Uncategorized

Harrison Schmitt, NASA Astronaut and one of the few who walked on the Moon is not a Church of Global Warming member.

From the Boston Herald:

Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

“I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect,” said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists “are being intimidated” if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

“They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming,” Schmitt said.

The article goes on to talk about how Schmitt resigned from the Planetary Society (a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration) after the group blamed global warming on human activity. 

Of the global warming debate, he said: “It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity.”

Hmm, Convert or Die. What other group of extremists does that sound like?

What other famous speaker made the same connections?  I’ll give you a hint.

He wrote Mein Kampf.

Al Gore, on the day before Inauguration day to a bunch of 12 year olds.  this audio file was sent into Glenn Beck from a caller who had their daughter record the speach at an event in DC that she went to for the inauguration.  So you can’t freak out about anything Glenn Beck says, I will only include what came out of Al Gore’s mouth (Full Recording available here):

But I’m thinking back now a long way to when I was your age, and the civil rights was, uh, unfolding, and we kids asked our parents, and their generation ‘Ummm, explain to me again why it’s okay for the law to officially discriminate against people because of their skin color’?  And parents try to tell their kids the right thing, you know, usually, I do.  And when our parent’s generation couldn’t answer that question, that’s when the laws started to change.

There are some things about our world that you… know, that older people don’t know.  what would that be?  Well in a period of rapid change, the old assumptions sometimes just don’t… work anymore because their out of date.   New knowledge, new understandings are much more widely available sometimes to young people who are in school who aren’t weighed down with the old flawed assumptions of the past.

What the hell.  He is telling these children that THEY know better then their parents if they beleave in Global Warming!

Don’t get me wrong your parents and your elders, as you’ve figured out, know allot you can gain from… but in a time of rapid change there are times where new understandings are more apparent to young people.

and if a, if a, if a baby has a fever, you go to the doctors, and if it keeps going up you take the doctor’s recommendation usually, well, you might want a second opinion, and a third and a fourth, and we still really haven’t done anything about it.

Barack Obama wants to do something about it. And today, January 19, 2009, we will put 70 million tons of this global warming pollution into earth’s atmosphere, and people, allot of people think its okay.

No, Mr. Gore, please explain to us all who actually believes putting pollution into the air is ok?  NO ONE does.  there is a big diffrence however between “Global Warming pollution” and straight up pollution.  Pollution is bad, Global Warming pollution; or to be spicific, man made polution that is causing the earth’s temperature to rise in the manner that you have stated time and time again… simply does not exist.

And you look up at the sky, and the sky seems like a huge place, how could we possibly have any impact on it.  Just like they used to go out on the ground and look at the sun rise in the east and set in the west and used to conclude that the sun went around the earth.  They were wrong then, and anybody who thinks it’s okay to put all this pollution up there is wrong today.  We have to change it.

What he is saying here is: “Your parents are wrong and anyone who does not believe in man made Global Warming is wrong, and should be shunned for it.”

The entire north polar ice cap is melting, sea levels are rising, storms are getting stronger.  you know the story, it has to be dealt with, and you have to help us deal with it, because you are not encumbered with these old assumptions that it’s okay to put all these pollutions up there.

And you have the solution right in your hands.  Renewable energy.  It is time to end our dependence on dirty coal and foreign oil and go to solar power and wind power.

And the 12 year olds cheer.  This is brainwashing in the worst way.  I am absolutly flored that this man, one who refuses any debate on the topic and continues to say that “the science is settled” (in turn shutting down what scientific discovery is all about) is telling children to disreguard their parents and any adult that is not a true believer. 

Pretty soon peple will be wearing green armbands and will be asked not to just not believe their parents, but to report them for their climate sins.

Madison Wisconson is looking at land zoning to “meet the demands of climate change”.

From the Business & Media Institute and a City of Madison meeting agenda:

10. Zoning should adapt to meet the demands of climate change; use zoning to address or mitigate effects, or adapt to climate change; remove any barriers to mitigating the effects, adapting to climate change (trees, green space, mobility, renewable energy, land use).

As B&MI pionts out, that city wreaks of liberalism, but Global Warming city zoning?  And I thought their neighbor Minnesota was bad.

Ice is back up to 1979 Levels, recod cold throughout the world, but you won’t hear about it.

From the Baltimore Sun:

Despite what this newspaper’s editorialists aver (“A New Year’s resolution,” Jan. 2, 2009), there is no scientific proof that “time is running out for mankind to take the needed actions to thwart the most disastrous effects of climate change.” Nor is it anything more than an unproven assertion to argue that “the relevant scientific community has reached a clear consensus: Many decades of unchecked fossil fuel consumption has pushed the planet far beyond the natural cycle, and the impact of this enhanced warming, especially the forecast rise in sea level this century, could ultimately lead to human suffering on an epic scale.”

The Baltimore Sun confidently urges the next president to avoid the temptation of postponing drastic action on this matter because of other pressing problems, such as the worldwide economic slowdown, our wars in Eurasia, etc. – the most important thing in the long term is to “reduce global warming.” To this I say: “Nonsense.” Oops, that makes me a “flat-earth type,” and an all-around bad person, perhaps allied with “certain deep-pocketed traditional energy interests such as coal producers.” As you probably know, proponents of global warming are very well funded as well, but space is limited, so let us move on to the idea of scientific consensus, which is oxymoronic.

Then they quote Michael Crichton who said in a speach in 2003:

“Let’s be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

So, though I hope for MSNBC to come out and report with as much excitement that the Church of Global Warming has been wrong with their computer predictions and doom-saying… I have a feeling you won’t hear much about this until Summer hits, and they can start talking again about 6 month high temps.

First tax people by selling Carbon Credits and taxes for Carbon output, then sue their pants off.

From the Telegraph:

Stephen Hockman QC is proposing a body similar to the International Court of Justice in The Hague to be the supreme legal authority on issues regarding the environment.

The first role of the new body would be to enforce international agreements on cutting greenhouse gas emissions set to be agreed next year.

But the court would also fine countries or companies that fail to protect endangered species or degrade the natural environment and enforce the “right to a healthy environment”.

The innovative idea is being presented to an audience of politicians, scientists and public figures for the first time at a symposium at the British Library.

Innovative is right.  And with all the doubt recently in the whole Global Warming thing, they had better act fast before the rug-of-permanent-laws-and-tax-passage is pulled out from under them as the religion falters.