Alan Simpson Explains Social Security

Watching the following video, I am reminded of a conversation that I had with my son just two weeks ago.  We got in to a talk about Social Security and he was arguing that the program is a good thing.  In utter frustration I said to him that when designed the program was set up so that people would pay in to it their entire lives and then die before they ever got a penny out.  I went on to tell him that he needed to get over the myopic idea that massive bureaucracies are set up by people who fart moonbeams.  They are con men and social security, medicare, ObamaCare, you name it, are scams.  The government doesn't create these programs because they care about people.  They are set up because governments care about money, power and creating dependency.  Our Founding Fathers knew that if given absolute power the ruling class, government, would revert to its basest instincts.  That is why they set up a system of checks and balnces-so we could keep them in check. 



H/T  Breitbart.tv

Dueling headlines

Back on January 19th there was this:

2000s warmest decade on record, government reports

But that was almost a month ago and in the rapidly evolving world of Global Warming anything can happen.  For instance, from today's Daily Mail:

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Well, fancy that.  Bullet points from the article:

*  Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing

*  There has been no global warming since 1995

*  Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

This coming from Professor Phillip Jones who recently stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit whose work was heavily relied on by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  The problem with relying on Phillip's work is that he can't seem to remember where he put any of that darned data that backed up the claims that the Earth is in the midst of a man caused fever.  Seems Phillips keeps one very messy office and he just can't figure out where he put any of the data:

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

Jones housekeeping skills aside, if the lost date ever existed in the first place then scientist should be able to return to the original sources and duplicate the results, right?  But an admission by Jones casts doubt:

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Let's face it, Global warming is unraveling quicker than a cheap sweater.  Investigations by academic panels are all well and good but it is time for a criminal investigation.  Proponents manufactured "evidence" out of thin air for the purpose of enriching themselves either professionally, monetarily or both.  It is handcuff time.

If you throw a rock at a pack of wild dogs, the one that yelps...

People are throwing stones at Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC (which according to Doug Ross stands for International Panel on Climate Crime), is starting to get a might testy.  Note this from the Ace of Spades:

"Dr." Pachauri: Hey, Those Who Claim I Profited From IPCC Decisions Should Rub Asbestos on Their Faces (And Die of Cancer)

Rajendra Pachauri, the besieged head of the U.N.'s International Panel on Climate Change, told the Financial Times on Wednesday that he is the victim of a "carefully orchestrated" campaign to block climate change legislation.

"I would say [there are] nefarious designs behind people trying to attack me with lies, falsehoods," he told the paper, swatting away allegations that his India-based climate institute, TERI, has benefited from decisions made by the IPCC, which he also chairs.

Climate change skeptics "are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder," he said.

"I hope that they apply it (asbestos) to their faces every day."

Well, that is kinda mean.

Look, I barely made it through physics in college.  Science is not my thing.  However, I did manage to stay awake through a couple of my classes and I seem to remember that skepticism is crucial to good science.  Beyond that, when people start making ridiculous statements such as comparing Global Warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers or that skeptics believe that asbestos is as good as talcum powder then I know that the speaker is on shaky ground. 

The truth is, Global warming adherents don't want to talk about facts.  If you ask a disciple about previous warming periods they are likely to change the subject altogether.  A week ago I actually had someone respond to my question by launching into a weird ramble about our "illegal" invasion of Iraq.  Global warming/Iraq???  Um, wouldn't it have been just as easy to admit that he didn't have the answer rather than making an ass of himself by going off the deep end over something totally unrelated?

People have a perfect right to know what relationship exists between Pachauri's enormous wealth and his position as head of the IPCC.  Methinks that his answer belies a man with something to hide.

Gee, did it all have to end so soon?

Walter Russell Mead:

The Death of Global Warming

The global warming movement as we have known it is dead. Its health had been in steady decline during the last year as the once robust hopes for a strong and legally binding treaty to be agreed upon at the Copenhagen Summit faded away. By the time that summit opened, campaigners were reduced to hoping for a ‘politically binding’ agreement to be agreed that would set the stage for the rapid adoption of the legally binding treaty. After the failure of the summit to agree to even that much, the movement went into a rapid decline.

The movement died from two causes: bad science and bad politics.

After years in which global warming activists had lectured everyone about the overwhelming nature of the scientific evidence, it turned out that the most prestigious agencies in the global warming movement were breaking laws, hiding data, and making inflated, bogus claims resting on, in some cases, no scientific basis at all. This latest story in the London Times is yet another shocker; the IPCC’s claims that the rainforests were going to disappear as a result of global warming are as bogus and fraudulent as its claims that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. It seems as if a scare story could grab a headline, the IPCC simply didn’t care about whether it was reality-based.

Don't cry for fat Al Gore.  There really is a sucker born every minute and he'll be off the is next scam in the twinkle of an eye.  He'll proclaim his innocence in the Global Warming fraud-after all, he's not a scientist.  He only relied on what they told him.  He's the real victim here.  Sigh.

Anywho, all scams have a shelf life and this one's has expired.  Question is, what will the next one be?

Is "global warming" based on scientific fact or stories told around the bonfire?

It is based on anecdotes, though, told by the same people who tell stories of the Abominable Snowman.

That is a spot quote from Don Surber, who wrote:

The credibility of Church of Manmade Global Warming — which calls its priests “scientists” — is disappearing faster than the mountain glaciers its adherents claim are melting as a penance for the sins of mankind.

“The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountaintops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine,” Richard Gray of the London Telegraph reported.

Ah yes, the claim that the Himalayans will be ice free in 25 years is based on a few stories from sherpas.

And it was that contention that helped win Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change the Nobel Peace Prize.

Only now are IPCC officials owning up to the lies and cover-ups they have had over the years.

This revelation is only the latest in a string of discoveries that show the “science” purported by Al Gore and the Climatologists is nothing but distortions. The IPCC is a pack of bureaucrats who are using Chicken Little tactics to expand government’s control of industry.

This one is particularly lame.

The IPCC claims that the melting of mountaintops and that the Himalayans will be ice free by 2035 is based on science.

It is based on anecdotes, though, told by the same people who tell stories of the Abominable Snowman.

Yet no matter how much evidence comes out that shows that global warming is a scam of epic proportions, the powers that be continue to hang their hats on it.  Follow the money.  Which brings me to the President's SOTU address in which he mocked global warming skeptics-I wonder what is in his stock portfolio.

Read the rest of Surber's post.

Could GlacierGate lead to criminal charges?

Lets certainly hope so.

IPCC Head in Glaciergate Crime?

 The London Times continues to follow the glaciergate story–and it keeps getting worse.

The latest disclosure: Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s (formerly) prestigious Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (known as the IPCC), may have raised millions of dollars for his New Delhi institute on the basis of the totally bogus ‘glaciergate’ claim by the IPCC that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

According the the London Times, Pachauri’s institute got money from the European Union and the US-based Carnegie Corporation to investigate a prediction that never had any scientific backing whatever, and one which all serious glacier scientists instantly recognized as impossible. The bogus claim was frequently repeated in the fundraising efforts — and reiterated as recently as January 15 when the IPCC was already under intense pressure to admit it had blundered.

This is now more than an example of eye-popping incompetence and gross neglect of elementary scientific standards by a body on whose authority the world is expected to make multi-trillion dollar decisions affecting every business and every person on the planet.

It is now, potentially, a criminal issue. If Pachauri knew the claim was bogus and allowed these grant applications to go forward, he could find himself facing criminal charges. (emphasis added)

Global Warming is the scam of the century and scammers belong in prison.  Pachauri should not be an exception.  The scam has cost untold billions to governments, and by extension taxpayers, all over the world.  Given the corrupt nature of the UN it is no surprise that it has played a central role in promoting the con game. 

It is past time to apply the brakes.  No more taxpayer money should line the pockets of Global Warming corruptocrats and Pachauri, Gore, et al., should suffer the same fate as Bernie Madoff.  In this country we should insist that our Congressmen permanently shelve Cap & Trade. 

I anything good comes out of this we can hope that in the future people will not be so gullible and will be more skeptical when "scientists" make fantastic and nonsensical pronouncements.  Follow the money.

h/t Instapundit

Sucks for Gore

The American Thinker:

This past week, I was having lunch at a restaurant in midtown Manhattan when my colleague noticed Al and Tipper Gore dining across the room with another couple. It was a frigid day, with record-breaking temperatures keeping most people indoors, and we were the last two tables in the restaurant.

As the Gore party started walking out of the room, my colleague called out, "Hey, Al, how's all that global warming working out for you?" Gore turned around and stared at us with a completely dumbfounded look on his face. He was speechless. With a smile, my colleague repeated the question, again to a hapless look of dismay.

Finally, Gore mumbled under his breath, "Wow, you sound awfully angry." I responded with a thank you, explaining to him that we were actually extremely amused. The encounter concluded with Gore's friend mouthing a very animated "f--- you" at us, and they skulked away. My only regret is that no one at the table asked Gore, "What's the matter? The polar bear's got your tongue?"

This amuses the hell out of me.

This morning I had to scrape ice off my windshield with a credit card before I could drive to work. Did I mention that I live in Florida? South Florida. It is so cold iguanas are falling out of trees. For my part, that Global Warming thing isn’t working at all.

Poor Al. On the very heels of Climategate we have Global Freezing. It must suck to be exposed as a fraud in such short order. Personally, I hope the Gorester catches frost bite and his itty bits drop off. That would be amusing.

The Perfect Scam aka "Pay up, Sucker"

Having spent the last two and a half decades in banking on the branch level I've seen far too many people fall victim to scams. Scams take all manner of forms but the result is the same-the victims voluntarily give their money to the scammer. For all the millions of dollars that Nigerian scammers have suckered out of the pockets of willing victims, they are rank amateurs compared to the perpetrators of the "Global Warming" scam.

The "first name" in the Global Warming scam may be Al Gore but it turns out that Gore is a mere princeling compare to the King of the Fraud, Dr Rajendra Pachauri:

No one in the world exercised more influence on the events leading up to the Copenhagen conference on global warming than Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and mastermind of its latest report in 2007.

Although Dr Pachauri is often presented as a scientist (he was even once described by the BBC as “the world’s top climate scientist”), as a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics he has no qualifications in climate science at all.

What has also almost entirely escaped attention, however, is how Dr Pachauri has established an astonishing worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCC’s policy recommendations.

These outfits include banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds heavily involved in ‘carbon trading’ and ‘sustainable technologies’, which together make up the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.

Today, in addition to his role as chairman of the IPCC, Dr Pachauri occupies more than a score of such posts, acting as director or adviser to many of the bodies which play a leading role in what has become known as the international ‘climate industry’.

It is remarkable how only very recently has the staggering scale of Dr Pachauri’s links to so many of these concerns come to light, inevitably raising questions as to how the world’s leading ‘climate official’ can also be personally involved in so many organisations which stand to benefit from the IPCC’s recommendations. (emphasis added)

A long time criticism of the IPCC is that it ignores and very effectively silences scientists who present scientific evidence contrary to the IPCC's findings. Well, of course. The Nigerian scammer doesn't disclose negative information in the "Congratulations, you have won the Canadian lottery letter" and the chairman of the IPCC isn't going to allow information to become public that interferes with the "pay up, Sucker" conclusions that have made him one very, very wealthy gangster.

The Nigerians, and their counterparts, are able to pull off their scams over and over again because their victims are too embarrassed to speak out. ClimateGate is providing a (rare) window for the victims of the Global Warming scam, scientists and citizens alike, to speak out without embarrassment.

Read more about how Pachuri uses the IPCC to line his own pockets here.

For a pretty good clue about Pachuri's character read this post my Mark Steyn.

And to inject a bit of common sense in to the Global Warming nonsense: In other words, CO2 is not a pollutant in the air–it is air.

Dems Gloat About Screwing Over the American People

I'm going to paraphrase Sen. Harkin's remarks during the announcement that the Dems have the votes for ObamaCare:

This is not a mansion. This is a starter home. It has has a good foundation and a good roof for protection AND IT HAS ROOM FOR EXPANSION.

Do not doubt for one moment that once the Dems jam this bill through the race will be on to expand it and expand it until they have the single payer, government run system that they have wanted all along.

Sen. McConnell, speaking right now, says that the Dems talk alot about "making history" but history will note that this is the moment that our government completely ignored the will of the American people. McConnell rightly points out that were this not an attempt to deceive the American people, they would not be holding the vote at 1 A.M. on Monday morning. Thieves do their business under the cover of darkness. Is that what our government has become? The Dems ARE a bunch of thieves stealing our very liberty.

Read about Sen. Nelson's sellout at The Other McCain. He sold out our nation's unborn children for a sweetheart deal for his state. He no longer has the right to call himself pro-life.

Carbon Emissions is Causing Rapid Cooling

Increased carbon emissions is leading to rapid cooling that is threatening to decimate crops and destroy fragile eco-systems.

Okay, I totally made that up but if it turns out to be the next scam up the pike remember, you heard it here first.

From Don Surber:

Solar activity (sunspots and solar storms) dropped to zero in August 2007 and have barely increased since.

Is this a precursor to a lengthy period of little or no solar activity which may coincide with a mini-Ice Age — the so-called Maunder Minimum?

How the heck should I know, Jim? I’m a writer, not a doctor.

But it is worth keeping an eye on.

Science.com reported that the Earth’s thermosphere (100 miles up) is cooling rapidly. NASA launched the Thermosphere-Ionosphere-Mesophere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) mission in 2001 to get a better picture of this outer layer, Science.com reported.

“The sun is in a very unusual period,” said Marty Mlynczak, a TIMED team member at NASA Langley in Virginia. “The Earth’s thermosphere is responding remarkably – up to an order of magnitude decrease in infrared emission/radiative cooling by some molecules… I certainly didn’t expect to see this eight years ago.”

I wonder if that legendary Computer Model that the Church of Climate Scientology worships expected it.

“More work is needed to fully understand the links between the sun’s energy, rising greenhouse gas emissions and the Earth’s outer atmosphere, the scientists said,” Science.com reported.

Ya think?

Hey, maybe we ought to wait until we have facts — unadulterated by minions for the the Church of Climate Scientology — before we spend trillions retrofitting the world’s economy.

Well its been my experience that the climate changes over and over again but if Al Gore is predicting that the entire north polar ice cap will disappear in five years and that each meter of sea-level rise displaces 100,000,000 people. "It is not a matter of theory or conjecture." then I'd say chances that we'll have another Ice Age are pretty good.

Liars, Scammers and Frauds (and Hillary Clinton), Oh, My!

Hillary Clinton went to Copenhagen and as my Mom would say, talked out of her ass:

"In the context of a strong accord in which all major economies pledge meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to those actions, the U.S. is prepared to work with other countries towards a goal of mobilising $100bn a year to address the needs of developing countries," Sec. of State Hillary Clinton said, according to BBC.

As Darlene Click said at Protein Wisdom said, It’s not like, you know, it will be coming out of Hillary Clinton’s own bank account. It's also not like Hillary has the authority to commit the United States to anything, but in this case, it is the thought that counts.

Clinton's pledge feeds the notion that we owe the world. But were we to give all that we have "the world" would demand more while still insisting that we hadn't done enough. Those gathered in Copenhagen care little about our exceptionalism. If they think at all of the innovations born in the USA that have benefited the world as whole it is to complain we are destroying the planet. On one hand they insist that as a "rich" nation we have a duty to the world but then they cheer wildly when Hugo Chavez claims that "capitalism is the road to Hell."

This is a summit of liars, scammers and frauds and soon our president will be among them. The Apology Tour continues...

Who Would Benefit From Capping Carbon?

Self interest is a powerful thing. There is nothing unusual, or necessarily wrong, with a "what's in it for me" attitude. I have no doubt that there are people who sincerely believe that Al Gore is a humanitarian who is selflessly working to save the world. In their estimation the fact that "global warming" has changed Gore from a wealthy man to a WEALTHY man doesn't speak to his motivation. We call these people "dupes."

But let's face it, Gore isn't alone in benefiting from the global fraud being promoted in Copenhagan. In Forbes, Joel Kotkin discusses the "what's in it for me" factor:

So why do leaders like Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown continue identifying themselves with the climate change agenda and policies like cap and trade? Perhaps it's best to see this as a clash of classes. Today's environmental movement reflects the values of a large portion of the post-industrial upper class. The big money behind the warming industry includes many powerful corporate interests that would benefit from a super-regulated environment that would all but eliminate potential upstarts.

These people generally also do not fear the loss of millions of factory, truck, construction and agriculture-related jobs slated to be "de-developed." These tasks can shift to China, India or Vietnam--where the net emissions would no doubt be higher--at little immediate cost to tenured professors, nonprofit executives or investment bankers. The endowments and the investment funds can just as happily mint their profits in Chongqing as in Chicago.

Global warming-driven land-use legislation possesses a similarly pro-gentry slant. Suburban single family homes need to be sacrificed in the name of climate change, but this will not threaten the large Park Avenue apartments and private retreats of media superstars, financial tycoons and the scions of former carbon-spewing fortunes. After all, you can always pay for your pleasure with "carbon offsets."

Global warming is very much a class issue. Cap and Trade schemes give the political class control; the wizards of Wall Street gain wealth; the self absorbed hedonists in Hollywood get to feel like they are doing something noble. But it is we schmucks on the bottom of pile who will pay the price.

Rev. Gore likes to say, as he passes the collection plate, that this is the fight of his life. Nothing could be further from the truth. Gore's lavish lifestyle is chiseled in stone whether anything comes out of Copenhagen or not. The same doesn't hold true for the rest us. Carbon schemes will severely curtail our lifestyle. And ten years from now the charlatans will move on to their next scam.

More at Memeorandum

What Makes Someone an "Environmentalist"?

Every day, no matter the weather, I eat my lunch at a picnic table next to the lake. Yesterday was absolutely beautiful, as most Florida days are, and I was joined by two companions.


Every evening I sit on my porch and enjoy the breeze off the bay. I love manatees. Nothing is more glorious than dolphins playing at sunset. I know it sounds silly, but I love to watch lizards chasing each other.

I feel blessed to have a very simple lifestyle that for the most part centers around nature. So does that make me an environmentalist? I imagine that many people would say "no."


I was recently told by an acquaintance that I only think that I care about the environment but that I am either fooling myself or being insincere because I don't believe in global warming. Now let me be clear, I believe that the globe warms and I believe that the globe cools. That is the "change" in climate change. I also hope that future generations will enjoy the ocean just as I do today. But I am not willing to ruin the economy for future generations based on a risky and unproven scheme.

Nobody can explain the medieval warming period to me. How is that we had period that was much warmer than today but there were far fewer people and no cars, no jets, no factories. Yet, I am to believe that warming is caused by over population, inefficient cars and industrialization.

The medieval warming period ended without Cap and Trade. Nobody met in Copenhagen and there were no carbon offsets. But it ended anyway.

I get that I sound simplistic. I readily admit that I don't understand the science. But from a common sense point of view, Global Warming just doesn't pass the smell test.

We are a pretty smart bunch of people. We can, without sacrificing our market based economy, preserve and protect our environment. Technology improves and evolves when the market is allowed to function. Instead of putting our faith on the alter of questionable science, let's take a step back and put our faith in ourselves.

Al's Next Gig: Poet

Thanks, Gator, I'll never feel about poetry the same:

Sir Al (its just a matter of time):

One thin September soon
A floating continent disappears
In midnight sun

Vapors rise as
Fever settles on an acid sea
Neptune’s bones dissolve

Snow glides from the mountain
Ice fathers floods for a season
A hard rain comes quickly

Then dirt is parched
Kindling is placed in the forest
For the lightning’s celebration

Unknown creatures
Take their leave, unmourned
Horsemen ready their stirrups

Passion seeks heroes and friends
The bell of the city
On the hill is rung

The shepherd cries
The hour of choosing has arrived
Here are your tools

Whoa, that's deep. Like you know, waders deep. Grand Canyon deep. I need a hot fudge brownie deep. And some Cheetos. Brownies and Cheetos. Whoa, that's funny. No, I mean it. Al's deep. Ya know what I'm saying? Al's the bomb.

ClimateGate Denialists Screech, Fling Poop

Via Memeorandum:

ClimateGate denialist Brad Johnson at Think Progress is frothing at the mouth:

As the United States — led by President Barack Obama — prepares to join the world in the fight against global warming, the opponents of reform are resorting to criminal desperation, harkening back to the amoral extremes of Richard Nixon. The release of the hacked emails from CRU was praised as the act of a “whistleblower” by conservatives. “The timing couldn’t be better,” chortled Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK). The original Watergate scandal began when right-wing operatives burglarized the offices of their political opponents during a presidential election. “Climategate” is turning out to be worse — now the criminals are turning on scientists as the world burns.

Brad, obviously not given to open mindedness, tolerance or simple, clear thought processes, doesn't like it when his religion is attacked. Considering that the files at the CRU were more likely leaked than hacked, the Watergate analogy is a bit misplaced. No matter. I can almost imagine Brad orgasmic with righteous indignation as his belief system is exposed as the scam of the century.

There is one way that Watergate is similar to ClimateGate-in both cases the guilty parties destroyed evidence in an attempt to cover up their crimes. In ClimateGate, it is the "scientists" who behaved in a Nixonian manner.

ClimateGate: Starting Over

Seen over at Doug Ross:

Jonah Goldberg, writing in The National Review, makes the case that although nothing will come out significance will come out of Copenhagen or Cap and Trade, ClimateGate will not be the reason. Goldberg is much more generous to the scientist at the center of the ClimateGate scandal:

The e-mails don’t show that the scientists don’t believe global warming is real. Rather, they show that the scientists believe in global warming so much, they think they’re justified in doing anything to fight it. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, you never ask questions when Gaia’s on your side.

Personally, I believe that these scientists are a bunch of hacks who figured out that they could rake in the grant money and recognition by peddling junk science and were willing to go to any lengths to keep the money flowing. That's just me. However, Goldberg makes a very good point-there is no way in Hell to convince oil producing countries to leave their oil in the ground. Why should they? What has Saudi Arabia have going for it except its oil?

Being against Cap and Trade, I am, and believing that Global Warming is a scam, I do, doesn't mean that we should give up on energy independence. Energy independence is central to our national security. Make no mistake, every time you or I fill our gas tanks we put money in to the pockets who wish to see us dead.

What ClimateGate shows us is that we need honest scientists working on solutions to the very real energy problems that this country faces. But that will never happen so long as the very powerful environmental lobby is pulling the strings.

You will never see clean wind power being generated off our coasts because the environmental groups would rather worry about migrating birds than real solutions. Why aren't they promoting underwater turbines as a source of clean energy? Why aren't they promoting drilling to insure our energy independence? The environmentalists, and the scientists and politicians who are riding around in their pockets, have no interest in solutions except those that trade our dependence on foreign despots for dependence on one world fascists.

Goldberg says that it’s time to start over, beginning with the science. True enough, but this time around let's insist on honesty and transparency. We've seen what happens when the debate, and science, is left to those with hidden agendas.

Rasmussen: Majority of American Don't Buy the Global Warming Shtick UPDATED

Ed Morrissey brings word of the latest Rasmussen poll:

The fallout of the University of East Anglia CRU e-mails threatens to smother the credibility of anthropogenic global-warming advocates — and the UN along with them. In a new survey conducted after the exposure of UEA-CRU’s behind-the-scenes chicanery, the Rasmussen poll indicates that a majority of respondents think AGW scientists have lied about their data. Only 26% think that such dishonesty and fraud is either not very likely or not at all likely:

Most Americans (52%) believe that there continues to be significant disagreement within the scientific community over global warming.

While many advocates of aggressive policy responses to global warming say a consensus exists, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 25% of adults think most scientists agree on the topic. Twenty-three percent (23%) are not sure. …

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it’s Very Likely. Just 26% say it’s not very or not at all likely that some scientists falsified data.

I don't find the results of the poll surprising. I consider my fellow citizens to be thoughtful and not easily swayed by illogical arguments that don't pass the smell test. But there is one segment of the poll that bugs the beans out of me:

Despite the protestations of “consensus” from the Obama administration — reiterated by Robert Gibbs yesterday — only a quarter of Americans actually believe that a global consensus exists among scientists. Only 22% believe that the UN, which sponsored the IPCC report based in large part of UEA-CRU findings, is a credible resource for AGW. And only 15% of all respondents think AGW is a higher priority than rebuilding the economy and creating jobs, against 71% who believe jobs and the economy should take priority.

Who are these people who believe dealing with the non-existent Global Warming should take priority over getting the economy straightened out and putting people back to work? I can only imagine that we are talking about: a) spoiled brat college students who are still living on Mommy and Daddy's dime and b) people who are wealthy enough that they don't have to worry about Cap and Trade sending their electric bills through the roof. Does anybody think that "climate crusader" Leonardo DiCaprio gives a rat's ass what his utility bill is? What are the chances he even knows what is utility bill is?

I doubt that people who believe in Global Warming have any understanding of the unintended consequences of their good(?) intentions. Currently this issue is being driven by people who do not have a dog in the fight. I don't want this economy further damaged by people who will be unaffected or worse, profit, from decisions based on junk science.

Morrissey believes that Cap and Trade is dead:

This makes the job-killing cap-and-trade bill a political nightmare for Democrats, especially once the CRU scandal really captures the public imagination. No one will support higher energy prices and the economic handicaps they will impose for a cause rife with perceived falsehoods, misrepresentations, and flat-out fraud. The cap-and-trade bill has already been considered close to dead, thanks to Harry Reid’s rescheduling of it to the spring of an election year. This should convince all but the most radical Democrats on Capitol Hill to give up the effort entirely.

Bottom line-our elected officials won't walk away from Cap and Trade because of concerns about the economy, but they will run away from it out of concerns for their political careers.

UPDATE I

The Daley Gator has a report on the hypocrisy of the United Nations Climate Change Conference which begins this Monday in Copenhagen. It looks like the delegates to the conference need to buy a butt load of "offsets" from Al Gore to make up for the carbon they are going to pump into the environment while "saving the Earth."

UPDATE II

From Instapundit: CLIMATEGATE FALLOUT? Al Gore “Abruptly” Cancels Personal Appearance In Copenhagen.

Apparently 3,000 schmucks paid upwards of $1,200 for a picture with Big Al and a "light snack." The reasons for the cancellation aren't clear but maybe it has something to do with this:

Pajamas Media founder Roger L. Simon and independent filmmaker Lionel Chetwynd -- both members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and Oscar nominees -- have called on the academy to rescind Mr. Gore's Oscars in light of the Climategate revelations.

"In the history of the academy, not to my knowledge has an Oscar ever been rescinded. I think they should rescind this one," Mr. Simon said Thursday.

Maybe the Academy could replace Gore's Oscar with a fictional award to honor Gore's peddling of the fictional Global Warming.

More at:

Memeorandum
Riehl World View
American Power
Michelle Malkin
Don Surber
Pajamas Media

That Was Then, It is Also Now

I've decided to re-post a piece that I originally wrote on June 28, 2009. I am adding some current thoughts at the end.

Shutting Down Scientists Who Oppose Global Warming

What happens to experts whose scientific opinions contradict Global Warming or Climate Change, or whatever the latest incantation is? According to the Telegraph, their more politically correct brethren shut them out:

Dr Taylor was told that his views running "counter to human-induced climate change are extremely unhelpful". His signing of the Manhattan Declaration – a statement by 500 scientists that the causes of climate change are not CO2 but natural, such as changes in the radiation of the sun and ocean currents – was "inconsistent with the position taken by the PBSG".

Dr. Mitchell Taylor has been studying polar bears for over thirty years. Unfortunately for Dr. Taylor, he cares more about honesty than being the messenger of a flawed political, quasi-scientific assumption. The “science of Global Warming is settled” only because opposing views have been silenced.

Dr Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 – as is dictated by the computer models of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues – but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.

He has also observed, however, how the melting of Arctic ice, supposedly threatening the survival of the bears, has rocketed to the top of the warmists' agenda as their most iconic single cause. The famous photograph of two bears standing forlornly on a melting iceberg was produced thousands of times by Al Gore, the WWF and others as an emblem of how the bears faced extinction – until last year the photographer, Amanda Byrd, revealed that the bears, just off the Alaska coast, were in no danger. Her picture had nothing to do with global warming and was only taken because the wind-sculpted ice they were standing on made such a striking image.

Over 700 of the world’s top scientists disagree with the theory of climate change. In fact, far more oppose the current theory than support it. If those who favor the theory that global warming is man made are so confident in their position, why are they so opposed to debate? I say follow the money. There are those who stand to profit greatly and those who wish to see our free market destroyed. These two factions have joined forces and unless we take a strong stand against this farce the consequences will be the devastation of our economy.

UPDATE: E-mails indicate EPA suppressed report skeptical of global warming.

From Power Line: The Competitive Enterprise Institute has obtained an EPA study of the "endangerment" to human well-being ostensibly caused by carbon dioxide emissions, together with a set of EPA emails indicating that the study, which concludes that carbon dioxide is not a significant cause of climate change, was suppressed by the EPA for political reasons.The Administration is suppressing the truth. Surprise, surprise. Read the entire post.

There has always been ample evidence that Global Warming is a crock. Granted, the hacked emails lend credence because they were written by the hucksters themselves but despite the proof of fraud, nothing too much has changed. Robert Gibbs, "the science is settled." Carol Browning, "the science is settled." Barbara Boxer wants a criminal probe of the hackers. Obama is still going to Copenhagen and no, I don't think he'll be making any bold statements about the Global Warming scam. While I certainly appreciate Sen. Inhofe's stance on ClimateGate, where is his backup in the Senate? Where is Sen. Lindsey Graham?

It is, to say the least, deeply disappointing that so few of our representatives are willing to stand up and say that in light of the emails that the entire "science" of climate change should be be re-evaluated. Is there a politician in Washington still in possession of a spine?

Years from now, our children's children will still be making fun of Robert Gibbs

No truer words were ever spoken:

The consensus is that Climategate is real. You're a denier, Robert Gibbs. The silence is not settled.

Every time I listen to Gibbs I think of those immortal words, "whadda Maroon!"

Ruby Slippers has our esteemed (snark!) Energy Czar, Carol Browning's statement on Climategate:

"I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real," said Ms. Browner, who President Obama has tapped as his chief of policy on global warming.

Well alrighty then. Who is in denial now?

Actually as scams go, the whole Climate Change thing wouldn't be so bad had it not been tried before. Fool me once and all that. But I've gotta tell you, once a scam is busted it really works best to just sheepishly move along. The current batch of grifters don't seem inclined to move to their next mark.

I get that Global Warming has proven particularly lucrative for some people but honestly, there really is one born every minute. Surely these charletans can stumble across another hoax that will allow them to go all Pinky and the Brain with the world domination thing.

In the mean time it would be really sweet if they would let the rest of us mere mortals go about our business unfettered by carbon taxes and the rest. And if possible, pretty please, make the next new religion a little less fascist.

So Much for Tort Reform

For those people like me who thought that we would never see tort reform, a great big pat on the back for being right. However, the House bill does with the subject of tort reform, and if passed will kill it once and for all.

From The Moderate Voice:

I first saw this item noted by Jennifer Rubin and she quickly sent me scrambling to dig back into the bill. You see, the bill includes one section with the hopeful sounding title, “Medical Liability Alternatives.” (This is section 2531, found on pages 1431 through 1433 of the bill. For the record, if you follow that link you’ll have access to the entire bill, courtesy of the NY Times, in an easily browsed format for those of you who do not wish to download the entire thing in a pdf file.)

From the title and the initial description, you might be tempted to think that the bill was going to address tort reform, at least on some level, by offering an incentive to states who set up alternate methods of handling malpractice litigation.

Here are the offending passages:

(4) CONTENTS OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICAL LIABILITY LAW. – The contents of an alternative liability law are in accordance with this paragraph if -

(A) the litigation alternatives contained in the law consist of certificate of merit, early offer, or both; and

(B) the law does not limit attorneys’ fees or impose caps on damages.

Here's the scam:

The individual states are free to pass their own tort reform but if the tort reform limits attorney fees or imposes caps on damages the states will forfeit federal dollars. So, the federal government will take money from the taxpayers and give it to the states so long as they behave themselves and leave the trial lawyers alone to earn massive settlements (and fees) which in turn, drives up the cost of health care and health insurance. What do you want to bet that in turn, there will be far more medical malpractice suits when the plaintiff is covered by private insurance than there will be for those covered by the public option? Viola, the Dems reward their buddies (and donors) the trial lawyers while the cost of private insurance continues to rise and the cost of the public option is kept down.

Who is playing politics with our health care now?

More at:

Memeorandum
RedState
Hot Air
Gateway Pundit
Left Coast Rebel