Change is scary

The entire concept of being scared of change is what drives and motivates people to be fearful and even paranoid in the modern environmental movement.   The reason for this at its heart is that people are fearful of change.  And nowhere has society changed more than in modern society where we have gone from an agrarian society to a modern office worker society in just 100 years.  This dramatic change has left people without an outlet to discuss each change individually and so these people no longer promote such ideas as conservation and science when they advocate for change.  And so these people have turned into fear hustlers and fear promoters who spread their fears to everyone else under the guise of “the environment” or even homeland security.  These calls to change the world are based on the simple concepts of fear and paranoia.

Continue reading

Wind Power: all of the aesthetic beauty of a wiener

After every argument in favor of wind power is deconstructed as it is here:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100227983/wind-turbines-are-a-human-health-hazard-the-smoking-gun/

and here:

http://timworstall.com/2012/08/18/calling-william-connelly/#comments

The only argument left standing is that we should build these monsters because they are pretty.  You can talk to any green and they will go on and on about how they admire the aesthetic view of them from afar and how they want to gaze upon their naked faces in the glowing embers of sunset.

windts_20120207T144936_550Wind-energy

 

Continue reading

Oregon State University’s stance on science

Science at Oregon State University is no longer being applied honestly or even in any resemblance to the scientific method.  Instead of measuring statistics properly and coming to a good conclusion based off of solid data, we have incidents such as the recent Marcott paper where the data says one thing, and the scientist says another.

The story in this case seems to be that after they performed wrong calculations to get the data they wanted, they put a tiny disclaimer in after the fact that their conclusions in the paper are not based on proper methods.  Basically, in the actual paper’s abstract they make several “opinions of the author” and yet they imply strongly that their conclusions come from actual data.  What is even worse is that Dr. Marcott admits to it and yet the paper still remains and the news articles remain the same as well.   This is easy to see how this could be construed as outright fraud since the brand new PHD Dr. Marcott is performing incorrect methods and yet after admitting it does not change any of the conclusions he made in the abstract.  He was caught in the act of lying and instead of apologizing and changing the incorrect lines, he double downs on dishonesty and says that its OK to lie in his conclusions because he put a disclaimer at a separate website that explains that his methods are “not robust.”  This does not answer the questions of why he is being dishonest in the first place however.  Perhaps we need to start posing the questions for Oregon State University.  If we can not expect your scientists to ever tell the truth, how in the world can we the people trust you with our money?  And if you can not even apply the scientific method correctly, why should we trust our children in your hands when you obviously just teach them to lie, cheat, and steal instead of following proper science?

Continue reading

The joke of Rio (+20)

For most people, the entire concept of Rio+20 or United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, is really nothing to be worried about.  Indeed, most of the world’s (larger) leaders are staying away and otherwise skipping this massive and ironically “unsustainable” party where vast amounts of food and drink will be consumed at a rather “unsustainable” level and where I have no doubt large amounts of illicit drugs and other forms of partying will occur.  But, for appearance sakes, they will send “Delegates” to party.  The amount of CO2 emissions put out due to air travel and other forms of travel just make this entire event a joke.  What is the point to this escapade if the world will no longer agree to anything due to nothing but the current recession world-wide?

 

 

Continue reading

A call to clean up our science and Politics

Recently, it has become apparent through the release of approximately 5000 emails from scientists and various activists and others that even more shady behavior has been going along in climate science.  The last piece of the puzzle in this regard of course is the political connection, but the obvious connection between science and activists is very apparent and it occurs among all of the famous climate scientists and they are influenced by and influence activists with their techniques of working together for the “cause” (As they call it.)

Several emails in particular highlight this rather unhealthy relationship.  Science always gets ideas wherever it can receive them, but it should never be influenced by this and conversely balanced activism should never have scientists telling them “which scientists they can trust.”

But for now just the emails I will discuss: (2890 first) http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=2840

………CRU’s position (we don’t take positions!), well my position is simply that we can’t use hurricane changes as a detection variable, but precautionary principle clearly suggests (given some theoretical grounds for danger) we should reckon our systems are going to have to cope with more and worse in the future.
Cheers,
Mike

The previous discussion involves hurricanes and a discussion between Mike Hulme (scientist) with WWF who at this time wanted to broadcast how global warming was causing hurricane Floyd.  Just yet another unhealthy relationship there and some very interesting things said by a so-called scientist in that email.

Other emails that show this connection include: 5233 which shows a discussion of how the WWF can use more radical (or sober as they call it) portraits of the GCM results by not making the results statistically significant.  The scientist again in this case is M. Hulme who has no problems with this omission of facts at all.  4330 is another interesting email in this regard which once again shows outside contact between WWF, scientists and in this case the email itself shows us plenty at the end of it: (Email is to Mike Hulme).

 

……….I particularly like one of his statements which went something like ‘It would be very presumptious of us if we thought we could exactly model something as complex as the natural environment…..’ a good way of describing the complexity we face.
I will make fresh contact with WWF this week to see if they have any interest in trialling the disc and creating  teacher guidance notes on potential uses for the disc.
Regards
Jane

Jane Measures BP Britannic House

Now stopping there for a second, there are plenty of emails that I recommend reading that have similar veins in this with connections between the scientists and the green organizations.  The relevant emails in this regard are:

1006, 1216, 2890, 3141, 4127, 4221, 4280, 4330, 5233. (some have been mentioned earlier, but that is just the exhaustive list.)

Again, this shows us that there is definite connections between scientists and activists which goes far beyond normal working relationships and go towards a belief and or cause (as they call it.)  I seem to think this is evidence that we must be careful and we must act now.

The BBC has already been shown to be biased as in this news article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066706/BBC-sought-advice-global-warming-scientists-economy-drama-music–game-shows.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

This bias where activists and scientists would give the BBC advice on how to show only one side of the issue is very clear and the BBC actually paid these people to help them stay biased.  That is a nightmare coming to the BBC as it shows that not only did they use public funds to help them deceive their own public, but they would also allow these same scientists and activists to edit programs to show the right message for “the cause.”

And we could go on and on how the plot has thickened in the AGW debate since the release of more emails which shows even more scientists who broke the law (but will not be prosecuted due to statute of limitations issues.)  In other words, the emails prove even more so then the first set of climate-gate emails that these scientists lie, cheat, steal and do anything they can get away with to fulfill their false science under the guise of the “pre-cautionary principle.”  This is strictly speaking nothing about science but more about a cult.   The BBC is biased as shown, and there are roughly 220,000 emails still locked away to be released for various reasons.  These emails at some point will be released and if they hold as many bombshells as this current set does, well then…the end result is exactly the same and the level that this corruption exists to is anyone’s guesses.  I will remind everyone that very few emails have surfaced between politicians and scientists which I will remind everyone is sure to be contained in the remaining emails.

So if this does not break the camel’s back, the next batch ought to ruin more than some scientists and activists.

Let us also remember that these same scientists telling the world that they never lied when the evidence is right in front of the scientists is even more outrageous.  The only solution to this is obvious, and it involves removing green activism in any form by removing the tax-exempt status these organizations have and taxing them and putting rules on them as far as lobbying in politics goes.  As for the scientists, I fully believe a good portion of them do deserve jail time for breaking laws.  And the solution is to wash them out of academia first and then prosecute them for crimes they have committed including fraud.

Same goes for the activists, if they committed fraud on people by lying and cheating to generate income in any form, they too are guilty of fraud under our laws.

So the evidence is there for everyone to read, the question is what are we going to do about it?  Are we going to allow them 2 years again to get off with a slap on the wrist for employing these techniques?

Or will we actually hold them accountable for their actions as normal people should be?

Self-fulfilling prophecies

It is quite telling when we are told one thing and then…well yes that thing comes true but only because people forced it to happen.  It reminds me of a self-fulfilling prophecy which if you think of it is the most common type of prophecy that ever comes true.  This is because the prophecy causes people to act in a certain way to make sure it happens just as it is written.  Just like predictions of doom and gloom occur, those same predictions are reported as fact from media and other political activists who want to say: “We said X and you see X happened, so listen to us.”

The largest issue with this type of logic is of course the problem that every prediction or prophecy if you will that is predicted is not reported so if you predict 100 things to happen and only 10 happen, well that is rather bad but the worst of it is that you would expect at least 10 things to happen regardless.  Therefore, these predictions and/or prophecies are nothing but worthless ramblings and the people who fall for this line of thinking are falling for logical fallacies.  Yes, the entire AGW movement or global warming movement is based upon nothing but computer models when you get down to it.  Read More: https://benfrommo.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/a-time-to-kill-civilization-part-2/ As such, the end result is that the entire movement is more religious in that you have to take a leap of faith to believe in the movement in the first place.  This belief separates this movement from reality and as you go further down the road to cult-like thinking…well yes then it becomes nothing but a bunch of hot air and wild prophecies that are nothing to reality.

 

Picture from: http://www.amoreconvenienttruth.com/

Continue reading