Thursday, December 27, 2007

Global Warming Will Leave Only One Political Party

Journalist David Lindorff has found something about global warming that he likes. Based on his interpretation of the effects of global warming, he figures that the parts of the country that are home to vast numbers of conservative voters will soon be underwater or rendered uninhabitable by the ravages of global warming. Fewer conservatives, he reckons, is a "silver lining" to the dark cloud of catastrophic climate change.

According to Lindorff's post Global Warming Will Save America from the Right...Eventually, we can expect Florida, parts of Texas, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina to be flooded out in less time than Lindorff expects his two cats to live. He also gloats over his expectations that the midwest farmlands will suffer droughts that will empty out the breadbasket of America and all those pesky conservative farmers. The suffering caused by food shortages doesn't seem to upset him, I guess that is balanced out by the depletion of the people he considers most dangerous - those who don't agree with him. He also finds joy in the idea that conservative retirees will probably no longer have Southwest "right-wing" retirement communities to flock to.

When these citizens are displaced by climate change and are forced to move into other areas, Lindorff suggests some type of organized effort and gerrymandering to make sure they never again wield any political power.

The vitriol and decidedly unconstitutional suggestions made by Lindorff reveal more about him, liberals and the global warming alarmists than a million articles written by a conservative or even a climate skeptic ever could. His frustration obviously stems from the fact that the numbers of those who aren't buying into the global warming alarmism are increasing, and Americans are not as ready to commit economic suicide as he would like.

Luckily, none of what David Lindorff is clapping his hands in glee over is actually going to happen. Unfortunately, it is his type of fringe eco-liberal kooks who are constantly keeping the doom scenarios on the front page of papers and promoting policies that if enacted, will succeed where global warming will not - the destruction of the world as we know it.

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Millions of People Live Despite Global Warming

No, you're not likely to see that headline. The press thrives on disaster, so you will never hear that any changes, if happening, are slow to manifest and that the ultimate extinction of man is not nigh.

Over 400 scientists, many of whom are former or current members of the IPCC have disputed the claims about global warming from the Goracle and the IPCC just this year alone. Still, the press seizes anything that even hints of global warming and runs with it, it's a media frenzy. And it's not hard to find stories about global warming, everything is caused by global warming - rain, snow, heat, cold, drought, flood - you name it, global warming must be to blame. There have many stories in the press regarding the UN conference in Bali, but how many stories were run about the 100 concerned scientists who converged on Bali to urge the conference attendees to stop endangering the world's economies by enacting policies that won't do a thing to stop climate change but may cause economic collapse and a shift in the balance of power?

That's basically what it's all about - power and money.

The UN is proposing a global carbon tax that should net the UN $10-$40 billion dollars a year. Al Gore is chairman and part owner of a business that sells carbon offsets and has made another $100 million from being the global warming spokesman to the world. So who are the parties with monetary interests in global warming?

The press doesn't report that average global temperature has been falling for the past five years, they don't report that a peer-reviewed study of the computer models being used by the global warming alarmists found that they are faulty and have been shown to be inaccurate.

They don't report that at the heart of the global warming agenda is a "redistribution of wealth" as advocated by the "Friends of the Earth" who attended the conference in Bali. And yet they laugh at Czech President Vaclav Klaus when he compares the global warming agenda to communism.

The press prints pictures of polar bears standing on an ice floe riddled with more holes than swiss cheese along with a story about polar bears drowning due to the ice melting but don't tell you that the picture was taken 3 years ago during the summer and that polar bears can swim more than 100 miles.

And they wonder why so many have ceased to believe their global warming hype.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

PETA Proposes Sin Tax on Meat

We all knew this was going to happen, didn't we? PETA has sent a letter to all the Republican and Democratic candidates that explains how we can solve the global warming problem. They contend that eating meat is much more harmful to the environment than all the planes, ships and SUVs in the world combined and therefore propose that a tax on meat-eating must be levied.

Here's how they explain it:

On behalf of PETA and our more than 1.8 million members and supporters, I'm writing to inform you of a proposal that would help stop global warming, reduce Americans' health-care costs, and bring much-needed revenue to the federal government: a 10-cent-per-pound excise (or "sin") tax on every pound of chicken, turkey, pig, fish, and cow flesh sold in grocery stores and restaurants.

That's right, a sin tax. Now, most states have no sales tax on food and a handful that do have taxes give some sort of credit or deduction for low-income families. Only seven states that tax food don't have any form of credit for low-income households. When Tennessee began to explore eliminating the sales tax on food earlier this year, one legislator recommended they replace it with a tax on pornography. They tax food but not pornography?

PETA states in its letter that meat consumption is the number one cause of global warming. They also contend that meat-eating is the cause of major illness and disease and therefore, we would be doing the American citizens a public service by discouraging them from indulging.

Frankly, I am a little sick and tired of the government regulating and taxing things for my own good. I am even more sick and tired of PETA. I wish they would stick to protesting Santa hats on Beluga whales in Japan and leave my hamburger alone.

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

WWF warns of Penguin Decline

The big news of the week has been the report of the WWF to the UN conference in Bali on dwindling penguin populations. There has been widespread coverage of this doomsday prediction stating that "the effects of climate change and overfishing" have caused the penguin population in Antarctica to seriously decline. You just know that if they could put the word "overfishing" in tiny little letters that they would. But more importantly, what climate change? The only climate change in Antarctica is that it is getting colder.

A lot is made of one habitat, the Western Peninsula. What isn't mentioned is that it is the only place in Antarctica that has experienced any warming or melting of sea ice. The truth of the matter is that Antarctic temperatures have been getting colder for at least the last 20 years and Antarctic ice is increasing.

Antarctica is huge, the fifth largest of the seven continents. The western peninsula is a very small bit of the whole continent, most of which has seen increased ice and falling temperatures which is inconsistent with the computer models of what should be happening if global warming were actually taking place at five times the rate of the rest of the world as is claimed by the global warming scaremongers.

Thursday, December 6, 2007

Kangaroo Farts Good for the Environment

Although diary farmers and steak lovers alike have taken a hit from the global warming crowd over the greenhouse effect of bovine flatulence, scientists are waxing enthusiastic over kangaroo digestive emissions. According to them, kangaroos have a special bacteria in their digestive system that keeps their farts devoid of methane, making them more environmentally friendly.

Scientists in Queensland say they can isolate this bacteria so that it can be introduced into feed for sheep and cattle so that their digestive systems will get a tune-up, utilize the food they eat 10 to 15 % more efficiently and not produce the flatulence that contributes to global warming.

There was no indication that scientists worry that the bacteria in kangaroo digestive systems would cause any trouble for the cows and sheep who have never before encountered this bacteria. It might be worth investigating before there is a plague of "jumping cow disease" or something similar.

Since kangaroos are in plenitful supply, some scientists recommend that people just eat more kangaroo and forget about lamb and beef entirely.

Monday, December 3, 2007

Divorce Causes Global Warming

The cry of the global warming alarmists has always been that it is our selfish, excessively consuming ways that are destroying the planet. Now, along with our gas-guzzling vehicles, our failure to recycle toilet paper and our addiction to plastic, our society is harming the environment by having too many divorces. That's right, divorce causes global warming.

This story in The Times singles out the statistics on the US, one of twelve countries studied. The researchers from Michigan State University found that divorced households used 73 billion more kilowatt hours of electricity in 2005 - electricity that could have been saved if the marriage had been saved.

A divorce means two households instead of one and double the housing needs and energy usage. But it isn't just divorced people who are lussing up more natural resources. The study says that those who selfishly remain single in one-person households are the biggest consumers of energy, land and household goods. Singles consume 38% more products (they have more disposable income to buy them), 42% more packaging (all those frozen TV dinners), 55% more electricity (for the microwave, presumably) and 61% more gas (they can afford it) per capita.

So, in addition to increased taxes on fuel and energy, maybe the government should consider a divorce tax or a stiffer tax penalty for being single. Perhaps they should re-consider the law banning polygamy - after all, the more people in a household the better and monogamy means only one household per every two adults. Polygamy could incorporate many families into one household, thus conserving precious resources.

There were no statistics on how much energy was used in the completion of this study nor on the environmental effect of the hot air created as a result.