Sunday, December 6, 2009

Climategate and O's War

About eighteen months ago I was saying in 5 years global warming or climate change whatever you call it would be no more. It seems I am right on track, give or take six months. Of course the MSM is ignoring it and hoping the sixty one megabytes of emails between top level scientist altering evidence of a decade long decline in global temperature, will just go away. A decline that the all the "settled" science did not forecast. Along with that the raw data that created the forecasting software was destroyed for unknown reasons. Odd that instead of bringing this (what should be) good news to light the media is focused on a couple who "crashed" a WH party. The couple BTW says they have emails containing their invitation. I am gonna sidetrack for a moment and explain this; the couple are starting a reality show on Bravo a subsidiary of NBC who is owned by GE. Jefferey Immelt is the head of GE and if you remember the WH guest list that was put online several weeks ago is a frequent visitor (very frequent). Mr. Immelt is partnering with the administration in the new al"greener" world the cap and trade will bring. With GE making the profit. So you can decide, did the bumbling idiots at the Secret Service expose the President of the United States to "party crashers", or is the govt. controlled media using this to hide the "Climategate" emails?

Also toping the news is Obama's plan for Afghanistan, which is at best a weak attempt to please both his base and his detractors. If Al Qaeda announced that in 18 months after training some new jihadist they were going to leave Afghanistan and go to Jordan (for example), we would be celebrating a victory. Which is probably what our enemies in Afghanistan were doing after the speech and why Sec. Gates is now saying there is no timeline on exiting the fight. Now while Obama did grant the request for more troops (good thing), but is moving them in slow and promising they will be out just in time for the 2012 election. After watching the speech I felt betrayed and couldn't imagine how the West Point'ers were feeling knowing they would soon be under Obama's command. Of course MSNBC's Matthews described them as the "Enemy Camp" which was disturbing enough. Not to mention that it was almost the same speech that Obama gave back in March when he was talking about his plans for Afghanistan, so that leaves me thinking "Why did Obama spend so much time 'Thinking' out this 'New' strategy when he already had it?" The next couple years are going to be be very long.


  1. “Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.

    It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.

    A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.

    Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.

    But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if this evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.

    The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.

    All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.

    It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.

    Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet--with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.

    Harleigh Kyson Jr.

  2. Thank you for your comment, I would like to address a couple of your points.
    First off I do not believe the "minority" is as minor as you think. The movie Expelled from Ben Stein already shows us that dissenters in politically motivated science are put down in anyway possible. I believe the same is true for man-made climate change. With that in mind how many scientist have been shunned, discredited or worse to keep them silent about their climate change findings?

    Secondly science can never be "Settled". Such a staunch finality should not and can not exist or it isn't science any more. Even if we are talking about something that is believed to be a popular held fact the door should never be closed. Think about it, the earth was flat, that was the common belief and if you asked anyone of the time they would have told you the science was settled. When you restrict the ability for someone to question, it is no longer science.

    Last, alarmist have said many wild things over the years. I don't know if you recall see the TIME magazine cover from the mid-seventies that spoke of the coming ice age. Some scientist believed at the time the earth was moving into an ice age. Add a few prominent politicians to the mix with large stakes in companies that sold winter coats and the same fake hysteria would have started then. Billions of dollars spent on every kook idea to slow or prepare yourself for the coming catastrophe. Think of the countless millions or billions (or more) spent on switching out spray cans and Styrofoam to get rid of CFC's that have now been shown by science to have meant nothing to the environment. What happened to the hole in the O-zone layer? I thought the O-zone layer was going to disappear and leave us cooking in the sun's radioactive rays! The planet warmed and cooled before man was on it. Mars is warming and cooling, with us nowhere close to it. We are a speck in the universe. While I'd love to believe we have the power to control the warming and cooling of the not only our planet but our neighboring ones as well we're just not that special. Sure we could wipe out human life on earth with nukes. But the planet would recover and keep warming and cooling without us.