Marlo Lewis vs. Al Gore?? on Fox, right? No! On CNN! In other news, baby foxes, little foxes are called Kits
...So I saw the CEI on CNN last week (well good 'ol Marlo Lie-ass anyway) to give, you know, the "other side of the story." It was nice to see Heidi Collins 'tough' questions to Marlo, i guess, but basically let Marlo jr. rant for 5 full minutes. So the fog about uncertainties just refused to lift... Sheesh! A Nobel Prize and CNN is busy butt-licking the CEI (What? was the AEI and "singer" not available??) That seemed to go nowhere. Maybe Schullemberger and Nordhaus are right. Either that, or maybe this guy below, maybe he can tell us whats up with the weather?
oh wait! that was the esteemed Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Marlow Lewis yikes. So apparently the 'global warming crusaders are plotting to put an "Energy Starved Planet on an Energy Diet." And apparently energy efficiency, according to Marlo Jr. will lead to economic meltdown. Mr. Marlow obviously has no idea who David Goldstein is.
So far I think that weatherman #1 up there makes more sense. But maybe one of these, from FOX (you know, to be fair & balanced) might make more sense...
What me worry? Well it's always interesting when climate deniers all of the sudden scurry up onto the soapbox to become promoters of climate solutions, right? When they stop even doubting the anthropogenic causes and turn coats 180 degrees. Always interesting... and even more so when its from the AEI, the American Enterprise Institute (which houses of course Fred "2nd hand smoke does not harm the baby" Singer, as well as the bloodthirsty and obsequious Michael "Nuke 'em All" Ledeen... but that is in fact what just happened today (maybe it has something to do with Exxon no longer funding climate skeptics). In a recently released "opinion piece" Joel Schwartz writes that scientist of course are dead set against having a "warmer but richer" planet, and also that the only real way to deal with climate change (now that it is real), is to fill the atmosphere with sulfur and other particulate (just like chemtrails.... but real?). Geoengineering is our only way out he says, and those damn scientists! They just don't seem to get that. Schwartz does, of course, because he's not a scientist (he does have an MS in planetary Sciences, but he spent much more time with the RAND Corporation (nice) and working for the Orwellian "Coalition for Clean Air" (which managed to set back clean air regulations across Florida). Trust me, anything this guy is going to promote is a danger to every living thing.
IPCC's Fourth Assesment lures eco-fundamentalist out of the woodwork Its always neat-o when those teeny tiny cars stop in the middle of the three rings, and not one not two but almost a dozen clowns come out of the vehicle...always brings a smile to *most* kiddies' faces (most because actually a lot of kids HATE clowns, right?).
Well after the IPCC released the new AR4 (or Fourth Assessment report) it seems that the media has been having a climate field day-- i mean after 20 years it is interesting to note the QuoteUnquotes are off (no longer "greenhouse gasses" and no longer "climate change" at least in the MSM. not exacly in the EconoFundamentalist papers but more on them later...). I guess for the most part, once your readership is convinced of something, you might as well toe the line... It is amazing to see every paper tout themselves as bearing the burden of bringing us the climate truth for decades now(!) And usually they seem to be the only ones who were "daring" to tell the truth all along. They're still printed on virgin tree pulp, they're still chock-full of car and tire ads, and of course they are the very same ones who would pit the very same 3 climate skeptics (Lindzen Singer & Michaels...) into every debate since the 80's... But they're banking that no one has memories that long, and that they can now come out smelling like roses, all concerned about global climate change... w/e ..Now the bigger irony is with this much press going to climate change, there's even more pulped virgin forest being inked about climate than ever before(!)
Won't you please help? The C.E.I. just lost some major funding!! Well now that Exxon has to wipe the egg off their face and no longer fund climate change "Skeptics" we have to look at the ramifications of this on some near & dear colleagues. And I propose we raise some fund for them so they can continue their important [sic] work. I mean think of poor Fred Singer, its not like he can go back to big tobacco and get back on their dole, and what about poor Patty Michaels? He's used to mainlining that oil cash, I mean he's used to being well funded to add that line of reality to the climate debate (well at least until the peer reviews kick his work to the curb, which they often do). But most importantly, what wll become the CEI when they loose their Exxon ducats? They have been raking in $250K a year from the eX with a guarantee that at least $180K will be spent on "climate skepticism" they can't do that anymore.. so will Exxo even want to give them the balance of $75K if they can no longer pay for them "CO2, some call it a poison we call it life" commercials? I mean really, Lee Raymond oughta know his bang for buck is pretty weak there, and that money would be put to better use with advertising saying how the Valdez spill was great for the Alaskan economy or something. Come to think of it, the CEI would probably be willing to do those commercials (anything for a buck!)
I've been reading this book called "Eco Freaks" written by John Berlau and the cretins at the CEI (the competitive enterprise institute) and it's a sickening tome full of hate and venom. It's about how all environmentalists are these "Animists" who worship trees and want only to see people get killed so that the violent nature can have her way with us. He's really full of it (hate and venom), but I have been spending my nights taking notes so I can clarify a few of the details. Because people ought to know that this disinformation is going on (really he blames environmentalists for killing birds, trees, people, for taking down the WTC and for hurricane Katrina among other things). Truly vile his manipulations of the fact....
And so i decided that what we really need to do is have a bake sale for the CEI. Those poor bums would be on the street if it weren't for the corporate handouts (they rake in $3M a year, Exxon is only a little piece). And since everything they do, they claim is in our best interest, I thought it only befitting that we raise a little scratch for these doods. They need it. And the worst part is, if we let them look for their $$$ elsewhere, they will no doubt find some poison manufacturer or some union carbide or other slovenly planet-killer and sign up a new cause celebre... so we have to raise them some cash before they go out and do it again!!!!!
Don't Worry, Be Happy, it seems that there us no such thing as climate change. Apparently from the new video with decades-old (discredited) info. It's like a Patrick Michaels retro party!
This 25 minute video will "amaze and astound you" see, it turns out, there is no such thing as anthropogenic climate change.... isn't that good to know? At a news conference held in Ottawa, some of North America’s "foremost climate experts" provided evidence demonstrating that the science underlying the Kyoto Protocol is seriously flawed; a problem that continues to be ignored by the Canadian government. (((um, this is a bit dated the present administration totally takes these flaws seriously~~ why we're now canceling all our programs and erasing any mention of climate change from government websites)). Even if this entire 25 minute video's theory is bunk, "Scientists" ((doenst that make it seem like it was some consensus based body? not a few well paid freeaks with tar-sand greasy lined pockets)) called on the Canadian government to delay implementation of the Kyoto Protocol until a thorough, public review of the current state of climate science has been conducted by climate experts (really, it's from the Friends of Science. And with friends like that....)
This is Andrew Revkin. He shot this self portrait around the time he was shooting the cover for his latest book "The North Pole Was Here." Revkin has been writing about climate change for over 20 years, he rocks. He's also been writing for the New York Times on climate for these decades.. So one can imagine that anyone who shoots-up petroleum is not going to like him. In fact Senator James Inhofe was so incensed by Revkins latest book that he hit the podiums and microphones before he took the rubber tie off his arm. Veins a-poppin' Inhofe was foaming at the mouth about a book he obviously hand't read (Inhofe, who BTW, was a "fact" checker for Rush Limbaugh before becoming a senator). He really didn't like the title (probably the only thing he read in the whole book) as it's alarmist and making people think that climate change will affect them. So in this awesome Grist interview* Andrew Revkin explains that the title is actually from reality, they mapped the north pole, then the ice started sliding, and then the sign that said "North Pole is Here" was changed to 'was' it's not like it was a mad prediction of future climate changes... it was simply reporting a current event. But the interview is a classic, Revkin has many great climate one-liners... it made me laugh, i hope you enjoy it!
[Grist Interviews Andy Revkin] PS: he also has a band, you can hear it on his Myspace (seriously how many other climate reporters have a myspace?? Revkin rocks, even on the mandolin!)
wasn't i just talking about Arilngton Virginia's newspaper for the intellectually-handicapped (USAToday)? Well according to them, Florida is the Canary in the coalmine when it comes to these "So-Called Greenhouse Gasses" (would love it if they added So-Called to every scientific discovery since that time... 'so called gravity' "so called internal combustion" buah hah). Anyway, according to America's Coloring Book, don't worry it may suck for Florida, but it wont really suck until around 2099 or 2100 (so says teh crystal ball). Whiel they mention real actual people, even Kunstler and the Weatrhermakers, they stick to this 2100 thing, and besides, as they say: "But most, including Edmonds, think of climate change as an uncertainty-plagued risk-management problem. People didn't deal with acid rain, remove lead from gasoline or start protecting the ozone layer until the benefits of doing so were understood."
Where's the pea? Everybiodies a winner! Step right up!
some people just wouldn't recognize a 1 1/2" steel rebar if it up and smacked them alongside the head! Ok, some people, i guess, have a right to be idiots. I mean let's say your dad was also your brother and his dad was also his brother, sure, you might be as thick as your glass lenses, and it would behoove the rest of us to be kind and not too judgmental. But speaking of mental, some people just don't have that excuse, no excuse for being idiots. And i guess that's when the steel rebar test comes in handy. Because sometimes people can be idiots. And that's not stupid or dim, that's intelligent enough to use a word processor, beligerent enough to think that hubris is better than ACTUAL FACTS, and of course if you are stupid enough to live in a flood plane a second time after the waters have swept everything away, well then you deserve what you have coming... And why the vitriol, you ask? Well I just read something completely idiotic. I mean so stupid that I shake my head (and I've seen my fair share of stupid stuff in the past).
So thanks to this guy, Jonathan Loubiere, (who happens to be an LSU grad student in chemistry-- see, you can be smart and still be an idiot!) He has actually spent time and effort to write about how Global Warming is not yet Proven [sic]. No. Ferreal. This guy is in Baton Rouge LA and says that GW is a myth.
I ought to just stop reading anything the moment i see "opinion" in the editorial sectioning of online news.... MARK STEYN, an editor for the Jerusalem Post just cut/copied/pasted some lame-ass opinion piece on the cult of global warming. (sheeesh! you'd think that a country like israel, with all of its problems, and no oil would just mind their `own business, but obviously, it's a little more than "opinion" and for some reason Mr. Steyn's bosses decided that we need more obfuscation lies and slight-of-words printed in the diarreah of anti-greenhouse mental sludge sphere.... Not to mention that this lame-o didn't even do his own research! Anyone who has had to wade through the CO2-is-good-for-you tripe, will be familiar not only with the arguments he pastes, but even the actual wording and phrases.... Oh my god, will someone please duct tape this useless pontificator? Not only does he bring up Michael Chriton's anti environmentalist's book in the first line (a sure indication where the crap will roll-- not only does he think Chriton is a purveyor of sound policies, but he actually thinks it's a good read! So no accounting for taste, the guy still has his head up his butt)
And you may think i'm being a little harsh here, so let me just pluck some adjectives from this bile-spewer's litany for y'all: "Martin Sheenesque Hollywood eco-poseur," ..."eco-tists sounded more than a little squaresvill," ..."the short-term interests of the eco-establishment count for more than the long-term health and welfare of ordinary Australians," ...."laughably fraudulent (hear that Patrick Michaels?)," ...."Yet, such is the power of the eco-lobby that this fraud became the centerpiece of UN reports on global warming.," ...."the problem for the Kyoto cultists," ...."Kyotocrats will be citing lack of climate change as evidence of climate change. They are, literally, a church, and under the Holy Book of Kyoto their bishops demand that the great industrial nations of the world tithe their incomes to them," ...."unlike the Kyotophiles, their (the Beyond Kyoto crew)strategy isn't a form of cultural self-flagellation," ..."One day, the world will marvel at the environmental hysteria at our time, and the deeply damaging corruption of science in the cause of an alarmist cult.," I normally don't hold back, but I will with what i would tell this guy to do with his plagaristic "opinion"
Instead i will offer an antidote. This Mark Steyn guy, obviously genuflected, and open for rimming any American will (or what he thinks will appease America), might do better (and for anyone looking for an actual good opinion) try reading an article actually from within the United States. I don't think you can find a more car crazy place than Petaluma California (That's where the car's first owner was, a little old lady from Petaluma). And yet, The Petaluma Argus Courier has a great article by Bruce Hagen entitled "Our choice: petrolism or patriotism". Now, maybe I have a bias, but this guy hits all the notes, with a pro-activist stance and you can really understand what he's talking about. So there Mr. Jerusalem Post Disinformation Editor, try some reality....
Theeeeeeyyyyyyre heeeeerrree! ok, I mentioned this when it first came out, and I apologize, i handled it in a very cynical way--
But now they're back for more Beyond Kyoto! Everybody say Ho! ...and while Condi was going to go and attend the six-nation Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate next week, she canceled, and now Undersecretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky will be attending. And she must be pleased as punch. I know I know, she looks it, that's for sure! The meeting will be the first for the partnership, which includes Australia, China, India, Japan and South Korea along with the United States and was set up under an agreement last July. ((Woah! Slow down there...)) and Undersecretary Dobriansky must be excited! And she certainly knows the party line, stating at least 4 times how this agreement (BTW "agreement on climate",not on climate change) will be going "beyond kyoto." Seriously, she said it in every possible combination ("we're bringing innovations to take us beyond kyoto"... "we come not with an effort to circumvent the Kyoto Protocol, but rather to complement it with action that goes beyond the treaty", blah blah blah...), and it leads me to ask just one thing: Why exactly, if they have no problem going beyond Kyoto, could they not sign Kyoto? Or maybe not actually sign it, maybe just stop trying to derail it at every chance they got? I mean if they come to praise Kyoto not bury it... OK well anyway, it's interesting to see what Greenpeace's take is on this: apparently there are no new innovations, except of course for the meme 'beyond kyoto.' Thanks heavens for PR flacks...
((hey! thats the second one-word bowie quote i have here)) Wanna participate in the UNFCCC but not in Montreal? Well, Climate Action Network are down there on the floor, and every day they pin the winners of the Fossil Of The Day Awards and as you can see from the link, you can join in the fun! The award goes to the country how blocks the most progress at the conference. At presstime, the winner seems to be a three way tie between USA Russia and Australia. Go team go! [CAN]
....and on that climate chanhe Montreal topic: An interesting story form Financial Times today, about a new group at the conference, the NGO: Coalition for Rianforest Nations</a> basically working to get rainforest preservation valued for carbon exchange credits (one of the main grease wheels at the UNFCCC).
and if you do want one, here's a nice primer on climate change called Why Montreal Matters
big news in Washintoon: many a greenie pissed off by "solar pork" I find this an interesting conundrum--- both sides have good points, and yet the whole thing seems so lampoonish. I mean come on, Government Pork has traditionally been for the anti-green (stuff like highway building), and here we are in the 21st century where 1/2 of the solar PV industry is pitted against the other and the mud if flying out of the trough.... Traditionally the government calls it "Earmarking." A Bill is about to be passed (let's say about politeness, or some abortion pill), and some congressman comes over and tacks on a highway amendment, saying basically, he will vote for the bill, so long as his friends back home get to build another $75M highway in his home town (i mean, voting base). But that's oldschool--- we're in the 21st now!
And as reported today in Renewable Energy Access the shizzle is hitting the fanizzle in a big way. What's going on is that state-by-state "Earmarking" has been done to support big mega solar projects. Good you say, right? Well, apparently its at the cost of our future (sort of). For example, NREL had to lay off a whole bunch of people (who were working on new solar techs, new applications and processes)... Which in my opinion sucks. They have always been on the forefront, and losing their funding so that some private company can get $2M to build a 1Megawatt solar plant on a brownfield near the highway may or may not be a great alternative (it's good in the sense that people driving by will acclimatize themselves to solar being good). It is a tough one, because other examples are even dumber; Sandia labs for example just got $3.5M to build a demonstration site to show off their parabolic solar stirling systems. Great tech! I'm all for people knowing about it, but don't you think that a 4,500 acre site in the California desert is a good demonstration, especially since a company is paying for it, not the government dole?
I'm all for government sponsored facilitation. I love tax credits and rebates and incentives... shit, just removing the market barriers would be good enough for me. And I do think that there's merit in these mega-projects and demonstrations... but when it comes in the old fashioned method of pork "earmarking" I think we are bound to get into a Gap Dress situation; media shock, disinformation, and the rest...
I'm really on the fence on this one. Will have to see how it plays itself out....
re-thinking the standard journalistic framework Great article today in RealClimate; I urge everyone who wants to be informed to go over there and read it! They take umbrage on the countless journalists that try to cover the Climate Change issue in a fair and balanced way --they usually end up interviewing one of the thousands of actual scientists, before being balanced and going to ask Fred Linson, Patrick Michaels or another of the (quickly disappearing) Fossil Fuel Rim-Jobbers out there to get the other side of the store (the "don't worry be happy side"). So RC said enough is enough. And I quote:
There are only a handful of "contrarian" climate scientists who continue to dispute that consensus. To give these contrarians equal time or space in public discourse on climate change out of a sense of need for journalistic "balance" is as indefensible as, say, granting the Flat Earth Society an equal say with NASA in the design of a new space satellite. It's plainly inappropriate. But it stubbornly persists nonetheless
They then site an example of how things out to be covered. They link to this op-ed piece by Mark Trahant of the Seattle Post Intellignecer, who finally decides that "Fairness, or journalist balance, is the obstacle. It's time for journalists -- and especially those of us who write opinion -- to declare outright that truth is a higher calling than fairness..... ...It's a call to make certain we never have to look back and explain to the next generation why we ignored the overwhelming evidence. The highest journalism value must be truth. But fairness will be served, too, especially when that means being fair to our children." Amen.
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
scalarparty's journal
