June 2006 Archives

While noted non-scientists such as Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Robert Redford, Ed Begley Jr, and that liberal nutcase friend you have continue to beat the global warming drum, REAL scientists are hardly monolithic in their views of the matter. In fact, a wide variety of REAL experts know better. While the nuts are criticizing the head of the National Hurricane Center for telling the truth about the hurricane cycle, actual scientists who really study these things are telling the truth. Scientists in Canada are speaking out against Gore's "Scary Movie" and it is a great read.

Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.

Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."

Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"

There's more. There's a lot more. Of course, to appreciate it, you have to be open to the idea that actual scientists might know more about climate change than dropouts like Al Gore.

One of the greatest aspects of my favorite sport, politics, is watching the hardcore partisans make absolute declarations, when they have no real evidence to back up their claims. The Democrats have become absolute masters in this maneuver. They claimed we would not be able to win in Afghanistan. They said we would need thousands of bodybags if we invaded. They said we could never sponsor a stable government there. They claimed we would not be able to win in Iraq. They said we would need thousands of bodybags if we invaded. They claimed we could never sponsor a stable government there. Heck, they've claimed so many things as absolute truths that have turned out to be false, I've long since lost count. If all else fails, make up something that sounds good.
Well, it's happened again. For many months, we've heard over and over that Karl Rove was going to be indicted in the next week. Never mind that the prosecutor in the supposed CIA leak case stated early on that Rove wasn't a target of the investigation. Never mind that the prosecutor repeated on a regular basis that Rove wasn't a target of the investigation. Never mind that... Aw, heck. There was NEVER any evidence that Rove was the leaker in this case. There was only wild conjecture on the part of liberals who claimed things to be that they wanted to be, but weren't.
That's one of the reasons the Democrats are failing at this point in history. Instead of dealing with things as they really are, they deal with things as they wish they were. They wish our military was running around mass-killing innocent women, children, and babies. They wish George Bush was an idiot. They wish George Bush was a right-wing extremist. They wish Hillary Clinton was a viable candidate to win the presidency. They wish the economy was doing poorly. They wish we were losing in Iraq. They wish Karl Rove was indicted. They wish the United States was the cause of global warming. They wish the oil companies were price-gouging.
They wish all these things because they are necessary to gain the biggest thing they wish was true. They wish they were winning. They wish for all these bad things to happen. You can tell, because they're constantly claiming them to be true, when they aren't. The evidence repeatedly proves their claims wrong, but they continue to make the claims. There's a reason for this. In order for liberals to gain, America must lose.
The left has positioned themselves as the best to handle economic downturns, but not economic high-points. As a result, they rely on a poor economy for political gain. They've positioned themselves as the answer to global warming, because they want to change how the US does business as a response. If the left is to benefit politically from global warming, the US must be the cause. Likewise, with each of the above wishes, the left has positioned itself politically to benefit only under the condition that the wish is actually true.
As it turns out, the evidence has shown that Bush is probably smarter than both Gore and Kerry, and I'd guess Hillary, too. Turns out we're also winning in Iraq, that both Afghanistan and Iraq have built stable governments, our economy is doing very well, the oil companies are raising and lowering prices in conjunction with the crude oil price, and our soldiers in Iraq are doing a good, decent job. As for Global Warming, the only major scientific communities in which there is absolute belief that mankind (primarily the United States) is causing it are Hollywood liberals and Al Gore.
Oh yeah, and Karl Rove didn't get indicted. Wrong again.

Immigration has been a huge issue for some time now. At first, I thought it was moderately entertaining, but as it has drawn out, it's just gotten boring. The House has passed some real reforms, if imperfect. The Senate has done everything they can to destroy those reforms. In fact, the Senate made their whole bill unconstitutiional by ignoring some basic, elementary-school constitutional law.

Anybody here who didn't know that revenue-generating bills must start in the House of Representatives, stand up. You folks should find a pocket copy of the Constitution and do some studying.

I think it is time for some real reforms. Here's my proposition.

• Anyone entering or residing in the US without valid authorization shall, after a six-month grace-period, be committing a felony.


• Anyone found committing the above felony shall pay $5000 and be deported. Alternately, they can stay in the country on work-release as long as they A) Have a job, B) Spend five years on probation, C) Pay $1000 initial fine and $1000 per year for the five years they are on probation. D) Demonstrate, by the second year of their probation, at least a functioning knowledge of the English language. Probationary residents shall be considered to be legal during the duration of their stay, and once their probation has been completed, eligibility time limits for citizenship may begin.


• Any local, state, or other government entity that refuses to enforce immigration law shall lose all federal funding.


• Any monies removed from localities that refuse to enforce immigration law shall flow as bonuses to those areas that do enforce the same laws, based on the statistics of enforcement given to the federal immigration authorities. (ie. San Diego loses millions of dollars because they refuse to enforce. The Raleigh, NC police department turns 1000 cases over to the feds. Raleigh will receive 1000 shares of the funding lost by San Diego and other localities that refused.)


• No illegal immigrant or immigration probationer may receive government services free of charge. These services include welfare assistance, education, housing, and such. These services shall not include police, fire, and rescue services or actual emergency medicine. If non-covered services are used, their costs shall be added to the probation fees and must be paid before probation may end.


• At any time, a probationer may request deportation and their probation will end permanently, and future eligibility for re-entry will be revoked for twice the remaining time of their probation.

That's my idea. I think it would work.