SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/23/2005 1:03:30 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 65232
 
Another lib stuck on stupid just like you.

    FWIW, the Bush administration acknowledges certain 
aspects of global warming. What they don't buy into is
Kyoto protocols that will crush the economy yet do little
to effect global warming or help the overall environment.
They also eschew much of the pseudo-science that hawks
flawed, falsified & unsubstantiated theory as fact.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21589159

Earth's Fidgeting Climate

Is human activity warming the Earth or do recent signs of climate change signal natural variations? In this feature article, scientists discuss the vexing ambiguities of our planet's complex and unwieldy climate.

science.nasa.gov

Two Sides to Global Warming - Is it proven fact, or just conventional wisdom?

Message 20757055

Second Global Warming Treaty Makes Less Sense Than First

A new study out this week, however, seems to question the point of the existing global warming treaty.

Message 21147172

Bush stands firm on Kyoto pact

President Bush yesterday stood fast in his rejection of the Kyoto climate treaty, and the consensus document on climate change at this week's Group of Eight summit in Scotland is not likely to reflect the more urgent and radical view of many European powers.

Message 21484234

Gleneagles outcome major energy triumph for Bush

....largely ignored by inattentive news media, the declaration on global warming at the G-8 summit of industrialized nations sounded far more like George W. Bush than Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac. Prime Minister Blair failed in his attempted coup at Gleneagles in Scotland to bring his close friend President Bush into conformity on the Kyoto protocol.

Message 21510076

A Stroke of Genius?

....consider Bush's latest master stroke: the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate.

Message 21552649

Environmentalism's Dangerous Campaign for "Safety"

The environmentalists' proclamations of danger and doom are not honest errors--they are a dishonest scare-tactic to make their anti-industrial policies appealing.

Message 20771435

Global Warming: Got Data?

Message 21139344

Has the Global Warming Hockey-Stick Been Broken?

Message 20647274

Hockey Stick Climate Temperature Trend Theory Challenged

Message 20997953

Greatest Danger Is Kyoto Protocol, Not Global Warming

Message 20804990

I've said it many times before, that to liberals it's more important what you feel than what you actually do. With that in mind, read this .

Message 20868360

Global Warming - Science or Religion?

Meteorologist Likens Fear of Global Warming to 'Religious Belief'

Message 20833237

Global Warming Quiz

dev.siliconinvestor.com

The Big Business of Climate Change Research

Message 21190539

Honest Al He Isn't: Don't Trust Al Gore on the Environment

nationalcenter.org

The Medieval Warm Period in Finland

co2science.org

Global Warming Nonsense

Even if people stopped pumping out carbon dioxide and other pollutants tomorrow, global warming would still get worse, two teams of researchers reported on Thursday.

Message 21149994

Michael Crichton Takes on Global Warming in Latest Work

Author Says Environmentalists Are 'Fomenting False Fears'

Message 20850670

Rational Explications - Michael Crichton takes on Dan Rather, Al Gore, and the U.N.

Message 20804998

Hot Air, It's Not Just for Politicians Anymore

dev.siliconinvestor.com

In or Out of Kyoto, We Still Get Screwed

Message 20805664

Science and silence

Message 20821006

The Kyoto Protocol is Dead

Message 20867078

Save the world, ignore global warming

Message 20858334

Creative Class Warms to Climate Change

Message 20865094

Global Warming? Hot Air.

Message 20891351

Natural climate change may be larger than commonly thought

Message 21038236

Reaping the Hurricane

Dr. Christopher Landsea charged that the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is "both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound."

Message 20973123

Global Warming

Why isn't more being said in the liberal media about the fallacy of global warming? By this I mean, why isn't the real cause of global warming being discussed? Is it because it is not proper to discuss something that is NOT man made? Is it improper to place blame on nature?

Message 21125540

Kyoto's Walls Are Crumbling Down

Message 21049012

Canadian Scientists Denounce Kyoto Protocol

Message 21304963

Save the Planet, Drive an SUV

Message 20956365

"Rapture" Rapture

Republicans, the environment, and the Second Coming: The origins of a liberal myth.

Message 21048711

Update air-pollution policy

Message 21462002

Green Politics and hypocrisy

Message 21462830

The AP's Biased Global Warming Coverage

Message 21038229

AP Runs Environmental Propaganda Piece as News

Message 21132628

Yet another predictable distortion

Message 21261559

Global Warming To Cause New Ice Age

Message 21345559

I wonder what Kyoto will have to say about this?

Message 21102686

Many Scientists Admit to Misconduct

Message 21403464

Is Global Warming the result of clean air?

Message 21300170

Katrina Conceit - Global warming and Mother Nature

Message 21655809

RFK Jr Releases Hot Gas Into The Political Atmosphere

Message 21657282

Democrats Never Felt the Heat

Message 21714853

Global Warming Trek Cancelled Due To Snow

Message 21390161

'Day After Tomorrow': A lot of hot air

dev.siliconinvestor.com



To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/23/2005 1:03:40 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 65232
 
Stuck on stupid

David Limbaugh
townhall.com
September 23, 2005

I believe General Russel Honore’s classic admonition to reporters, "Don’t get stuck on stupid," was one of the best lines so far of the new millennium. Part of its enduring value is its uncanny applicability to politics these days.

Honore made the statement to reporters who insisted on asking questions about Katrina when he was trying to focus on Rita. He said there would be plenty of time later to sort through inadequacies in the government’s response to Katrina, but for now they need to deal with Rita’s impending wrath.

"Don’t get stuck on stupid," thus became an instant metaphor -- at least to me -- for "Quit playing gotcha, quit dwelling in the past, and help us with solutions."

Honore’s metaphor perfectly fits the behavior of Washington Democrat politicians and caterwauling liberal loons since 2000 -- that’s right, the entire millennium, so far. In their singular obsession with George W. Bush -- "hatred" is probably more accurate -- they have been "stuck on stupid."

To clarify, I’m not calling Washington Democrats and the whacko left fringe stupid. Far from it. I am saying, though, that their perspective has been tainted by their consuming antipathy for George Bush.

They don’t even deny their contempt for President Bush but wear it proudly. I think they would deny, however, its irrationality and poisonous effects. Many of them seem to think it’s a completely rational reaction to his "contemptible" policies, particularly the war with Iraq. What they don’t tell you is that their ill will for him significantly preceded our invasion of Iraq, which many of them, by the way, supported.

Their unhealthy hatred for Mr. Bush dates back to the 2000 election, which they -- irrationally again -- believe he stole from Mr. Gore. The fact is, Mr. Gore was trying to steal the election himself and almost succeeded, through one of the most egregious perversions of the rule of law in our nation’s history, by the Florida Supreme Court.

But the real source of their animus is even more basic. They resent him because he represents their expulsion from power over the executive branch, which the Clinton eight-year heyday should have ensured them in perpetuity.

You’ll recall that their "entitlement" to the legislative branch was stolen from them in 1994, which is one of the reasons they consider Newt Gingrich another personification of evil. Adding insult to cumulative injury, they’ve also lost their monopoly on the media over the last 15 years.

The intensity of their blinding hatred for Bush compels them to view all problems through their anti-Bush lenses. How many of them could bring themselves to rejoice, for example, over the historic elections in Iraq and the people’s courageous embracing of self-rule and representative government there? And how about their unconscionable politicizing of Katrina?

They are stuck on stupid.

Indeed, the real challenge for Democrats, politically, is whether they’ll be able to unstick themselves from stupid as we approach the 2008 elections -- not to mention 2006. Are they capable of thinking clearly again? Can they offer alternative solutions to the nation’s problems, beyond carping at President Bush -- who won’t be running -- and tearing down Republican ideas?

One great irony is that Hillary Clinton figured this out a long time ago. She realized that she needed to rise above this pettiness and demonstrate an appreciation for the global evil we face in the War on Terror, among other things.

But just when she had almost succeeded at extricating herself -- opportunistically -- from the Democrat "stupid" quagmire, she was jerked right back into it by the formidably powerful crazies that dominate the party today. Hillary just got trounced in an unofficial poll among the far-left kooks -- hundreds of thousands of them -- and she’s understandably nervous. Properly chastened, she’s started hurling obligatory invectives at President Bush again.

If Republicans weren’t stuck on stupid as well -- in an entirely different way -- they would have nothing to fear from Democrats in 2008, notwithstanding the enormity of the problems we now face, foreign and domestic. But Republicans just don’t seem to know how to be consistently true to the principles they champion. Though a majority of the country probably leans conservative, the GOP is still scared to death to govern that way.

President Bush should ignore the polls and the conventional wisdom that he has lost too much political capital to implement his agenda. He must abandon all fantasies of placating the implacable Left. He should appoint a conspicuously conservative originalist, like Janice Rogers Brown, to replace Justice O’Conner, then proceed to make his income tax cuts permanent, eliminate the estate tax, reform Social Security, reform immigration, cut pork and continue building up Iraqi forces -- and let the other guys stick on stupid.

David Limbaugh is a syndicated columnist who blogs at DavidLimbaugh.com.

©2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

townhall.com



To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/23/2005 1:33:51 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 65232
 
Environmentalism as a religion

Posted by Jerry Scharf
Common Sense and Wonder

<<<

Remarks to the Commonwealth Club

by Michael Crichton
San Francisco
September 15, 2003


I have been asked to talk about what I consider the most important challenge facing mankind, and I have a fundamental answer. The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance.

We must daily decide whether the threats we face are real, whether the solutions we are offered will do any good, whether the problems we're told exist are in fact real problems, or non-problems. Every one of us has a sense of the world, and we all know that this sense is in part given to us by what other people and society tell us; in part generated by our emotional state, which we project outward; and in part by our genuine perceptions of reality. In short, our struggle to determine what is true is the struggle to decide which of our perceptions are genuine, and which are false because they are handed down, or sold to us, or generated by our own hopes and fears.

As an example of this challenge, I want to talk today about environmentalism. And in order not to be misunderstood, I want it perfectly clear that I believe it is incumbent on us to conduct our lives in a way that takes into account all the consequences of our actions, including the consequences to other people, and the consequences to the environment. I believe it is important to act in ways that are sympathetic to the environment, and I believe this will always be a need, carrying into the future. I believe the world has genuine problems and I believe it can and should be improved. But I also think that deciding what constitutes responsible action is immensely difficult, and the consequences of our actions are often difficult to know in advance. I think our past record of environmental action is discouraging, to put it mildly, because even our best intended efforts often go awry. But I think we do not recognize our past failures, and face them squarely. And I think I know why.

I studied anthropology in college, and one of the things I learned was that certain human social structures always reappear. They can't be eliminated from society. One of those structures is religion. Today it is said we live in a secular society in which many people---the best people, the most enlightened people---do not believe in any religion. But I think that you cannot eliminate religion from the psyche of mankind. If you suppress it in one form, it merely re-emerges in another form. You can not believe in God, but you still have to believe in something that gives meaning to your life, and shapes your sense of the world. Such a belief is religious.

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism.
Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.

There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe.

Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday---these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don't want to talk anybody out of them, as I don't want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don't want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can't talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith.

And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them.

Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not. Because we know a lot more about the world than we did forty or fifty years ago. And what we know now is not so supportive of certain core environmental myths, yet the myths do not die. Let's examine some of those beliefs.

>>>

Continue
crichton-official.com

commonsensewonder.com



To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/23/2005 6:28:39 PM
From: Clappy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
I'm a believer that everything just happens in cycles.

Just like the stock market and everything else in nature...

I always get a kick out of watching people attach reasons for
it.

On a daily basis you can see the reporters attach a reason as
to why the market was up or down.

"The market was up because of a drop in oil prices."

Then one day the market goes up but so did the oil prices, so
the reason becomes something else.

Meanwhile the whole thing is just fluctuating along some
cosmic ride of Elliot Waves and Fibonacci Cycles and waves of
emotion.

All of it as natural as the ebb and flow of the tides and the
continual decay and rebirth in a forest.

It's just a thought.

They are now trying to attach reasons for these storms.

If we get a few earth quakes, they will find some sort of
reason that makes sense to them as well.

...and yes, global warming is also part of the super-cycle.
The earth will find a method to take care of the problem if
we can't. It's all natural. (Just like human greed and
emotion. They are all figured into the equation.)

...probably won't be fun when Mother Nature corrects this.

It would be nice if we ran out of oil BEFORE we get hit with
some sort of Ice Age...

The sky high oil price would natually find the next source of
energy for us to use.

-Clapper

---------------

Katrina, Rita part of powerful storm cycle

BY ROBERT NOLIN

South Florida Sun-Sentinel

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - (KRT) - Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the muscular headliners of this hurricane season, are just a preview of what to expect in coming years: More powerful storms.

And the trend could span decades.

Rita weakened slightly Thursday from a mighty Category 5 to a still-dangerous Category 4, but remained on course for the Texas coast, with an inevitably destructive landfall predicted for late Friday or early Saturday.

As the storm took a loose turn north, aiming somewhere between Galveston and the Texas-Louisiana border, more than a million threatened residents fled inland.

Floridians can expect similar scenarios as part of a natural cycle that will not only see more hurricanes, but more powerful ones as well.

"We are solidly into one of these active periods," said Colin McAdie, a meteorologist with the National Hurricane Center. "We're figuring we're 10 years into this one. We could be looking at 10 to 20 more years."

That means next year, and the years after that, could be just as scary as this one, with mega-storms taking aim at Florida, the Carolinas or the Gulf Coast, spiking the anxiety levels of those in their path.

Hurricanes feed on warm water and scientists say the pattern of increased storm frequency and strength is caused by a cyclical rise in ocean temperatures.

Besides fueling more powerful hurricanes, a higher number of storms means more of them will be stronger.

"Certainly, with more frequency of active systems, we can see a lot more chances to have more intense hurricanes," said another storm forecaster, Chris Sisko.

The cycles commonly run about 25 to 30 years, scientists say, but can vary and see breaks of as much as a decade. The current cycle started around 1995. Prior to then, from 1975 to 1995, only four major hurricanes, defined as a Category 3 or higher, impacted the state.

"In the `70s and `80s," McAdie said, "people were saying, `I guess we don't get hurricanes any more.'"

By contrast, 23 hurricanes hit South Florida alone during the last cycle of high hurricane activity, from 1926 to 1965. Of those storms, 15 were major ones. "We had about a 40-year period when it was very busy," said meteorologist Chris Landsea with the National Hurricane Center. During that cycle, on Labor Day 1935, a Category 5 hurricane hit the Florida Keys.

It's getting busy this cycle, too. Last year, four hurricanes, three of them Category 3 or higher, made landfall in Florida. This year, with two months yet to go in the season, two hurricanes, Dennis and Katrina, have already struck the state.

Rita, which boasted winds of 175 mph before weakening Thursday, was the third most intense Atlantic Basin hurricane on record.

After sideswiping Key West on Tuesday, the storm spun into the Gulf of Mexico, where it quickly sucked up energy from the warm waters of the Loop Current, a segment of the Gulf Stream that flows into the central Gulf from between Cuba and the Yucatan Peninsula.

By Thursday afternoon, however, forecasters said a wind shear, or strong upper level air flow, damaged the storm's top end, causing it to lose some power. The hurricane's slower pace over cooler water pockets also sapped its strength. While the storm was expected to pass over warmer water late Thursday night, the wind shear was also predicted to increase, possibly canceling out any regained strength.

Forecasters say it's possible the storm could drop a notch to a Category 3 hurricane, with winds of at least 111 mph, before it makes landfall. Hurricane center director Max Mayfield often says the difference between a Category 3 and Category 4 storm is like the difference between getting hit by a freight train or an 18-wheeler.

A cycle of warm ocean water fuels individual storms like Rita, and gives rise to stronger hurricanes during high activity cycles such as the present one. Researchers say a higher salt content in the Atlantic causes the water to become more dense, which in turn causes the water to grow warmer, perhaps by as much as a degree.

That single degree can make a difference in whether a tropical wave rolling across the sea will develop into a devastating hurricane.

Researchers have yet to decipher the rhythm of the storm cycles. "The oceanographers are looking into that, trying to understand that," Landsea said.

Contrary to speculation, the cycles may not result from human-induced global warming. Prevailing scientific opinion says global warming has little or nothing to do with the trend.

"The science is not settled on that," McAdie said. "It's an open question."

---

© 2005 South Florida Sun-Sentinel.



To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/27/2005 8:09:21 AM
From: Clappy  Respond to of 65232
 
Evidence of global warming...

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

...on Mars

mars.jpl.nasa.gov



To: abstract who wrote (62589)9/27/2005 2:44:01 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
The left and hysteria

Dennis Prager
townhall.com
September 27, 2005

If you want to understand the Left, the best place to start is with an understanding of hysteria. Leading leftists either use hysteria as a political tactic or are actually hysterics.

Take almost any subject the Left discusses and you will find hysteria.

The Patriot Act:
According to leftist spokesmen and groups, the Patriot Act is a grave threat to liberty and democracy. It is frequently likened to the tactics of a fascist state. This is pure hysteria. The Los Angeles Times recently published statistics concerning the use of the Act. Through 2004, of the 7,136 complaints to the Justice Department's inspector general, one was related to the Patriot Act. The number of "sneak and peek" warrants, allowing searches without telling a subject, totaled 155. The number of roving wiretaps was 49, and the number of personal records seizures under Section 215 of the Act was 35.

The war in Iraq:
It is not enough for leftist opponents of the war to argue that the war is a mistake, was initiated due to faulty intelligence, or is being poorly prosecuted. Rather they charge that President Bush lied, that the war was waged for Halliburton, and that America is engaged in a criminal and imperialist enterprise. Each charge is a form of hysteria.

Risks to health: Not everyone who believes the hysterical claims of danger made about secondhand smoke, baby formula, dodgeball or Bextra is on the Left. But the Left leads the country in hysteria over dangers to health. That is why leftist organizations are generally incapable of merely saying that something is unhealthy. The danger must be described as the killer of hundreds of thousands and often be ascribed to some murderous corporate conspiracy.

Environment: More people may be attacked by aardvarks in any given year than visit the remote and frozen region of Alaska known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). It is the home, however, of vast oil reserves and many caribou. Good people can differ on whether or not to drill for oil there. But the rhetoric of the Left is hysterical. Listening to leftist organizations one would think that drilling would bring no benefit to America and would render the caribou virtually extinct. None of this is true. It is all drama.

Likewise there is largely hysteria over global warming and the charge that man -- especially Homo Americanus -- is the cause of it. The great number of scientists who claim that we are in a normal warming period or in no major weather change at all are ignored. Only the most hysterical scenarios are offered by the Left. Witness the reasons given for Hurricane Katrina. Yet even The New York Times reported that scientists are virtually unanimous in denying that the hurricane has anything to do with global warming.

Animal rights: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is the living embodiment of hysteria. Take their program "Holocaust on your plate," which equates barbecuing chickens with the cremating of the Jews in the Holocaust. It is one thing to be concerned about chickens' welfare, but only hysterics compare eating them with the slaughter of a people.

Racism: There is no worse charge than racism. Acting hatefully toward people because of their skin color is among the most vile acts a person can engage in. Yet the Left throws that charge around as if it were the essence of the American people (which, come to think of it, is what many on the Left believe). Most of the time, however, the charge of racism -- such as when it is directed at opponents of race-based affirmative action -- is just another example of hysteria.

Christianity: Most on the Left really believe that this country is on the verge of a theocracy because George W. Bush is an evangelical Christian, because the words "under God" are still in the Pledge of Allegiance, and because most Americans don't think marriage ought to be redefined.

Other examples abound. America neglects its poor, beats up its gays, oppresses its women, fouls its environment, ignores its children's educations, denies blacks their votes, and invades other countries for corporate profits: These are common accusations of the Left.

No event is free of leftist hysteria. On the third day after Katrina, civil rights activist Randall Robinson reported that blacks in New Orleans were resorting to cannibalism. Indeed, most of the news media coverage bordered on the hysterical. Not to mention the hysterical predictions of 10,000-plus dead in New Orleans.

None of this is to deny that the Right also gets hysterical. Some right-wing reactions to immigration and Terry Schiavo provide such examples.

But the irony in all of this is that the Left sees itself as the side that thinks intellectually and non-emotionally. And that is hysterical.

©2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

townhall.com