two years later I can't believe people are silent or even complicit in attempts to silence or frighten Wilders - who has not advocated violence - yet apparently are happy that true Hate-Preachers who preach death for gays, Jews and ''enemies'' of Islam may speak freely in this country? Why the hypocrisy? Why the fear?
NOTE: I highly recommend that you get hold of a Koren and read its disorganised chapters from cover to cover and see for yourself how many times (over 200+) it states that Muslims should hate and kill Christians and Jews and any other religion they deem as infidels (Hindus and Buddists beware)!
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Geert Wilders had his first speech to Melbourne supporters last night. Those supporters had to go through a barrage of vile abuse protected by a line of police. What Australians got was simply another attempt to howl down Wilders, not listen or even counter with arguments. These unruly protesters (see photo) come from a handful of different protest groups mainly cast in the image of their leftist elitist academic professors. Tight security surrounded Mr Wilders' hour-long speech to members of the conservative local group of the Q-Society of Australia.
There's Solidarity, which is acually a Trotskyite outfit with a minuscule membership and an authoritarian plan for Australia (http:/www.solidarity.net.au/about us/) far more threatening to our democracy and our freedoms than anything Wilders could ever dream of. It's manifesto, for instance, declares: ''Capitalism stifles democracy and smothers creative freedom...We stand for socialism, a society that would be based on democratically elected workers councils which control and plan the economy.....Parliament, the army, the police and the courts are institutions of the capitalist state....which cannnot be taken over and used by the working class.'' Dumb Deadshits!
Then there was the Students for Palestine filling the ranks of the protesters. This is the same ratbag group that helped organise the disgraceful and, in my view, racist and intimidatory protests against Jewish chocolate shops to help enforce a boycott of things Israeli. Wilders, in contrast, is supportive of Israel and a strong critic of anti-Semitism. These protesters, in my opinion, do not represent the good but the bad in our country. Yet the lame-stream media never labeled this bunch of vermin as being far-Left, yet they went on and on calling Wilders a far-Right Dutch politician.
In fact, Geert Wilders is not far-Right. He'll own up to being culturally conservative, but his policy platforms aren't standard far-Right fare. He is a strong supporter of small government and free speech (reports that he wants the Koran banned are false). He has kept his distance from true far-Right parties such as France's National Front. We all remember that he appied for a visa to visit and come to Australia, but the application was stalled last February. The official reason for the many months of delay was that he is on a database of people of ''security concern''and the Department of Immigration had to do more through security checks. It smelled of a gutless government.
As if to underscore the Politically Correct calculations delaying Wilders' visa application, the governing Labour Party swiftly approved a visa for Taji Mustafa, the British head of the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, a group of scumbags notorious for religious intolerance, disdain for Western values and sympathy for jihad. Stupidly, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said she would not be revoking Mustafa's visa and that Hizb ut-Tahrir was not on the government's list of proscribed terrorist groups. When appeasers rule, they instinctively appease and if appeasement doesn't work, then they appease harder. But you see Geert Wilders' visit would upset Muslims who might riot, while Mustafa's visit might also get Muslims to riot, but on the other hand it could convince them how much Australia loves them (sic)!
The Way I See It....the mitigated irony of it is that protest organiser Feiyi Zhang said Wilders' speech could incite violence against Muslims. Doesn't she mean violence from Muslims....and from her radical Left? She and her companions used physical force and intimidation to stop others from simply listening to whom they like...is shameful and betrays the totalitarian nature of the far-Left. But what is more bizarre is that Leftists claiming to defend Muslims from vilification are, by using this force, only making Islam seem even more threatening.
The Australian Islamic Council wisely stayed out of promoting any animosity to the speaking tour. They are fully aware, I'm sure, that any encouragement given to protesters and their actions would definitely crystallise Wilders' message in the minds of all tolerant Australians. Wilders speaks for those of us who are sick to death of PC thugs telling us what we can and can't say, especially now that we've had our eyes opened to the gross intolerance and obvious hypocrisy of the Muslim intent together with its nasty ideology that stifles freedom of speech.
Monday, February 18, 2013
Electric cars were the wet-dream of the global warming believers. As the Greenies insisted, ''Around the world electric vehicles (EVs) are beginning to transform the way we move....EVs, along with increased investment in public transport, are central to meeting the twin challenges of climate change and energy security.''
Warmist politicians - as usual - threw taxpayer-funded subsidies at this latest green scheme and drew up grand plans. Take deluded U.S. President Barack Obama. In his first term, Obama propped up battery makers with grants and aced like a venture capitalist with nearly $1 billion in loans to electric car startups Fisker and Tesla. He loaned Nissan $1.6 billion to build electric cars in the U.S.
In Britain: The Committee on Climate Change, the U.K. government watchdog, has called for the number of electric cars on Britain's roads to increase from a few hundred now to 1.7 million by 2020. Britain's Department for Transport is spending $66 million over the next year giving up to 8,600 buyers of electric cars a grant of $7700 towards the purchase price.
Around Australia: The Gillard Government, under the influence of the Greens Party, is also leading a work program to ensure Australia's energy markets are ready to support the potential large-scale adoption of electric vehicles and related technologies.
The State of Victoria: The Victorian government's electric vehicle trial....is being held in the expectation that Victorians will switch to electric cars in their thousands in coming years, even though the number currently is use is only 100 or so.
The City of Sydney: The city council has announced a tender for up to 12 new electric car charging stations to be installed across Sydney next year. Never mind that the Green argument didn't actually stack up. However, a study has shown electric cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries.
Never mind that the Green movement's argument for electric cars was particularly insane in Australia. A climate scientist attests, ''Victoria's dependence on brown coal for energy is so high that any electric car that ran off the electricity grid would generate even more carbon emissions than one running on petrol.'' It's a clear example of one green policy didn't know what the other green policy was doing!
''One in 10 cars may be electric by 2020 although the take-up in Australia would be slower due to the carbon tax,'' claims Nissan. That carbon tax is ''small potatoes'' when compared to the main reasons. What consumers did mind was the cost of this Greens-backed car and its small range. The slow global up-take of EVs has been mirrored in Australia, with only 18 sold privately and 45 sold to the government and business sectors. But while many blame high prices from $49,000-$59,000 even the cries for more subsidies - that lifeblood of global warmists - cannot save the electric car. Big car makers are winding down their big plans. A spokesman for one Japanese automaker said, ''The electric car is still not ready for prime time....and maybe never.''
Warmist politicians are crabwalking away from their over-ambitious plans, without quite admitting it. When asked about the Obama administration's 1 million car goal (by 2015), Energy Secretary Steven Chu was noncommittal. ''It was ambitious, but we'll see what happens,'' he said to Reuters last week. Careful to not be seen as a failure, the Energy Department preempted Chu's comment by noting that it's more important to start a program than to spend time on a number.
The Way I See It....even the car visionaries are giving the electric car its last rites. I've read that, Takeshi Uchiyamada, the ''father-of-the-Prius'' who helped put hybrids on the map, said he believes fuel-cell vehicles hold far more promise than battery electric cars. He firmly stated, ''Because of its shortcomings.....driving range, cost and recharging time, the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most conventional cars. We need something entirely new.'' I guess that means more taxpayer-funded subsidies....sic! This has been a sorry tale of Green carpetbagging and the dangers of politicians, armed with your money, deciding they can see the future -- a future they can't distinguish from their dreams.
Dutch political leader Geert Wilders, is now on a speaking tour or Australia. He's out to give Australians big dose of Dutch Courage. The same courage his country mustered in 2011 to finally abandon the long-standing model of multiculturalism that encourage Muslim immigrants to create a parallel society with the Netherlands. The new integration bill, which Dutch Interior Minister, Piet Hein Donner, presented to his parliament reads:
''The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people. In this new integration system, the values of the Dutch society plays a central role. With this change, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society that obviously isn't working.''
Mr Wilders was prepared and scheduled to come to Australia this time last year but the Gillard Government, an enemy of free speech and an ass-kisser of multiculturalism, tried to stop him from coming by tying up the visa process for months until citizens complained. In a television interview this week he was asked, ''So you plan to warn Australian audiences of what you see as the danger of Islamic migration, is that correct.'' He replied, ''Yes...I believe that Islam and freedom are incompatible. Look how in societies today where Islam is dominant, how any non-Islamic person, whether it's a Christian or an apostate or a woman or a critical journalist, how they are treated,'' he added further, ''I believe that what with the mass immigration into our free societies, our societies will change, and it will for the worse.'' He went on to explain why he came to fear Islam:
In the Islamic world, I was always struck by two things. I was impressed by the kindness and helpfulness of many Muslim people. But there was also their fear. Islamic societies are ruled by terror. Muslims are good people, but they live under the yoke of Islamic sharia law. If they leave Islam, or even just mildly criticise it, they sign their own death verdict.
I returned to the Netherlands and became a politician. I used to live in the Kanaleneiland district of Utrecht. During my years there, the district was transformed into a dangerous neighbourhood for non-Muslims. I have been robbed and on several occasions I had to run for safety. The same transformation happened in several cities in the Netherlands and other European countries where Islamics settled. Europe is going through an Islamification process, which makes our continent less free and less safe.
Contrary to what many Westerners think, Islam, rather than a religion, is a totalitarian political ideology; just read the Koran. Islam, rather than a religion, is a totalitarian political ideology. It is an ideology because it aims for an Islamic state and wants to impose sharia law on all of us. It is totalitarian because it is not voluntary; once you are in, you cannot get out. Unlike genuine religions, Islam also make demands on non-Muslims. We, too, are marked for death if we criticise it. (This is the title of Geert's recent book)
For nine years I have been living under constant police protection. I live in a government safe house. I am driven every day to my office in an armoured police car. I have even lived in army barracks and prison cells just to be safe from assassins. I, and many others, are threatened because we are telling the truth about Islam. Don't be fooled, there is no radical or moderate Islam. There is only Islam from the Koran, the ''holy'' book. That is the Islam from Mohammad. There are no two sorts of Islam....just the hateful one.
The Way I See It.....some critics will scoff, knowing that to do so puts them in no danger at all. It will make them seem more tolerant, and enable them to walk down the street in danger of nothing but praise from so many like-minded ignorant fools. Wilder's life, though is proof of at least part of his message. There has been a long list of security guidelines distributed to Australian journalists covering his visit here. If criticising Islam requires this much protection, there must be something to criticise.
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Neck pain is the third most common type of pain according to the American Pain Foundation. It is estimated that 70% of people world-wide will experience neck pain at some point in their lives but research into effective treatments is surprisingly limited. And let's not forget previous research has proven 80% of all headaches stem from vertebral misalignments in the neck. So, if you visit a conventional physician for neck pain, there's every good chance you'll leave with a prescription for a medication, as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen and even opioids (OxyContin, Vicodin, etc) which are the go-to-treatment for pain in our modern, drug-addicted, world. The better options, not only in terms of pain and inflammation relief, are those that help to treat the underlying cause of the pain in the first place so that healing can truly occur.
The researchers stated, ''Due to their comprehensive training in neuro-musculoskeletal management, numerous sources of evidence have shown that a chiropractor's treatments are much safer and often more effective than allopathic medical treatments, particularly for back and neck pain. Combined with exercise the chiropractic approach often leads to improved posture, range of motion and functionality. Researchers have also found that chiropractic spinal adjustments effect our bodies on a deep cellular level. What that means is the chiropractic care affects the basic physiological processes that influence oxidative stress and DNA repair, and the Immune system. So, in addition to addressing any immediate spinal misalignments that might cause pain, it can also address deeper dysfunctions in your body you wouldn't be aware of. By treating the underlying source of pain, you're helping in preventing a chronic degenerative neck structure from developing in the first place.
Exercise helps to prevent neck pain through a number of mechanisms including strengthening key supportive muscles and restoring flexibility, thereby maintaining your chiropractic corrections. Not surprisingly, repetitive strain injuries have become increasingly common as so many people spend most of their work days sitting in front of computers. Aside from computer work many types of neck pain can be traced back to poor posture at watching television, sleeping on one's stomach, and even during your commute to and from work. It's a vicious cycle as prolonged poor sitting posture leads to neck pain and once neck pain develops and pulls out neck vertebrae, it makes your posture and pain even worse. Research in the Journal of Applied Physiology found that specific exercises helped people with neck pain improve their ability to maintain a neutral upright cervical posture during prolonged sitting and break their poor posture/neck pain cycle.
The Way I See It....I have personally found that therapeutic massage added to the program of exercise and chiro-care offers clinically effective improvement as a whole. But in the meantime, while you are arranging to schedule that chiropractic appointment, you don't need to suffer unnecessarily. You can start your road-to-recovery by getting on to the following safe options that'll reduce your muscle and joint inflammation....though they may require some patience to allow your body tissues to adapt. Among the best are:
- Start taking high-quality, Omega-3 fat like Krill Oil. The Omega-3 fats EPA and DHA are precursors to mediators in inflammation called prostaglandins. (In fact, that is how anti-inflammatory drugs work, they positively influence prostaglandins)
- Eliminate or radically reduce most grains and sugars (including fructose) from your diet. Avoiding grains and sugars will lower your insulin and leptin levels. Elevated insulin and leptin levels are one of the most profound stimulator's of prostaglandin production.
- Optimize your production of Vitamin D by getting regular appropriate sun exposure, with some backup supplementation, which will work through a variety of different body mechanisms to reduce your aches.
- Take Astaxanthin daily: One of the most effective oil-soluble antioxidants known. It has very potent anti-inflammatory properties and in many cases works far more effectively than NSAIDs. Higher does are are typiclly required and one may need 8 mg per day to achieve benefit.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Welcome to Morality in the New World Order!
Pedophiles want the same rights as homosexuals. They claim it's unfair to be stigmatized for sexual orientation. Using the same tactics used by gay rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar staus arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation....no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an ''alternative lifestyle'' or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. Gay advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, some psychiatrists have formed an organization, called B4U-Act, and are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association (APA) declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statisical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA. The B4U-Act calls pedophiles ''minor-attracted people.'' The organization's website states its purpose is to, ''help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of sterotyping, stigma and fear.'' Amazingly, in 1998, the APA issued a report claiming ''that the 'negative potential' of adult sex with children was 'overstated' and that 'the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects' from childhood sexual abuse experences.''
Unfortunately, pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the United States Federal Government. The liberal/progressive leftists in the infamous Democratic Party introduced, in 2009, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act which lists ''sexual orientation'' as a protected class. President Obama praised the bill saying, ''At root, this isn't just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another - whether we embrace our differences rather than allowing them to become a source of animus.'' Last year, not to be out done, two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality. One of them, retired Montreal professor, Van Gijseghem, told his Parliamentarians, ''Pedophiles are people grappling with what is the equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual grappling with homosexuality.''
Dr A. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen's University in Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said pedophiles' sexual interests prefer children and, ''There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment, just like the failed efforts to change homosexuals in the past.'' In 2010, a Harvard Health publication admitted that treatment only aims to ''enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.'' Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor, and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, ''Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for actual sex against children.''
The Way I See It....the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as sexually-deviated groups continue to assert themselves. It's all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages; to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.
Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several American states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks are unfair because it penalizes them for life. They say they have a right to be free of condemnation, discrimination or societal intervention in private sexual behaviour and are gradually making themselves heard in courts around the world.
Friday, February 15, 2013
What should a senior minister of the Gillard Governmnt do when he learns he is wrong about global warming? If you recall, it was my posting on February the 10th that exposed Dr Craig Emerson and Dr Karl Kruzelnicki to the fact that their ''warmist'' ideology wasn't holding water. I presented a chart that showed that there hasn't been any significant warming of the planet for 16 years. It couldn't get plainer than that, but both refused to acknowledge this fact. It was worse this week when Trade Minister Emerson got on the 2GB radio show and tried again to deny there had been a 16-year pause in global warming and instead the world was warming fast. This, despite the announcers pointing out that none of the measurements used even by the IPCC detect any warming trend that is ''statistically significant''?
Here's what I expect. I would expect Dr Emerson to apologise for being so badly informed. I would expect him to revise his thinking about the nature and speed of any warming, and the warming influence of our emissions. I would expect him to explain why, in the light of the facts I and others have now drawn to his attention, he thinks trying to ''stop'' global warming with a carbon tax and billions in subsidies still makes economic sense. Or to admit it does not, after all. These are the kinds of things a serious man, a responsible politician, would do when presented with facts contradicting a critical assumption behind an important public policy.
On 2GB, his argument was bizarre, but standard issue in the warmist media outlets -- that there cannot have been such a pause because the average temperature of the past decade was higher than of the decade before. Emerson couldn't understand the fallacy of that argument. So a listener, a forensic accountant, equally frustrated with the mathematical ineptitude of this senior minister, produced a graphic chart that surely even Emerson can understand. (see above) So...to say the past decade was warmer than the one before is true - but still does not contradict the fact that for 16 years there has been no warming of any statistical significance.
The Way I See It.....if someone like this minister is still so adamant about his global warming beliefs, and in a government advised by top scientists - is wrong in the very basic facts about climatic warming, what does it say about the Gillard Government and its warming policies? When facts change....normal, honest people change their opinions. This now goes beyond a judgement of Emerson's intellect. It also invites a judgement of this scumbag's character.
Oh yes, still no admission, retraction or apology from ABC science presenter Dr Karl, either, even though he is even more profoundly wrong than Dr Craig and should know better. He completed a MB, BS after a science B.Sc (Hons) and some further broad study into medical science. His attitude has brought some loss of credibility amongst his admirers.
NOTE: Dr Emerson has a doctorate in Economics. On matters of science he has no qualifications.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
During the Cold War, Germany moved much of its gold to New York in case the USSR invaded Germany. It was assumed at the time the US would be a safer storage location, and of course, they could always ask to have it returned if they wished. But German citizens have become increasingly worried about the security of the 1,536 tonnes of their Gold reputedly held at the Federal Reserve in New York City. This has resulted in the Bundesbank pursuing repatriation of the Gold, beginning with a request to view it in the basement vault of the Federal Reserve Building, where it is claimed to reside.
Of course, the German government had received periodic assurances from the Fed that the Gold is there; however, the issue began to get a bit sticky recently, when the Fed refused a request for an inspection. The world then raised a collective eyebrow, and whilst not panicking over this development just yet, closer attention has come to bear, not only on the Fed, but on any institution that is entrusted with the storage of the Gold for other parties.
Concern spread to Austria, where a question arose in Parliament as to where Austria's Gold is stored. The answer was that 80% of of it (224.4 tonnes) is in the UK. (It was claimed that the reason for this is that, if a crisis were to occur, it could be more easily traded from London than from New York City.) Seems reasonable enough, except that the return of the Gold to Austria, if it were requested, may be a bit difficult, as the Gold seems to have been leased out by the UK! To many, a second eyebrow might go up at this point. Lease out the wealth of another nation? Isn't this a bit....irresponsible?
Welcome to the New Gold Shuffle. I found that it's done all the time. The Gold is leased to a Bullion Bank, which typically pays 1% interest to the Fed, with a promise to return it on a specified date. The Bullion Bank then sells the Gold on the open market and uses the proceeds to buy Treasury Bonds which will net a 3-4% return. The nicest thing about such an arrangement is that the lessor continues to claim it on his balance sheet as a line item: ''gold and gold receivables.''After all, an assest that we have leased out is still an asset, even if it has now been sold by the lessee. This of course means that there i less Gold in the world than has been claimed. How much less? That's anyone's guess.
But even if it became generally known that the Fed and other banks are holding paper, rather than physical Gold, couldn't we carry on regardless? Sure, but there's quite a bit of risk. Like...(1) If there were a dramatic rise in the price of Gold and the lessor were to call in the return of the Gold. the Bullion Bank could easily lose far more than its 2-3% margin it was enjoying. (2) Then if there were a crash in the bond market and hyperinflation set in, the bonds that the Bullion Bank purchased could become worthless. So, with the present market, there are any number of possible triggers that could cause the people of Germany, Austria or a host of other nations to demand their Gold be returned.
However, the Fed has already stated in so many words, ''We're sorry, but we can't let you have all your Gold at one time, but we'd be prepared to send it to you over a period of years." The Bundesbank should say to that, I'm afraid that's not good enough. It's our Gold and we insist that you produce it immediately!'' If they were to take this perfectly logical step and the Fed refused, there could be a run on the banks, and, very possibly, within as short a period as 24 hours, a world-wide bank holiday might be declared with regard to Gold. However, this is not what will transpire. Neither logic nor sound banking practices are the object here. The object is to maintain the charade that exists within the banking community. The Bundesbank is just as fearful of a run as the Fed and will be only too willing to accept the Fed's terms.
The Way I See It....it is not the banks who wish to correct the situation. Not one bank wishes to expose the inappropriate practices of any other bank. Their loyalty, is to each other and not to their depositors. We haven't heard the last of this issue. The cat is out of the bag at this point and the depositers' distrust and uncertainty will not be quelled by any counter-offers. Tension will continue to mount amongst depositors, and, at some point, the situation will reach an impasse.
We might consider whether a possible run may become systemic, causing a bank holiday on all the bank's activities, thus freezing any currency that we may have on deposit. We may conclude that it is prudent to only retain in our bank enough money to allow cheques to clear -- an amount sufficient to cover a few months' expenses. In the near future, I predict we may well find that a significant amount of Gold that is claimed to exist in the world will ''disappear.'' Whilst we cannot control this eventuality, we may be able to save the Gold that is being held in our names from disappearing.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
In 2010, for instance, I posted on my Blog on August 30th an article entitled You'd Have "Stolen'' too! which seriously looked into this matter and using Keith Windschuttle's informative research published as a book, ''The Fabrication of Aboriginal History'', to debunk these atrocity stories. Now, we hear that this isn't the end of it.....it seems we have misguided ''reformers'' saying, '' there is more to be done.'' By that they mean to "rework the outdated and racist wording of the Constitution.'' In the capital, Canberra, today MPs will take the next step towards that reform. In fact, as Keith Windschuttle noted, there is nothing racist in the Constitution, despite the claims of a Gillard-appointed panel demanding change.
The passage the panel identifies as racially offensive is Section 51 (xxvi). This reads:
The Parliament shall, subject to the Constitution, have power to make laws for the peaceful order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: The people of any race, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws.
Unless this panel failed to research its topic properly, it should have been well aware that not once since Federation has this section lent support to discrimination or racial abuse of Aboriginal people. Every time state and Commonwealth laws in this field have been tested in the High Court, their intention has been found to be for the benefit of the Aboriginal people. What really is happening is not the removal of racist provisions but the attempted addition of them! And so today MPs will start start the debate over this and another innocuous paragraph to repeal a perfectly good section which lets the government make special laws for, quote, ''people of any race'', inserting sections that recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, bans racial discrimination and affirms English is our national language, while recognising that Indigenous languages were the nation's first tongues.
1) Do you think we should treat each other equally, regardless of ''race'' or ''ethnicity?
2) Then why do you want a new Constitution that treats people differently, on the grounds of race. It's pure stupidity brought on by the Greens and their fellow travellers wanting to keep indigenous people separate, as they had been before European settlement. They want to treat indigenous people like museum artefacts - something quaint to look at with their traditional dancing and weapons but not part of modern Australia. A number of progressive indigenous leaders have said privately that they found all the ''recognition- of-the-traditional-owners'' at the beginning of government speeches patronising and insulting. And when asked why they didn't speak out publicly against these greenie activist assholes, they said they would have been howled down by the Aboriginal Industry of leftists ad Greens. ''It would be too much of a burden to bear,'' said one.
The Way I See It....the myth of the "Stolen Generations" as I wrote in my previous posting, was spun from the distortion of missionary workers receiving, not kidnapping, half-caste children. The treatment of half-caste children by their parents was well known and was appalling. It would have been a crime not to rescue them and send them into mission stations for caring. Indeed, even today we still ''remove'' or ''steal'' a disproportionate number of Aboriginal children for a good moral purpose: they are in trouble, abused and need help.
It's not just the ''Stolen Generations'' media beat-up but even Philip Noyce's distorted-history film, Rabbit Proof Fence that has robbed children of pride in their country; that this film and repetition of this myth has given newcomers less reason to embrace us, that it has made villains of caring heroes who once saved children abandoned by everyone else, and that it tells Aboriginal children that this is such a genocidal society that they should not even want to join in, even if they dared. Worst still this fiction is actually killing children!
Listen to other Aboriginal leaders such as Wesley Aird, Mick Gooda and Linda Burney, who all have said a fear of the ''stolen generations' tag ''has made us too scared to save Aboriginal children right now.'' And why? Because I believe, we don't want to admit that Aboriginal children were once rescued not from their Aboriginality, but from harm like this. We refuse to remove them from harm today, to avoid admitting this may be why we removed them yesterday. Changing the Constitution will only complicate things further.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Professor G. Cornelis van Kooten holds a chair in Environmental Studies and Climate at Canada's University of Victoria and has written this in the past week:
|Chart Showing 16 Years Without Significant Warming|
I have worked on climate problems related to forestry, both in terms of adaptation and mitigation. However, I first looked at the broader problem of climate change when, about five years ago, I was asked to teach climate economics in a new Climate studies minor in the Faculty of Social Sciences at my university. It opened my eyes!
I have now encountered a significant number of scientists and others who have been personally attacked and even threatened with violence for their contrary views but now keep such views to themselves. Indeed, I would even dare say that there are likely as many on my own university campus who are skeptical about the human origins of supposed global warming as there are those who support the so-called consensus and my university is noted for for its climate scientists and pro-anthropogenic origins of global warming.
So here is what I found.... The climate models have never been validated and are simply unreliable. To add insult to injury, the climate models were also used to make claims about the increasing intensity of storms, rainfall events, etc., when all the empirical evidence indicates that storm events have been on the decline. After reading large amounts of literature by astrophysicists, I am more convinced that changes in solar activities (whether sunspots, various types of cycles, etc) are a better explanation of changing temperature and possible global warming than CO2.
The highest temperature projections are based on affecting the poorest people in world. But it will be not be from rising temperatures (which are not) but from the increased Carbon Dioxide that will see yields of all leading crops rising dramatically. So per capita income of the poorest people will see them earning 15 times more than now. There are huge benefits to health and every other measure one cares to choose when one becomes rich. These more than outweigh any damage from climate change. So you can appreciate that rising CO2 emissions are, for the most part, a side effect of alleviating global poverty. To mitigate climate change one needs to force the vast majority of humankind to continue living in abject poverty. I would welcome 3 degrees of warming, or even more. Warm weather is much better for one's health than cold weather.
The Way I See It....preventing climate change does not help the poor, it dooms them! Poverty simply kills more people than climate ever will. In my view, the only real threat to humanity comes from the eco-fascist environmental movement. The threats to polar bears, ecosystems, ice caps, glaciers and agriculture are vastly overstated and in many cases, non-existent. I have yet to see convincing evidence that the threats are going to be catastrophic. It was 3 degrees warmer in 950AD when the Vikings were running around in shorts and boots raping and pillaging and found a green land they named Greenland.
Economists, as well as myself, have warned and continue to warn against the use of emissions trading. They worry about additionality, leakages, transaction costs, and of course corruption, that are associated with emissions trading. The Europeans are addicted to it and Australia has followed blindly to instigate it and now Obama seems to be imbued with this stupidity. All the while Canada, Japan Russia and China have walked away from the idea. In conclusion, perhaps, massive subsidies to support wind and solar developments on the basis of job creation might be a more insane policy.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Even more galling is that Dr Karl Kruszelnicki (photo), one of Australia's ''National Living Treasures'' , last week tweeted an outrage to his 177,000 admiring followers, about a journalist's article, stating the latest findings, saying, ''How does Andrew Bolt get away with saying our planet hasn't warmed in the last 16 years?' His employers pay him to say this misconception?''. Dr Emerson replied: ''Mr Bolt can have his own opinions but he can't have his own facts. Temperatures are rising. Fact!" Just last month, an admission from the godfather of global warming, NASA's James Hansen stated warming has been flat for more than decade. Do Karl and Emerson truly dispute this evidence?
Dr Karl, as he is affectionately known, presents science on the government controlled leftist ABC's radio and television, writing books and doing guest spots on other channels giving insight and explaining various scientific events and phenomena. So you would expect him to know the very basic data about global warming. This is an egregious example of warmist know-nothingness. It is also a symbol of the giddy and irresponsible ignorance of so many of the noisier global warming prophets. This wouldn't be serious if Dr Kruszelnicki wasn't such a public figure and helping to promote a great scare that our gases are frying the world.
To compound the ignorance is the arrogance Dr Karl showed in a following tweet, by debating the figures of Britain's MET, asserting the world has warmed 0.3 degrees in those 16 years -- which still isn't that much, actually. But I discover the Met''s figures show warming just one-sixth of what the good doctor claimed (0.05 degrees Centigrade). That is so small that scientists say it's statistically insignificant. It's indistinguishable from background noise. Essentially ZERO!
In the foolish hope that these two men may reconsider their opinions and just in case there is any doubt about what the Met figures show, here is the Met in its own words:
The linear trend from August 1997 (in the middle of an exceptionally strong El Nino) to August 2012 (coming at the tail end of a double-dip La Nina) is about 0.03C/decade, amounting to a temperature increase of 0.5C over that period....
--------Or put it this way: if this rate of warming is real and was maintained for the rest of the century, the world by 2100 would be hotter by about 0.27C of a degree. You'd struggle to even measure it. You certainly wouldn't notice a change in climate, other than the natural ones that have always been with us.
The Way I See It....I am terribly disappointed and even astonished Dr Karl doesn't know about this pause in the warming, and didn't check it out even after Andrew Bolt alerted him to it. Secondly, I'm even more astonished that after finally (apparently) learning from his mistake, Dr Karl did not apologise to his followers and Mr Bolt, issue a public correction or give any indication he would reassess his global warming catastrophism. He's given no sign he will change his mind about anything even after learning the planet hasn't warmed 0.3C degrees in 16 years as he thought, but just 0.05C. If he is in denial, his science degrees and his reputation will mean nothing in the eyes of many now.
His only response, it seems, is to remove from his Twitter site any tweets on this topic that might be held against him. I don't think that's good enough for him to cling to his delusion. And, of course, there's some basic questions about intellectual integrity and being straight with your audience. So I ask Dr Karl, much honoured ABC science presenter, to at least tell us this: when facts change, sir, does your opinion?
Miss Me ?? I'm back....after a week off fighting a virus, I find there's plenty of info piling up.....coming from my many website sources to keep me busy for weeks. Let's get started!
An asteroid half the size of a US football field will dart between Earth and orbiting satellites this coming Saturday, sparing the human race and putting on a show for sky gazers in Eastern Europe, Asia and Australia, NASA said. The 45 meter (150 foot) asteroid, named 2012 DA14 (according to NASA's Near Earth Object Program), will pass over the Indian Ocean at about 27, 358 kilometres -- lower than the orbits of some 400 satellites -- in the closest known approach of an object this size. ''It will come extremely close and travel in a north-to-south trajectory at 7.8 kilometres a second, or about 8 times the speed of a rifle shot'', NASA scientists said last week. Could you image the tsunami it would cause if it did hit the Indian Ocean? It would make the Boxing Day (Dec 26th) tsunami look like a rock dropped in a wading pool!
''No Earth impact is possible," says Donald Yeomans, who manages the Near-Earth-Object office at Pasadena, California-based Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The NASA unit monitors relatively small space objects such as DA14 to measure the risks they present to the Earth. Researchers said the asteroid's close trajectory will help NASA in preparing for an eventual encounter with a near-Earth object later this decade. While a strike by an asteroid DA14's size would do ''a lot of regional destruction,'' it wouldn't be catastrophic to the planet's population, said Lindley Johnson, program executive for NASA's Near-Earth-Object observations program in Washington. Sadly, for the fantatical environmentalists desires, the damage would rival an impact event in Russia in 1908 that leveled trees over a 2123.8 square-kilometres (820-square-mile) territory. The asteroid that is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs was about 10-kilometres in diameter.
2012 DA14 was discovered by amateur astronomers in February 2012, and has been tracked by NASA ever since. ''When we first discover them we really can't say where in its orbit its going to be at a particular time very accurately,'' explains Yeomans, "If we can get the radars on them right after we discover them then we can nail their orbit for another 100-200 years and run them out and see if there's a problem. If not, we put them aside and go on to the next one.'' The asteroid will be ''pinged'' by NASA's Goldstone Radar in the Mojave desert. The radar will send a beam and then by measuring how and when it bounces back, the scientists can measure its characteristics.
The Way I See It....the scientists have determined DA14 to be a fairly normal asteroid. It is medium-sized and made of stone, as opposed to ice or iron like some asteroids floating around out there in space. Asteroids about this size fly by Earth once every 40 years on average, and strike about once every 1,200 years.
I was fortunate to see the result of an iron 50-meter asteroid in South-West United States that impacted about 50,000 years ago, leveling and killing every living thing in an area 80.5 kilometers (50 miles) around and leaving behind the Meteor Crater in Arizona. At 1200 metres (4000 feet) in diameter and 170 meters deep (570 feet) it is quite a sight!
Saturday, February 2, 2013
George Zimmerman is not the racist that President Obama helped to paint. When he heard that an unarmed 17 year black boy, Trayvon Martin, was shot and killed by a Neighborhood Watch volunteer he assumed it was by a white man. Before even knowing the full story Obama recklessly ramped up the race-hate scenario with the inflammatory remark, ''You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon" then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the Black Panther Party did the rest.
It was weeks later when the Orlando Sentinel revealed the police account of the incident corroborated by witnesses: ''With a single punch, Trayvon decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer, which broke his nose, then he climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk leaving him bloody and battered, where in Zimmerman managed to shoot the 17 year old dead in self-defence.'' Mr Zimmerman is an Hispanic and lawfully has a gun under Florida's ''stand-your-ground'' legislation. Congratulations, Obama, for inflaming white-black tensions when the the worse violence is in fact mostly black-on-black.
I wrote in a recent posting that the Democrats and their left liberal bleeding hearts are demanding tighter gun control with the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in their minds. No mention of tighting up controls of the many ''fruitcakes'' walking around forgetting to take their medications. The Democrat's present stance with guns and their paternal feelings for Negros runs counter to the real historical record which has faded over the years. This is due to the ''excellent'' public education system that ensures that no American under the age of 60 has the slightest notion of their country's history.
Gun control laws were originally promulgated by Democrats to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. This allowed the Democratic policy of slavery to proceed with fewer bumps and, after the Civil War, allowed the Democratic Kn Klux Klan to menace and murder black Americans with little resistance. (Contrary to what illiterates believe, the KKK was an outgrowth of the Democratic Party, with overlapping membership rolls. The Klan was to the Democrats what the deadshit American Civil Liberties Union is today: Not every Democrat is an ACLUér, but every ACLUér is a Democrat. Same with the Klan.)
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger Taney's infamous opinion in 1857 in Dred Scott v. Sandford argued that blacks could not be citizens because if they were citizens they would have to right to own guns: ''It would give them the full liberty to keep and carry arms wherever they went,'' he said. With logic like that, Republicans eventually had to fight a Civil War to get the Democrats to give up slavery. Alas, they were Democrats, so they cheated. Right after the war, Democratic legislatures enacted ''Black Codes'' denying black Americans the right of citizenship -- such as the rather crucial one of bearing arms -- while other Democrats (sometimes the same Democrats) founded the Ku Klux Klan. For more than a hundred years, Republicans have aggressively supported arming blacks, so they could defend themselves against Democrats.
The Anti-Klan Act of 1871, under the authority of Republican president Ulysses S. Grant, employed the U.S. military to destroy the Klan and pretty much completed the job. But the Klan had a few resurgences in the early and mid-20th century. Curiously, wherever the Klan became a political force, gun control laws would suddenly appear on the books. Here's an idea of how those gun control laws worked. Following the firebombing of his house in 1956, Dr. Martin Luther King, who was a Christian minister, applied for a gun permit, but the Alabama authorities found him ''unsuitable''. A decade later, he won a Nobel Peace Prize.
The National Rifle Association opposed these discretionary gun permit laws and proceeded to grant NRA Charters to blacks who sought to defend themselves from Klan violence. Take for example; when WW2 Marine veteran, Robert F. Williams returned home to Monroe, North Carolina, to find the Klan riding high -- beating, lynching and murdering blacks at will. But it was not until he got a Charter from the NRA in 1957 and founded the Black Armed Guard that the Klan got their comeuppance. His repeated thwarting of violent Klan attacks is described in his stirring book, ''Negros With Guns.'' In one crucial battle, the Klan sieged the home of a black physician and his wife, but William's Black Armed Guard stood sentry and repelled the larger, cowardly force. As the the Klan found out, it's not so much fun when the rabbit's got the gun. In his book Williams wrote, ''It has always been an accepted right of Americans, that where the law is unable, or unwilling, to enforce order, the citizens can, and must act in self-defense against lawless violence.''
The Way I See It....the National; Rifle Association's proud history of fighting the Klan has been airbrushed out of the record by those who were complicit with the KKK, Jim Crow and racial terror, to wit: the DEMOCRATS.
The Democrats and the media have motivated many citizens to treat the NRA as a pariah because of its stance to protect the Second Amendment from being trampled by impassioned political idiots, like Dianne Feinstein. Gun control is always a scheme of the powerful to deprive the powerless of the right to self-defense. The Russian Communists in 1926 took all guns from their citizens -- and since then over 60 million Russians perished at the hands of their government. Food-for-Thought.