Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

IS THE "PEER REVIEW" PROCESS ADVANCING SCIENCE?

The question deserves serious consideration.   To what extent is "science" shackled by dogma, a refusal to publish research that "goes against the grain"?  And if fresh research never gets published, how can science advance?  Dr. Hugh Henry considers the question.  Some excerpts:

In today's society, we often look to science as an unbiased source of truth, regulated by the peer review process. Unfortunately, the phenomenon of publication bias—well-documented in the scientific literature—permeates a variety of scientific studies. To put it one way, certain points of view are more likely to be published than others for reasons other than the quality of research.

For example, the authors of a 2015 meta-analysis of US National Institutes of Health trials pinpointed publication bias as the reason why we overestimate the effectiveness of antidepressant medications. Another 2015 meta-analysis of the social cost of carbon (a concept related to global warming) found that contrary data was often suppressed which "might create an upward bias in the literature."¹ The authors of the study also found that "the evidence for selective reporting is stronger for studies published in peer-reviewed journals than for unpublished papers." 

. . .  Science recently published the results of a massive study with more than 250 coauthors "estimating the reproducibility of psychological science."⁴ After conducting replications of 100 studies that were published in three psychology journals, the researchers found only 39 percent of the effects replicated the original result. Reproducibility is one of the three pillars of science.⁵ An experiment repeated under the same conditions should produce similar results; if it doesn't, then it's back to the drawing board. Yet it appears 61 percent of psychology studies fail this test.  These data support an earlier analysis that found a strong publication bias in favor of human-caused global warming in articles published in Science and Nature.²

The peer review process is supposed to pick up errors like these, but instead it seems complicit. And the problem appears much broader than just these examples.  [more . . .]

WHY CHRISTIANS SHOULD CARE ABOUT ENVIRONMENTALISM

Sandra Richter, Professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College, explains what the Bible has to say about the topic in just under 9 minutes.

 

THE 97 PERCENT "STATISTIC" REGARDING GLOBAL WARMING

Jonah Goldberg introduces the video below by saying:

This video clip of Ted Cruz disemboweling Aaron Mair, the head of the Sierra Club, is making the rounds. It shows Cruz at his very best, cross-examining a witness to a pulp. The most striking thing, however, is how unbelievably hackish and ill-prepared Mair is. Here’s the video:

 

Goldberg writes further:

Over and over again, Mair simply says that he’s going to rely on the 97 percent of scientists who say that global warming is happening, it’s caused by man and it’s a huge problem. People of good faith can take Mair’s position on one or all of those particulars. But the 97 percent stat is pure public relations b.s.

Here’s a good explainer by Joseph Bast and Roy Spencer on where that number — which Barack Obama, John Kerry and countless other politicians and journalists retail uncritically:   [more. . .]

MAUREEN MULLARKEY OFFERS A "NO-HOLDS BARRED" ATTACK ON POPE FRANCIS' ENVIRONMENTAL ENCYCLICAL

In addition to Rich Lowry's negative commentary on Pope Francis' encyclical posted previously, I now offer Maureen Malarkey's which is even more strident, but very much worth reading.  She titles her contribution (published June 24, 2015), "Where Did Pope Francis's Extravagant Rant Come From?"  Mularkey writes: [my bolding]

Subversion of Christianity by the spirit of the age has been a hazard down the centuries. The significance of “Laudato Si” lies beyond its stated concern for the climate. Discount obfuscating religious language. The encyclical lays ground to legitimize global government and makes the church an instrument of propaganda—a herald for the upcoming United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference in Paris.

Accommodation by church hierarchy to green dogma has been metastasizing since the UN proclaimed Earth Day in 1970. Two decades later, Kevin Costner went dancing with wolves while the Fraser Institute prefaced “Religion, Wealth, and Poverty” (1990) by Jesuit scholar James V. Schall with this:

. . . the relatively sudden appearance of religion not primarily as worship or doctrine, but as social activism, has been not a little perplexing. Numerous sympathetic critics, many of the faithful, and interested observers sense that something is occurring with vast and unsettling implications for the well-being of the public order and for religion itself. They are not at all sure, however, that what is happening is itself in the best interests of religion or of the poor and outcast for whom it is said to be occurring.

Propelled by the cult of feeling and Golden Age nostalgia—enshrined in the myth of indigenous peoples as peaceable ecologists—that elusive something picked up a tincture of Teilhardian gnosticism as it grew. It bursts on us now as “Laudato Si,” a malignant jumble of dubious science, policy prescriptions, doomsday rhetoric, and what students of Wordsworthian poetics call, in Keats’ derisive phrase, “the egotistical sublime.”

Eco-Activists Thrive on Distortions

The document’s catalogue of distortions and factual errors are those of the climate-change establishment swallowed whole. There is no scientific consensus on man-made global warming, no consensus on the role of human activity in any of the environmental phenomena cited.

Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore abandoned the organization in 1986, highlighting its abandonment of scientific objectivity in favor of political agendas:

By around the mid-1980s, when I left Greenpeace, the public had accepted most of the reasonable things we had been fighting for: stop the bomb, save the whales, stop toxic waste dumping into the earth, water, and air. Some, like myself, realized the job of creating mass awareness of the importance of the environment had been accomplished and it was time to move on from confrontation to sustainable development, seeking solutions. But others seemed bent on lifelong confrontation, ‘up against the man’ ‘smash capitalism’. . . .

In order to remain confrontational as society adopted all the reasonable demands, it was necessary for these anti-establishment lifers to adopt ever more extreme positions, eventually abandoning science and logic altogether in zero-tolerance policies.

That was 30 years ago. Since then, “the ‘green’ movement has not only become more hard line, they have also become irrational and fanatical.”

Climate has fluctuated since the planet formed. Sea levels have been rising for thousands of years with no current increase in the rate. Catastrophic extinctions occurred millions of years before industrialization. Not so long ago in geological time, Arctic islands were covered in sub-tropical forests and no ice covered either pole. Climate temperature has been flat for nearly two decades despite rise in CO2. On it goes.

Enter Jorge Bergolio. Informed objection to the pope’s roster of pending disasters is widely available—but also, at this point, moot. Reducing greenhouse gases has just been deemed a religious obligation. What should concern us now is the ecclesial climate that yielded this extravagant rant.

A Short List of What’s Wrong with ‘Laudato Si’

There is nothing to admire in its assault on market economies, technological progress, and—worse—on rationality itself. Bergolio, whom we know now as Pope Francis, is a limited man. His grasp of economics is straitjacketed by the Peronist culture in which he was raised. “Laudato Si” descends to garish, left-wing boilerplate. The pope is neither a public intellectual, theologian, nor a man of science. Yet he impersonates all three.

POPE FRANCIS GOES OFF THE RAILS

Update 6/23/15 - Pope's key science advisor believes in Gaia not God...

(Original post):  Rich Lowry offers appropriate commentary:

A quasi-religious movement now has a genuinely religious leader.

The pope’s encyclical on the environment is being hailed for its embrace of science, although it is about as scientific as the Catholic hymnal.

Pope Francis writes that Sister Earth “now cries out because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her.” Really? Is that what the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says?

I’m not Catholic, but I respect the pope’s humility and am moved by his love for the handicapped and his concern for the vulnerable. The Catholic Church is one of the pillars of Western civilization, and it has brought comfort and meaning to the lives of countless millions of people down through the millennia.

That doesn’t mean that climate science, economic policy, cost-benefit analysis are its core competencies. No one has ever said: Yes, but what did Gregory VII do to fight the onset of the Medieval Warm Period?

The pope’s at times lyrical encyclical draws on a beautiful tradition of respect for nature and its creatures represented by the pope’s namesake, St. Francis of Assisi, and is suffused with an intense regard for the poor. But anyone who takes the encyclical as a serious guide to public policy deserves a stern talking to from the nearest tough-minded, ruler-wielding nun. 

QUICK TAKES

**  Report: D.C.'s green-approved buildings using more energy

 

**  German Home-School Family allowed to stay in the United States

A German home-school family will be allowed to stay in the United States permanently, the Department of Homeland Security said Tuesday.

The U.S. Supreme Court had refused to hear Uwe and Hannelore Romeike's bid for asylum after they fled Germany over their choice to home school their children.

Today, the DHS announced the family has been granted indefinite deferred action status. That means that the Romeikes can stay in the United States permanently unless they commit a crime or violate the terms of their status.

"This is hugely great news," Attorney Michael Donnelly, with the Home School Legal Defense Association, said.

In 2008, the Romeike family fled Germany because the state threatened to take their children away if they did not enroll in public school.

In 2013, the Justice Department argued in the Romeike case that home schooling is not a fundamental human right. The department filed suit to have them sent back to Germany.

    Update:   Lindsay Howard offers a suspicious (and perhaps accurate?) evaluation of the DHS's move and issues an admonishment:

I suspect this was done for political expediency. The Obama Administration really doesn’t care about one more homeschooling family in the U.S. They just wanted to use the Romeikes to make legal precedent. So, after they win in court, set the precedent that homsechooling is not a parental right (and that refusing to allow homeschooling is not persecution), they act magnanimous and allow the Romeikes to stay to get the public to shut up and forget about the whole thing. We need to be sure we DON’T forget about it. We need to keep working to ensure that our government recognizes the rights of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children.

 **  The new USA secession movement gains steam

IN CALIFORNIA, ENVIRONMENTALISTS VALUE A TINY FISH OVER HUMAN BEINGS

The Family Research Council offers an account of an amazing story of liberals acting breathtakingly stupid. 

California's Central Valley is known as "the salad bowl of the world" -- but that salad's about to get tossed, if the Left doesn't stop angling for special fish protections. Under some of the worst drought conditions the region's ever seen, communities may be 60 days away from running out of water altogether. While people panic, especially farmers of the rich asparagus, broccoli, onion, tomato, lettuce, and garlic crops, liberals are fighting the push to divert millions of gallons of water away from an endangered fish habitat to parched locals.

"Without water, we can't work," said the head of Harris Farms. "It's not healthy. Without knowing how much water we're going to get, it's so difficult to plan!" If a pistachio tree takes five to seven years to grow, "how can we plant one now if we can't guarantee we can water it in a couple of years?" Yesterday, recognizing the desperate situation of farmers and families, the House debated a bill that would roll back the area's environmental protections long enough to save the harvest. But fishing for liberals' support was tough, especially in a party willing to leave families thirsty for the sake of a three-inch fish called the delta smelt.

EVANGELICALS AND IMMIGRATION - NO CLEAR CONSENSUS

The Evangelical Immigraton Table likes to give the impression it speaks for evangelicals, but the Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration contends otherwise.  Read Betsy Woodruf 's article for balance and nots its concluding paragraph. 

The Evangelical movement is huge and, for all that its members have in common, disparate and complex. No single advocacy group can effectively crystallize 90 million persons’ opinions on an issue as messy as immigration reform.

Previous posts on immigration:

IMMIGRATION BILL HORROR - SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS' FINAL SPEECH

BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVES ON IMMIGRATION

TEDDY ROOSEVELT ON IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR NECESSARY "AMERICANIZATION"

IMMIGRATION AND FLOUTING THE LAW - WHAT IS AT STAKE?

IMMIGRATION MADNESS - TONY BLANKLEY SPEAKS OF "LUNACY"

THOMAS SOWELL ON THE IMMIGRATION QUESTION

STEVE GOREHAM: CLIMATISM THE "GREATEST GLOBAL DELUSION IN HISTORY"

Goreham, author of Climatism! Science, Common Sense, and the 21st Century's Hottest Topic   (New Lenox Books, 2010) and The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania (New Lenox books, 2012), appeared July 25, 2013 on the 700 Club

 
Goreham maintains an interesting website - www.climatism.net

GREENS CANNOT PRODUCE THE ENERGY THE U.S. NEEDS

From Stephen Moore's, "When the Moore Family Lost Power"

[...] On Saturday night we all sat on the couch with flickering candle light, sweating and talking. What did people do before the age of electricity?" my 11-year-old asks. "I would have killed myself," he moans.

Electrical power is the central nervous system of our modern economy and our 21st-century lifestyles, and living without it for a few days reminds us how vulnerable we are to being sent back to a pre-Industrial Age. Yet every initiative by green groups is focused on reducing our access to electrical power—although they never admit that explicitly.

This power outage was caused by a severe thunderstorm from Mother Nature, but I'm convinced that rolling brown outs are coming, thanks to the radical environmental movement that has taken hold of our body politic. Green groups, for example, have declared war on coal, which still produces about 40% of our electricity. The Obama administration is listening and slamming the brakes on coal production. This cheap and domestically abundant energy source is getting cleaner all the time, thanks to technological progress. But that doesn't stop a global-warming alarmists like James Hansen, a lead scientist at NASA, from likening trains carrying coal to the German "death trains" that transported the Jews to Nazi concentration camps.

MARYLAND NOW REQUIRES STUDENTS TO PASS SOCIALIST GREEN JUNK SCIENCE BEFORE GRADUATING

From Gateway Pundit - "It's an Obama World ...   Maryland Now Requires Students to Pass Socialist Green Junk Science Test Before Graduating"      - Lots of important links

It used to be that the mission of the Department of Energy is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges. But that was before Obama. Now it’s all about indoctrination and junk science.

Barack Obama’s radical (green) Energy Secretary Steven Chu said he didn’t think average folks had the know-how or will to to change their behavior enough to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. So, like a good socialist, Chu proposed indoctrinating the nation’s youth on global warming junk science. And he’s not shy about it.  [more - including video]

THE LATEST "SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE REVIEW: THE INSIDER'S GUIDE TO PRO-FAMILY NEWS" - JANUARY 20, 2011

These compilations of articles from a variety of sources by the Family Research Council continue to offer interested people a gold mine.  A new edition appears every two weeks.  Readers will find in each a wealth of information not readily found elsewhere. For previous reviews I've posted, click here.

"COOL IT" OPENS THIS WEEKEND

Hugh Hewitt says:

The critically-acclaimed new documentary that rips global warming alarmism opens in theaters across the country today, and every opponent of cap-and-tax and the hysteria that drives it should turn out to see the entertaining expose of sky-is-falling climate change doomsaying.

Bjorn Lomborg drives the Goreites crazy, as will this film for years to come.  A big first weekend at the box office will drive its release so find time to be amused and enlightened this weekend.

FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL (FRC) COLLATES VALUABLE ESSAYS AND ARTICLES

The Family Research Council is launching The Social Conservative Review.  An e-mail states it will constitute

"a unique summary of news of interest to social conservatives. The focus of this comprehensive collation of stories, journal articles, and op-eds is the intersection of moral  concern and public life, the issues that reflect and shape not only events and legislation, but the nation's very soul.

FRC will send the Review out twice monthly.

It will feature important pieces from the country's leading newspapers, magazines, journals and conservative Web sites. FRC's goal is to help keep you informed -- and ready to act -- about the policies and proposals, research and reports that bear directly on life, liberty, family and Christian faith.

Me: I have reproduced the e-mail below, complete with links.  It looks to me like a fabulous service.

---

The Social Conservative Review: The Insider's Guide to Pro-Family News

April 29, 2010

Educational Freedom and Reform

• "The ACLU: Unwelcome Schoolyard Bully?"
  Cynthia Hill, Family Research Council
• 2010 April School Reform News (full text pdf)
  Edited by Ben Boychuk, The Heartland Institute
• "Making Men without Chests: The Intellectual Life and Moral Imagination"
  R. J. Snell, First Principles Journal
• "Are There Harms of Home Schooling?"
  Christopher O. Tollefsen, The Witherspoon Institute
• "Expulsion may await campus pro-lifers"
  Bill Bumpas, OneNewsNow
• "Teach Social Justice-Or Else"
  Mark Bauerlein, Students For Academic Freedom
• "Education Spending in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Stimulating the Status Quo"
  Lindsey Burke, The Heritage Foundation

Environmental Issues

• "How a Climate Change Treaty Threatens You, Your Nation and Your Church"
  Dr. Cal Beisner, FRC Family Policy Lecture
• "My Tribute to Earth Day"
  Jeanne Monahan, Family Research Council
• "Titles You Can't Make Up: Cleaner Air Could Speed Global Warming"
  Tom McClusky, Family Research Council Action
• "Creation and Man"
  Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship
• "Getting Into Hot Water: Evangelicals and Global Warming"
  Benjamin B. Phillips, Acton Institute, Journal of Markets and Morality
• "Polls on the Environment and Global Warming"
  Karlyn Bowman, Andrew Rugg, American Enterprise Institute
• "Celebrate Earth's Best Friend"
  James M. Taylor, Heartland Institute
• "The Green Shepherd: The White House Wants Churches To Advance It's Climate Change Agenda"
  Meghan Clyne, The Weekly Standard
• "Environmentalism is now a religion, and being overtaken by extremism"
  Robert H. Nelson, The Catholic Thing

Faith and Policy

• "Fiscal Conservatism Is Not Enough: What Social Conservatives Offer the Party of Lincoln"
  Robert W. Patterson, The Family in America Journal
• "Prophet Jim Wallis and the Ecclesia of Economic Ignorance"
  John Couretas, The Acton Institute
• "Living Under God"
  Ken Blackwell, Family Research Council

Health Care

• "States Face Their First ObamaCare Test"
  Grace-Marie Turner, The Wall Street Journal
• "Hospital Visit Horrors? Here's the Rest of the Story"
  Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council
• "Ten Ways Consumer-Driven Health Care Is a Proven Success"
  Greg Scandlen, The Heartland Institute
• "The Separation of Health and State: What happens when all medical decisions are political"
  Opinion, Wall Street Journal
• "Krugman Admits Rationing (Death Panels) From Obamacare"
  Wesley J. Smith, First Things
• "The Tea Party Spirit and Lawless Health Care Reform"
  Charles R. Kesler, Claremont Review of Books
• "Bad Medicine: The Public Square"
  Joseph Bottum, First Things
• "US Is Turning Into Dependency Society"
  Lee Edwards, Ph.D., The Heritage Foundation
• "Where's the Administration's Cost Estimate?"
  James C. Capretta, National Review

Homosexuals in the Military

• "FRC's Tony Perkins Condemns Franklin Graham's Rescinded Invitation" to participate in Pentagon prayer event.
  FRC Press Release
• "Sex Matters in the Military"
  Peter Sprigg, The Washington Times
• "Homosexuals in the Military"
  Mackubin Thomas Owens, The Ashbrook Center
• "The Real Anti-Christian Bigotry"
  Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice

Judiciary

• The Judicial Review
  Family Research Council Action's Constitutional and Legal Commentary
• "The Coming Constitutional Debate"
  Judge Stephen Markham, Imprimis
• "Koh Fails the Democracy Test"
  John Fonte, Hudson Institute
• "Delegitimizing the Roberts Court"
  David Marion, The Ashbrook Institute
• "ADF on striking down the National Day of Prayer Statute"
  Alliance Defense Fund
• "More Prayer than Protests"
  Tobin Grant, Christianity Today

Marriage and Family

Family Economics

• "The Family GDP: How Marriage and Fertility Drive the Economy"
  Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D., Family Research Council
• "The Economics of the Family Household"
  Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D., Family Research Council Family Policy Lecture
• "Family Policy Lecture: The Crushing Burden of Student Loans on Family Formation for Generation X+"
  Dr. Allan Carlson, The Howard Center, Family Research Council Family Policy Lecture
• "Obamacare Update: About That Only Tax the Rich Thing . . ."
  Tom McClusky, Family Research Council Action
• "The VAT's in the Fire"
  Ken Blackwell, The Patriot Post

Marriage

• "Facing the Bad News (on out-of-wedlock births)"
  Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D., The Catholic Thing
• "Culture Clash: Monogamy vs. Polyandry"
  Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D., Family Research Council

Pornography

• "The Effects of Pornography on Individuals, Marriage, Family and Community"
  Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D., Family Research Council
• "Standing for Truth"
  Daniel Weiss, Citizen Magazine
• "Pornography and the Muslim World"
  Carson Holloway, The Public Discourse
• "Public urged to take action to prevent .xxx web domain"
  Erin Roach, Baptist Press

Religious Liberty

• "Wall of Separation Between Church and State: Myth, Reality, Results"
  Dr. Kenyn M. Cureton, FRC Lecture
• "High Court Says Mojave Cross in California Can Stay"
  Robert Barnes, The Washington Post
• "Supreme Court Protects War Memorial Cross"
  Jay Sekulow, American Center for Law and Justice
• "Texas students see religious bias with 'year of Our Lord'"
  Casey Curlin, The Washington Times
• "Homeless in Binghamton"
  Faith J.H. McDonnell, Front Page Magazine
• "Western Civilization on Trial"
  Paul Marshall and Nina Shea, National Review Online Symposium
• "Hastings Case Tests Religious Freedom on Campus"
  By Newt Gingrich, Jim Garlow, The Washington Post

Sanctity of Life

Abortion

• "Post-Abortion Suffering: A Psychiatrist Looks at the Effects of Abortion"
  Dr. Martha Shuping and Chris Gacek, J.D., Ph.D., Family Research Council
• "Virginia Cuts Funding of Abortions"
  Jeanne Monahan, Family Research Council
• "Abortion Isn't Painless"
  Editorial, The Washington Times
• Oklahoma Senate overrides governor's vetoes to pass abortion laws
  Joe Sterling, CNN
• Legal status of induced abortions around the globe
  CBC News

Adoption

• "A Passion to Serve, A Vision for Life"
  Family Research Council Publication
• "Louisiana Senate panel rejects gay adoption expansion"
  Bill Barrow, Times-Picayune
• "Visits to mission result in adoption"
  Rob Hedelt, Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star

Cloning

• "UK Scientists Clone 3-Parent Embryos"
  Dr. David Prentice, Family Research Council

Bioethics

• "Obama Administration Eyes a More Active Role in Genomics"
  Rachel Lehmann-Haupt, BNET
• "Panel to take broad view of bioethics: President Obama appoints commission to advise on stem cells, clinical trials and more"
  Brendan Borrell, Nature
• "The First Christian Voices Against Euthanasia"
  David W.T. Brattston, The Weekly Standard
• "Euthanasia Bill turned away, but work goes on"
  Charlie Butts, One News Now

Stem Cell Research

• Family Research Council's major adult stem cell initiative, "Adult Stem Cells Saved My Life" ("Stem Cell Research Facts") features compelling video stories of persons whose lives have been transformed through adult stem cell implantation. The site also contains leading-edge information on this dynamic, transformative and entirely ethical type of stem cell treatment.
• "Vatican Funds Adult Stem Cell Research"
  Dr. David Prentice, Family Research Council

Other Articles of Note for Social Conservatives

• "Apologist in chief"
  Ken Blackwell, World Magazine
• "A Crisis Republicans Should Not Waste"
  Hadley Arkes, Weekly Standard
• "After Virtue: Localism and the Restoration of Character and Community"
  Austin Lipari, First Principles Journal
• "How America became a 'secular-socialist machine'"
  Newt Gingrich, The Washington Post
• "Schumer: Obama's 'counter-productive' Israel policy 'has to stop'"
  Ben Smith, The Politico
• "The Foreign Policy of Self-Abasement"
  Mona Charen, National Review
• "When Free Speech Wins"
  Eric Giunta, Front Page Magazine

"GREEN ENERGY" A PROFOUNDLY DELUDED QUEST

Trevor Butterworth offers a stunning review of Robert Bryce's book, Power Hungry: The Myths of "Green" Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future."   It's "stunning" simply because it faithfully displays the book's "brutal, brilliant exploration of this profoundly deluded quest."  One example:

So you want to build a wind farm? OK, Mr. Bryce says, to start you'll need 45 times the land mass of a nuclear power station to produce a comparable amount of power; and because you are in the middle of nowhere you'll also need hundreds of miles of high-voltage lines to get the energy to your customers. This "energy sprawl" of giant turbines and pylons will require far greater amounts of concrete and steel than conventional power plants—figure on anywhere from 870 to 956 cubic feet of concrete per megawatt of electricity and 460 tons of steel (32 times more concrete and 139 times as much steel as a gas-fired plant).

Once you've carpeted your tract of wilderness with turbines and gotten over any guilt you might feel about the thousands of birds you're about to kill, prepare to be underwhelmed and underpowered. Look at Texas, Mr. Bryce says: It ranks sixth in the world in total wind-power production capacity, and it has been hailed as a model for renewable energy and green jobs by Republicans and Democrats alike. And yet, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which runs the state's electricity grid, just "8.7 percent of the installed wind capability can be counted on as dependable capacity during the peak demand period." The wind may blow in Texas, but, sadly, it doesn't blow much when it is most needed—in summer. The net result is that just 1% of the state's reliable energy needs comes from wind.

If using a huge amount of real estate to generate a tiny amount of energy from an intermittent energy source sounds deranged, consider, too, that we haven't yet found the holy grail for storing wind-generated energy. Wind is either an instant energy snack or a famine. It must be used when it's there or immediately replaced when it isn't.

There's much more. . .

AWESOME PHOTOS OF THE VOLCANIC ERUPTION IN ICELAND

Many more photos. . .  (HT: Jonah Goldberg)

ENVIRONMENTALIST "WACKOS" AND HUMAN WELL-BEING

It's hard to find a more dramatic beginning to an article than this . . .

Who is the worst killer in the long, ugly history of war and extermination? Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Not even close. A single book called "Silent Spring" killed far more people than all those fiends put together.

"Dr. Zero" proceeds to  unpack and defend his opening paragraph and along the way makes other accusations: 

The DDT ban isn’t the only example of environmental extremism coming with a stack of body bags. Mandatory gas mileage standards cause about 2,000 deaths per year, by compelling automakers to produce lighter, more fragile cars. The biofuel mania has led resources to be shifted away from growing food crops, resulting

THE CONTINUING CLIMATE MELTDOWN

The stories keep coming.  I didn't want to keep posting one after another so I've waited for a fairly comprehensive overview.  The editors of the Wall Street Journal published such an article today.

It has been a bad—make that dreadful—few weeks for what used to be called the "settled science" of global warming, and especially for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that is supposed to be its gold standard.

First it turns out that the Himalayan glaciers are not going to melt anytime soon, notwithstanding dire U.N. predictions. Next came news that an IPCC claim that global warming could destroy 40% of the Amazon was based on a report by an environmental pressure group. Other IPCC sources of scholarly note have included a mountaineering magazine and a student paper. . .

All of this matters because the IPCC has been advertised as the last and definitive word on climate science. Its reports are the basis on which Al Gore, President Obama and others have claimed that climate ruin is inevitable unless the world reorganizes its economies with huge new taxes on carbon. Now we are discovering the U.N. reports are sloppy political documents intended to drive the climate lobby's regulatory agenda.  [more. . .]

CORNWALL ALLIANCE - THE BEST WAY TO KEEP UP WITH WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON IN COPENHAGEN AND THE "GLOBAL WARMING CROWD"

E. Calvin Beisner is live blogging in Copenhagen.  See the Cornwall Alliance's website and note in particular "An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming which has been signed by scores of Evangelical leaders.  About the Cornwall Alliance:

The Cornwall Alliance is a coalition of clergy, theologians, religious leaders, scientists, academics, and policy experts committed to bringing a balanced Biblical view of stewardship to the critical issues of environment and development. The Cornwall Alliance fully supports the principles espoused in the Cornwall Declaration on Environmental Stewardship, and is seeking to promote those principles in the discussion of various public policy issues including population and poverty, food, energy, water, endangered species, habitat, and other related topics.

So far as I can tell, the Cornwall Alliance is strongly concerned about how global policies will affect the poor -- which is often quite different from what major media outlets would have us believe.  Also, an often overlooked or hidden agenda of the Global Warming crowd is to dramatically reduce world population.  The Cornwall Alliance gets behind the "alleged facts" to the truth.  This is definitely a website to consult often.

ONE MAN MAKES A DIFFERENCE - NON-CLIMATOLOGIST STEPHEN McINTYRE ANALYZED THE DATA AND CHANGED THE CLIMATE SCIENCE WORLD

I found this article fascinating.  (HT:  HotAir) It proves once again that the right man, in the right place, with the right background and mindset, with focus and deliberation, can take down a Goliath.  One man!

McIntyr states a somewhat startling fact:

“There is far more independent due diligence on the smallest prospectus offering securities to the public than on a Nature article that might end up having a tremendous impact on policy.”

** Also, consider this video (not directly related to the McIntyr story above) demonstrating the deceptive use of the "hockey stick" set against an historical perspective :  (HT: HotAir via the Autopsy)

KRAUTHAMMER - The "NEW SOCIALISM" USES THE "RELIGION OF ENVIRONMENTALISM" AS ITS PRETEXT

Charles Krauthammer's article lays out the goals and technique of the "New Socialism" now raising its hydraheaded spectre once again.  It's  must reading for anyone interested in what's really going on, and for understanding the enormous threat the new socialism poses.

AL GORE IS A LIAR

- Update - Sarah Palin on her Facebook repeats her contention that President Obama should stay at home and not go to Copenhagen.  Excerpt:  (HT: HotAir)

In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a “deal.” Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people. What Obama really hopes to bring home from Copenhagen is more pressure to pass the Democrats’ cap-and-tax proposal. This is a political move. The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs -- particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.

- (Original Post) -That's the only conclusion one can come to if one reads Andrew Bolt's post:  (HT: Drudge)  (Note: Readers must click through to the extended page for the revelation of  Gore's falsehoods.)

Al Gore has studied the Climategate emails with his typically rigorous eye and dismissed them as mere piffle:

Q: How damaging to your argument was the disclosure of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University?

A: To paraphrase Shakespeare, it’s sound and fury signifying nothing. I haven’t read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old. These private exchanges between these scientists do not in any way cause any question about the scientific consensus.

And in case you think that was a mere slip of the tongue:

Q: There is a sense in these e-mails, though, that data was hidden and hoarded, which is the opposite of the case you make [in your book] about having an open and fair debate.

A: I think it’s been taken wildly out of context. The discussion you’re referring to was about two papers that two of these scientists felt shouldn’t be accepted as part of the IPCC report. Both of them, in fact, were included, referenced, and discussed. So an e-mail

THE TOTALITARIAN IMPULSE OF CLIMATE CONTROL

Bret Stephens, writing in the Wall Street Journal, sees the intellectual methods of true believers in global warming as instructively similar to Stalinists:  (HT: NRO Corner)

• Revolutionary fervor: There's a distinct tendency among climate alarmists toward uncompromising radicalism, a hatred of "bourgeois" values, a disgust with democratic practices. So President Obama wants to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 83% from current levels by 2050, levels not seen since the 1870s—in effect, the Industrial Revolution in reverse. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, insists that "our lifestyles are unsustainable." Al Gore gets crowds going by insisting that "civil disobedience has a role to play" in strong-arming governments to do his bidding. (This from the man who once sought to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.)

• Utopianism: In the world as it is, climate alarmists see humanity hurtling toward certain doom. In the world as it might be, humanity has seen the light and changed its patterns of behavior, becoming the green equivalent of the Soviet "new man." At his disposal are technologies that defy the laws of thermodynamics. The problems now attributed to global warming abate or disappear.

FORBES MAG: "THE WEST'S GOALS IN COPENHAGEN ARE TANTAMOUNT TO SUICIDE"

Forbes magazine published an important article, The West's Goals in Copenhagen are tantamount to Suicide." (HT: HotAir)  A few paragraphs near the end especially caught my eye:

Hegemony-seeking communist capitalists in China might fancy seeing America and the West decline to the point that they can no longer compete or fund their militaries. A weakened European Union or U.S. also won't be able provide a model of a more democratic version of capitalism to counter China’s ultra-authoritarian version.

The Chinese may win a victory in Copenhagen greater than anything accomplished so far in the marketplace--and our leaders will likely thank them for it. Forget bowing to the emperor in Tokyo; like vassal states at the height of the old Middle Kingdom, the new requisite diplomatic skill for Westerners will be kow-towing to Beijing.

CLIMATEGATE - THE SCIENCE IS NOT SETTLED!

Update 12/3/09 - In addition to Michelle's recommended article linked below, Jonah Goldberg gives a fine overview of what ClimateGate is all about.  Perhaps the best and most detailed summary has been provided by Lord Moncton who challenged Al Gore to a debate long ago.  Read his most recent summary here.  I blogged about Lord Moncton's warnings about the hoax of global warning and the threat to national sovereignty it entailed  here.

- (Original post) - Michelle Malkin has penned an excellent article on ClimateGate.  Top notch.  Take a deep breath everyone: the science is not settled!  She points out the great number of Obama administration people "who are working overtime to paper over the ClimateGate scandal."

CLIMATEGATE: HAS THE IDOL OF "SCIENCE" BEEN SMASHED?

- Update 11/29/09 -  UK Times Online article: "Climate Change Date Dumped"  (HT: Drudge)

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

Me:  Oh great.  Get a load of the comments on this article.

- (Original Post) - The idols of our time are falling with breathtaking rapidity.   The oldline media has been revealed to be biased and unreliable.   It suppresses information it doesn't want us to know, and pushes themes and stories it wishes to promote. 

The idol of Congress has been smashed.  Ordinary trust has been destroyed.  How can senators and representatives retain the people's confidence when they vote on bills they haven't read, and saddle generations to come with debt that staggers the mind?

And what about groups supposedly devoted to helping the poor like ACORN, which when the stone is lifted  show themselves immoral, vote-rigging, and power hungry arms of the democratic party.

And what about President Barack Obama?  Rather than continuing to bask in his Messiahship ("change you can believe in"), more and more segments of the nation have come to question his judgment and regret giving him stewardship over this great land.

And now, our trust in "science" has been smashed, as we see scientists fudging data, withholding information, lying, converting journals into propaganda organs, and misleading the public.  "Climategate" articles keep pouring from the press.  An earlier one is Three Things You Absolutely Must Know About Climategate." John Hindraker over at Power Line has written a lot about the East Anglia emails, here, here, here and here.  Viscount Monckton (the man who challenged Al Gore to a debate) expresses his anger.

See also James Lewis's "Climate-Gate: It's the Totalitarianism, Stupid."  He pulls no punches.  An excerpt:

Global warming was a fraud, and it has now been exposed.

That little fraud would have cost the taxpayers of the world trillions of dollars, not to mention wrecking their economies with carbon taxes and penalties.

But that’s not even the worst of it. The most important take home lesson is that global frauding was the clear and conscious work of a political machine aiming to steal your money,  your liberties, and your country. It was a massive, worldwide attempt at a coup d’etat, and the

VACLAV KLAUS, PRESIDENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Peter Robinson interviews Vaclav Klaus:

Communism and environmentalism—we are talking about two ideologies that are structurally very similar. They are against individual freedom.  They are in favor of centralist master-minding of our fates.  They are both very similar in telling us what to do, how to live, how to behave, what to eat, how to travel, what we can do and what we cannot do.  There is a huge similarity in this respect.

Full video interview here.

ENVIRONMENTAL LUNACY: TAKE LIGHT BULBS FOR EXAMPLE . . .

AAghhh!   Anybody like the idea of mandating what kind of light bulbs you must use?  And has anybody paid attention to their toxicity when they break?  Lunacy, indeed!  Click here.

EARTH DAY DEMOTIVATOR

This post comes a little late, but better late than never.  In addition to calling attention to the picture of North Korea, Jay Nordlinger has reproduced an e-mail sent him:

Hi, Jay,

 

I coach my eight-year-old daughter’s soccer team. [This is a mom writing — a soccer-mom-coach.] Wednesday at practice, my daughter bent down and picked up a stick and started drawing out a play in the dirt for her teammates. With one voice, at least three of the girls howled, “What are you doing?! It’s Earth Day! You’re hurting the Earth!” Indoctrination works.

REPORT: DEMOCRATS REFUSE TO ALLOW SKEPTIC TO TESTIFY ALONGSIDE GORE AT CONGRESSIONAL HEARING

Click here.  (HT: Drudge)

Me: This represents another case of the Left's commitment to "controlled speech."  They lock out opponents, shout down opponents,  or sue opponents.  Anything but allow opponents to speak freely.

Update:  I saw a book mentioned on TV the other day.  It may be worth taking a look at.  It's Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Ruin Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them by Steven Milloy

Also, did you see the article, "One in Three Children Fear an Earth Apocalypse?

One out of three children aged 6 to 11 fears that Ma Earth won't exist when they grow up, while more than half—56 percent—worry that the planet will be a blasted heath (or at least a very unpleasant place to live), according to a new survey.

Me:  This is sad.  The new earth religion is sapping the life out of children, and for no reason.  Talk about irresponsible fear-mongering!

It's On: Palin vs. Judd

- Update 2/6/09 - Michelle Malkin offers pertinent comments. in her column, "Ashley Judd: Clown in wolf's guardian clothing."

- (Original post)  Ed Morrissey reports:

Sarah Palin has hit back at actress Ashley Judd for her criticisms of the effort to pare back the Alaskan wolf population for the protection of caribou.  Scoffing at advice from “far east coast politicians,” Palin reminded Judd and her Defense of Wildlife Action Fund that Alaskans relied on healthy caribou populations for food — especially in economically trying times.  She also accused Judd of manufacturing outrage to stoke donations to her group. . .  (Click through for more commentary plus a video of a wolf chasing a baby caribou).

Morrissey concludes:

As I wrote at the time, critics of responsible wildlife management seem to live in Cartoon World, where the wolf and the bear and the caribou all become best friends and have adventures together with the plucky little kid from the local village.  In fact, the wolf and the bear will eat the caribou until there are none left, and would have the plucky little kid for dessert if they could.

Judd should get out of Cartoon World and learn something about wildlife management — and Palin’s success — before opening her mouth and removing all doubt about her ignorance.  [my emphases]

ARCTIC SEA ICE

Jonah Goldberg reports:

Arctic Sea Ice is back to 1979 levels. Funny how that hasn't been front page news. Of course, it's just a snapshot, but whenever the snapshots point to global-warming-catastrophe, it's headline news.

1/12/98 Update/correction follows . . .

SACRIFICES TO THE CLIMATE GODS

Dr, Roy Spencer makes many good points.  Note: I would have provided excerpts of the article but the updated software associated with "Typepad" (the software associated with this blog) has all kinds of bugs in it making posting very difficult these days.

Polar Bears, Oil and the Environment

Michelle Malkin on polar bear mania (quoting Sen. James Inhofe and others). Earlier in the day she wrote on Politics and the Polar Bear.

Hugh Hewitt weighs in.

Roy Spencer has it right:

And with three presidential candidates who all agree with the environmental activists, the coming months and years are looking pretty bleak for freedom, capitalism, and prosperity. Meanwhile, the polar bears will do just fine, just as they have during previous warm periods in history.

I only hope when global warming ends, and is accepted to be a largely natural phenomenon rather than manmade, that all of the regulatory mistakes we’ve made can somehow be undone.

— Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He is author of the new book, Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians, and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor.

EARTH DAY -BAD FOR THE UNBORN!

"Earth Day" was yesterday, April 22nd.  Our friends at the Family Research Council remind us that anti-life agendas piggy-back on the day.  (My underlining below).

An estimated billion people are celebrating Earth Day around the world, but few seem to understand its true motivation. Today isn't just another reminder to use recycled paper or drive energy-efficient cars. It's a calculated attack on the sanctity of human life. Population control is inextricably linked to the environmental and abortion movements. For years, the Sierra Club and other green militants have said that the best way to consume fewer resources is to have fewer children. Their own website says, "Talk to your decision-makers and demand an increase of funding for voluntary family planning programs and access to comprehensive sex education for young people." Last year, Optimum Population Trust released

Divorce Takes a Toll on the Environment

Update 12/29/07 - See Theodore Dalrymple's comment at the end of this post.
--
Reporting on a Michigan State Study, a Breakpoint article summarizes:

Researchers there found that divorce “exacts a serious toll on the environment.” How? It boosts “the energy and water consumption of those who used to live together.”

Why this should be the case is not hard to understand: Divorce turns what used to be one household into two. The efficient use of resources, including money, that comes naturally to families living under the same roof no longer applies. In its place are two of just about everything. The researchers calculated that, as the result of divorce, an additional 38 million rooms had to be heated and lighted. 

The impact of this divorce-induced consumption is not trivial, they say. The researchers calculated that if divorced couples had stayed married, the “United States would have saved 73 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and 627 BILLION gallons of water”—and that’s in 2005 alone.

Saving the Planet by Not having Children

Yesterday I blogged about the professor who advocates a baby tax to save the planet (by reducing births).  Today Chuck Colson writes about young people choosing self-sterilization as an environmental statement.  (Uuderlining that follows is mine.)

A recent story in the U.K.’s Daily Mail told readers about British women who refuse to have children because children are not “eco friendly.”

One of these women, Toni, works for an environmental group. She said that she “shudders with horror” at the thought of a “little hand slipping into hers—and a voice calling her Mummy.”

The “shudder” is caused by the thought of the child’s environmental impact. As Dave Barry likes to say, “I am not making this up.” I wish I were.

So, when Toni learned she was pregnant 10 years ago, she quickly had an abortion to “protect the planet.” Then, to make sure that such a “mistake” could not happen again, she had herself sterilized at age 27. 

What did the child’s father think about all this? He sent her a “congratulations card” and later married her. Apparently, he agrees that “having children is selfish. It’s all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet . . . ”

Baby tax needed to save planet, claims expert

Oh my...  This item would go in the "hard to believe department" if I had such a category. (HT: Drudge)

A WEST Australian medical expert wants families to pay a $5000-plus "baby levy" at birth and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 a child.

Writing in today's Medical Journal of Australia, Associate Professor Barry Walters said every couple with more than two children should be taxed to pay for enough trees to offset the carbon emissions generated over each child's lifetime.

Gore Wins 2007 Nobel Peace Prize - Plus a Look Back at Past Nobel Peace Prize Winners

Al Gore has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).   Powerline asks the question, "When did the Nobel Peace Prize go off the tracks?" and supplies this reminder of past recipients (HT: Hugh Hewitt):

2005
MOHAMED ELBARADEI (joint winner).  He's done such a nice job with Iran. 

2004
WANGARI MAATHAI. The Kenyan ecologist peacefully teaches that the AIDS virus is a biological agent deliberately created by the Man.

2002
JIMMY CARTER JR., former President of the United States of America. A true cosmopolitan, he has undermined the foreign policy of his own country and vouched for the bona fides of tyrants and murderers all over the world.

2001
UNITED NATIONS, New York, NY, USA. 
KOFI ANNAN, United Nations Secretary General. Among other things, they have

Bjorn Lomborg on the Global Kyoto Craze

Update 10/10/07 - British Court finds inaccuracies in Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." Judge rules it should only be shown in schools with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination.
**
David Freddoso refers to Bjorn Lomborg's article as

a must-read — a reductio ad absurdum for the Global Warming religion from someone who believes in man-made warming but sees through the hype.

Freddoso says:

Bjorn Lomborg is not a skeptic of man-made global warming. But he is a skeptic of the millennialist views of Al Gore and other adherents. The world is not coming to an end, he says, and no, Kyoto will not solve the world's problems. Nor is Global Warming the cause of all the world's problems — it might actually solve some of them.

Excerpts from Lomborg's article:

According to the first complete peer-reviewed survey of climate change's health effects, global warming will actually save lives. It's estimated that by 2050, global warming will cause almost 400,000 more heat-related deaths each year. But at the same time, 1.8 million fewer people will die from cold.

The Kyoto Protocol, with its drastic emissions cuts, is not a sensible way to stop people from dying in future heat waves. At a much lower cost, urban designers and politicians could lower temperatures more effectively by

Evangelicals,the Environment, and the Democratic Strategy to Garner Votes

Jay Richards notes that the major media now pays plenty of attention to evangelical views on the environment, especially since  86 evangelical leaders signed the "Evangelical Climate Initiative (ECI), although many others refused to sign it. There are powerful political reasons for this new attention to evangelical environmental views and I urge readers of this blog to click through to Richards' article and read it in its entirely.  Some notes follow (underlinings are my own).

Richards distinguishes between "theological principles" and "prudential judgments", saying that on theological principles, evangelicals are in agreement:

Human beings, as image bearers of God, are placed as stewards over the created order. We bear a responsibility for how we treat and use it. We are part of the creation, as well as its crowning achievement. God intends for us to use and transform the natural world around us for good purposes. Proper use is not misuse. But as fallen creatures, we can mess things up. No serious Evangelical thinker questions these basic principles.

Well and good.  But prudential judgments are something quite different.  Richards says we need to recognize at least four separate questions with regard to global warming.

(1) Is the planet warming?

(2) If the planet is warming, is human activity (like CO2 emissions) causing it?

(3) If the planet is warming, is it bad overall?

(4) If the planet is warming, we’re causing it, and it’s bad, would the policies commonly advocated (e.g., the Kyoto Protocol, legislative restrictions on CO2 emissions) make any difference and, if so, would their cost exceed their benefit?

He goes on to say:

Tough questions all, and theology doesn’t provide much help in answering them. To answer (1) and (2), one must consider a wide range of scientific evidence, theorizing, and speculation, drawing on disciplines as diverse as meteorology, astrophysics, geology, and probability theory. And the very nature of the questions and the evidence means answers will always be tentative and uncertain.

To answer (3) and (4), one must do careful economic reasoning. As a result, Evangelicals who agree disagree on how to answer these questions (the application).

The problem with the chief defenders of the Evangelical Climate Initiative is that they haven’t thought through these four questions, at least not publicly. What they have done is label

Is It Irresponsible To Have a Number of Children?

Should we call mothers "breeders"?   Do big families threaten the environment?   See  Chuck Colson's discussion on "Anti-Natalism in America."   

Michael Crichton on "Environmentalism as Religion"

Click here.

British TV 4 "Great Global Warming Swindle" TV Program (Video) Available on the Internet

** Update:   (HT:  Drudge)

- Researches Question Validity of a "Global Temperature"
- Al Gore Challenged to Intenational TV Debate on Global Warming
- Scientists Blame Hollywood for Increased Fears Over Global Warming

****
I have posted many items before on global warming and environmentalism, including the "Great Global Warming Swindle"  produced by British Channel 4 Television.  Now, however, I want to provide a link to the actual TV Program that you can view on the internet.   A friend passed along the following commentary by Thomas Sowell on the British Channel 4 production.  Sowell concludes, “Global warming” is just the latest in a long line of hysterical crusades to which we seem to be increasingly susceptible."   More excerpts:

The documentary goes into some of the many factors that have caused the earth to warm and cool for centuries, including changes in activities on the sun, 93 million miles away and wholly beyond the jurisdiction of the Kyoto treaty.

According to these climate scientists, human activities have very little effect on the climate, compared to many other factors, from volcanoes to clouds.

These climate scientists likewise debunk the mathematical models that have been used to hype global-warming hysteria, even though

Quick Takes on "Global Warming"

Update 3/13/07 -  The New York Times today published a major article on the "Global Warming" debate.  It offers a balanced assessment, and in so doing it printed a representative number of strong critiques.  It's worth a read. 

**

Some articles from Drudge worth checking:

Environmentalism is a Religion says Czek President.

From Babylon of Gilgamesh to post-Eden of Noah, every age has viewed climate change cataclysmically, as retribution for human greed and sinfulness..

Scientists threatened with death for 'climate denial'...

'New world order' to fight global warming...

Jamie Glazov of Frontpagemag conducts an interesting (and alarming in its own way) interview with Christopher Horner, the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism).

What is the true agenda behind the global warming hysteria?  Who profits?   This interview tells us.  It's important.  A must read.   

My previous posts on global warming can be found here.   

Greenhouse Effect is a Myth

So say many scientists.   The  Daily Mail reports: 

Research said to prove that greenhouse gases cause climate change has been condemned as a sham by scientists.

A United Nations report earlier this year said humans are very likely to be to blame for global warming and there is "virtually no doubt" it is linked to man's use of fossil fuels.

But other climate experts say there is little scientific evidence to support the theory. 

In fact global warming could be caused by increased solar activity such as a massive eruption.

Their argument will be outlined on Channel 4 [London] this Thursday in a programme called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" [more on channel 4 here] raising major questions about some of the evidence used for global warming.

Ice core samples from Antarctica have been used as proof of how warming over the centuries has been accompanied by raised CO2 levels.

But Professor Ian Clark, an expert in palaeoclimatology from the University of Ottawa, claims that warmer periods of the Earth's history came around 800 years before rises in carbon dioxide levels.

.  .  .  The UN report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was published in February.  At the time it was promoted as being backed by more than 2,000 of the world's leading scientists.

But Professor Paul Reiter, of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said it was a "sham" given that this list included the names of scientists who disagreed with its findings.

Professor Reiter, an expert in malaria, said his name was removed from an assessment only when he threatened legal action against the panel.

"That is how they make it seem that all the top scientists are agreed," he said. "It's not true."      (more)   (HT: Drudge)

Today the National Post of Canada has another article on the "Deniers" of global warming.  Click here.      My previous posts on global warming can be found here.

Pete DuPont on Global Warming (Hint: He's not convinced)

Click here for Pete DuPont's important essay on temperature fluctuations.  For essays by others on global warming as religion, click here and here.

Update: 2/24/07  -  Climatologist calls Gore's Oscar-nominated film "science fiction."  Click here.   Among various arguments, this article powerfully disputes Gore's contention of  rising sea levels, especially their magnitude.

Nowhere in the traditionally refereed scientific literature do we find any support for Gore’s hypothesis.

This is an important article.   (HT: Drudge Report)

Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" Examined and Critiqued

Update 12/9/06 - Senator Inhofe Announces Public Release of "Skeptic's Guide to Debunking Global Warming"  It can be downloaded here.   
--

The Competitive Enterprise Institute offers a thorough critique of Al Gore's views on global warming found in "An Inconvenient Truth."  Marlo Lewis, Jr. says the following:

In Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth", the only facts and studies considered are those convenient to Gore's scare-them-green agenda. And in many instances, he distorts the evidence he cites. In fact, nearly every significant statement Gore makes regarding climate science and climate policy is either one sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative, or wrong.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute offers a downloadable book, video, and power point presentation.   (HT: Iain Murray)

APPRECIATION OF NATURE

"Mother Skylark" offers a quote from Barbara Kingsolver's Small Wonder  that I find poignantly beautiful, one of the best pieces I can recall reading on the appreciation of the natural world.

"Let me back up and say that I am breathless with gratitude for the collisions of choice and luck that have resulted in my being able to work under the full-on gaze of mountains and animate beauty. It's a privilege to live any part of one's life in proximity to nature. It is a privilege, apparently, even to know that nature is out there at all. In the summer of 1996 human habitation on earth made a subtle, uncelebrated passage from being mostly rural to being mostly urban. More than half of all humans now live in cities.  The natural habitat of our species, then, officially, is steel, pavement, streetlights, architecture, and enterprise—the hominid agenda.

With all due respect for the wondrous ways people have invented to amuse themselves and one another on paved surfaces, I find that this exodus from the land makes me unspeakably sad. I think of the children who will never know, intuitively, that a flower is a plant's way of making love, or what silence sounds

COMMON SENSE ON GLOBAL WARNING

Robet J. Samuelson comes through with common sense on global warning in  today's Washington Post.   Making it a moral crusade is folly.  It's an enginnering problem, given inevitable population growth and the need for poor economies to grow.