Climate Change: Basic Greenhouse Equations “Totally Wrong”

Miklós Zágoni isn’t just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary’s most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was.That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA’s Ames Research Center.

…

After studying it, Zágoni stopped calling global warming a crisis, and has instead focused on presenting the new theory to other climatologists.

Can we focus on pollution again now? I got no problem with all kinds of regulation and activism if we are dealing with real pollutants. The world is in fact getting more polluted every day, and we need to deal with it. But CO2 is not the problem.

H/T to Just Right.

Wabbit Season… Coyote Season…

Can somebody tell me why our animal control officers don’t simply shoot these pests?  I see them roaming the streets and parks, they eat pets, they crap on the lawn (I get fined if I don’t pick up after my dog), they spill garbage.

Coyotes are not endangered.  They aren’t even indigenous - their territory has only in the last 100 years expanded out to the West Coast.  They are a nuisance, and can become a public danger.

Someone needs to get a backbone and start shooting these pests.

Breadlosers

I have to give credit to the Left for finally finding a way to market their ideology besides simply spending more or involving more government in our lives through this new junk science called global cooling nee climate change nee global warming. In the process, they have found a way of recapturing their deceptive tactics of the mid-20th century of framing their cause in a way that no one disagrees with on the surface, but hides lethal devils in the details; no one is against improving the environment, or social justice, or human rights, after all!

But, like almost all things that liberalism gets behind, the devil is very much in the details. A series of articles went largely unnoticed back in mid-February when we were concerned with John Tory’s fate, the Alberta election or the federal government’s lifespan. In them comes news that bread, particularly the stuff its made of (grain) has tripled in price in just a matter of months. Two factors are being blamed:

a)the rapid emergence of a middle class in the combined 2 billion-large areas of China and India (serious question: would it be improper to refer to this as Chindia from now on?)

and b) the increasing demand for ethanol as an energy source

We have no right or basis to blame the first point on anyone (in fact, kudos to the Asians who are beginning to enjoy a better standard of living!), however we should look into that latter one. Ethanol is a fairly plentiful chemical in our ecosystem, and the hippies love it because it’s a fairly clean, albeit highly inefficient source of energy (although don’t tell them that its mass is composed of over 50% carbon!). Don’t get me wrong either: if nothing else, I’m pro-moving away from oil just so we can stick it to the Saudis and eliminate the threat they pose to western civilization, however not only is the ethanol energy craze the philosopher’s stone of the modern era, it’s also the next best way of socialism causing a famine in the land.

Demonstrating that they really don’t understand economic forces, the greenies of the world praised ethanol as a cheap and renewable source of energy. Yes, it’s definately renewable but cheap is only a temporal trait as the market is always changing. If you need 1000 pounds of wheat to feed your population per day, and request another 500 pounds for energy purposes, demand goes up, and the price with it. Things could eventually stabilize with either continued breakthroughs in agricultural chemistry to improve grain yield, or us just planting more fields with grains, however I remain skeptical as energy demands have steadily increased over the past 100 years and will continue to as our population and technology increases. In the meantime, we really need to ask ourselves if forcing a child to do without an extra meal is worth the dubious effort to remove carbon from our atmosphere.

Elizabeth’s Prayer

Today’s National Post includes a response from Green Party Leader Elizabeth May regarding the Post’s editorial yesterday which made reference to her studying to be an Anglican priestess. Aside from the snarkiness of the title/quote she uses, Miss May might want to remember that she brought the Christian faith into the fray herself by allowing a press release to go out in her name which was explicitly derogatory towards Christianity. If the release had simply referenced “crusader mentality” sans the Christian reference, it still would have gotten eyebrows rightfully pointed upwards but at least she wouldn’t have suffered the same self-inflicted blow that she did last year by implying that our Prime Minister is akin to a Nazi apologist because he doesn’t share the Green Party’s undying faith in mother earth’s suffering. The fact that May now feels obligated to further insult the faith of serious Christian believers in a national newspaper shows just how dedicated her party is to replace the NDP and the left-wing of the Liberal Party as the political voice of bitter, post-Christian Canadian agnostics but, more importantly, it also simply shows that she simply doesn’t know when to just keep quite!

Ban the Drive Thru in North Vancouver

Ban restaurant drive-thru’s?

You’re kidding right?

You’ve got a problem with idling cars causing pollution,  build bigger roads and bridges.  100 times the pollution for 4 hours each morning and 6 hours each evening as the Second Narrows and the Lion’s Gate back up for miles.

The average person idles in a drive thru for less than 5 minutes.  He idles on the bridge deck for an hour at least during rush hours.  What about public health?  Why do we force people to sit in traffic breathing carbon monoxide?  You can’t have it both ways - you either build the transit to move people or you build roads to accommodate cars.  You can’t not build transit then whine that nobody rides it.

Where the Gaia Worshipers…err, Sorry, “Secularists” Are Taking Us…

They say that university campuses are the driving force behind all the major political movements these days…well at least those on The Left. I was waiting for this to happen though:

Sydney’s Cardinal Pell heavily criticized an Australian medical journal for publishing a professor’s letter calling for a tax on children of $5000 per child and $800 yearly for each child after birth, as punishment for parents who have families larger than two children.

…

Dr. Barry Walters condemned Australia’s “baby bonus” program, writing that “showering financial booty on new mothers” encouraged “greenhouse-unfriendly behaviour” and that Australia should adopt population plans similar to those in India or China. Trees should be planted to negate the ecological effect of every child born, he said.

But Cardinal Pell said that anti-human environmental proposals from extremist minorities were the real cause for concern.

Sadly, extremist minorities, the likes of which we saw around here courtesy of Atheism’s American high priest, soon become oppressive majorities after they use their influence in the education system to brainwash enough young voters to militantly support the agenda in question.

Just for the record as well, it’s not like India (whose culture is known to mimic ancient Rome’s and prefer male babies while slaughtering its daughters — feminists? feminists?!) or China export there excess human capital to other nations like our grande immigration scheme in this country likes to imagine. The bodies pile up pretty fast.

This professor’s letter also begs the question of what would happen if expectant parents aren’t able to pay a sickening carbon tax on newborns. Does the state then empower itself to violate the mother physically and abort the child? (Feminists? Feminists?!) The only crime that I can see the armies of The Left truly convicting this professor of is demonstrating modern liberalism’s true agenda of pursuing a Utopian world (which won’t work under real-world circumstances) through means that would make Hitler, Stalin, et al blush in jealousy. At least the ancients, as primative as I’ve been told they were in comparison to our highly evolved brains and culture, were honest enough to admit when all they wanted was a good old genocide to appease their blood-thirsty gods!

“Expelled”: The Tyranny on Thought

Jason, from Back off Government!, happens to be a very good friend of mine and sent me a link today to a new movie that I had no idea was coming out but will definately be seeing now…

Ben Stein, first made famous in the celebrity world through Farris Bueler’s Day Off, staunch Republican and former speech writer for Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, is staring in a new documentary called “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” that will be out in theatres this February and tackles the dogma of evolution that is not only harming free speech in our society but also has led to many of the disasters of the 20th century with the greatest death toll. I have searched and haven’t seen any evidence that it will be carried by Canadian chains, but I hope this is just because the movie is still at least a month away from release.

Anyway, watch the trailer here since it’s actually a pretty powerful and moving piece. I hope that everyone who considers themselves to be truly open minded to all the possibilities of science watches this too. As for the commentators on this blog who will simply dismiss both this post and this movie as blind faith, I offer the challenge to you that Stein implies in the above-linked movie: watch the movie, listen to the criticism and respond accordingly. Otherwise, it really begs the question on whether you are really comfortable with your faith in what you have heard about evolution (studies, evidence of, arguments for), or are just paranoid that someone if challenged with a rival theory like intelligent design it will come crashing down. For the trolls (and you know who you are!), I simply offer the original title Darwin gave to his book,

On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

,and ask you to explain how such a social (and Holocaust-endorsing) statement can be classified as the title of a purely scientific work — until I get a direct answer to that, I will not respond to any of your inquiries as I haven’t seemed to get much of a response on mine and think I’m overdue!

With that said, let the acid start flying…!

Alberta is Warming than Mississippi? Russians Claim it’s Par for the Course

Wacky weather in the new year… Get used to it, claims one Russian Scientist - we’re heading for another Ice Age!

Give & Take

First off, Merry Christmas to all the readers of ThePolitic who visit here frequently. I hope that you and your families get to enjoy the Christmas holidays and are blessed with the knowledge that true peace is achievable through Him that was born when he didn’t need to be, and died that death would not be the end.

---

Now that we’ve all settled into winter here in Canada and the Bali Summit is complete, the focus is starting to turn to the mission in Afghanistan. It struck me yesterday in my travels during the Boxing Day trials that these two political theatres have an interesting correlation that everyone on the Left, the Right and in between should heed:

In the environment sphere, the Left tells us that despite the fact that the U.S., China, and India (the global leaders in CO2 emissions and real pollutants) have, to date, not signed onto any treaty that would limit their emissions Canada should step up to the plate and do more than our fair share in reducing these emissions so as to at least reduce the alleged damage that would occur due to CO2 build-up in the atmosphere.

In the global security sphere, the Right is telling us that despite the fact that Great Britain, Germany, and Italy (the other coalition partners that are part of the NATO mission in Afghanistan) aren’t contributing their fair share in the heavy-fighting reasons in southern Afghanistan that Canada should step up to the plate and finish the job no one else is willing to in Afghanistan so as to at least bring stability to the Afghan people.

It’s an interesting comparison especially when you factor in the rebukes to each respective argument. While I would argue that the Afghan mission has more success, both initiatives are only tentative and not guaranteed to bring on a better world and both are costing our economy money that opponents would be better spent.

The only consideration that I believe we should be factoring into these issues as we consider how to move forward on them is that in both cases the other countries of the world are either too lazy or too hypocritical to engage in the endevours themselves, so whether it is fighting the Taliban in the mountains of Asia or car emissions on the 400, we shouldn’t be looking to the international community for either guidance or support. Rather, our policies should be based on a clearly thought out vision that is prudent and ultimately promotes Canadian values and growth. Consider this when both issues come up in next year’s almost-certain election when all four party leaders pitch their vision (or lack thereof) of why we should hitch our coach to their particular wagon!

The Growing Consensus of the Lack of Consensus for Global Warming

Confused yet?

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called “consensus” on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

« Previous Page — Next Page »