Science


For some time now it has appeared that desperation and exasperation has crept into the zeitgeist psyche of the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming)-support community. With each passing day, and with each strong rebuttal of the underpinnings of the AGW theory, the new theories or proofs of theories become more and more and more specious, speculative and tentative.

A prime example of this state of matters, what I like to personally call shoudda, woudda, coudda, is encapsulated in this recent AP story regarding a new, ominous theory that supports AGW and portends dire consequences for inaction and (of course) suggests that we cease our use of CO2-producing energy before it’s too late:

Warming ocean could melt ice faster than thought

I hate to even link to alleged news articles like this, because it might add to the appearance of credibility for the pure claptrap they report. But the best disinfectant for such things is sunlight, and I strongly feel it is a necessary responsibility to rebut these things as they arise.

I urge you to read and reread the article several times (it is short). If you will, count the number of times that a declarative (will, is, won’t, can, etc.) rather than a speculative (might, could, should, etc.) statement is made in describing the new “oceans-will-melt-faster” theory. I get eleven declaratives and eight speculatives in a cursory reading. However, if one removes the extraneous fluff, like how some action will cause some result…not associated with the theory, then the count becomes eight speculatives to four declaratives.

Through the use of clever journalistic techniques, one reads — at face value — a mainstream news story that seems like it solidly supports the underlying AGW theory, without a doubt. But if you take the time to strip away the extraneous information it contains, not related to the nub of the story, then the theory that the story purports to be rock-solid  proof, in this case of AGW, becomes quite speculative and specious.

It goes without saying that in the case if AGW, with all the power to be had and money to be made by those who would force us to accept it, that for the average man or woman two words must come to the fore whenever they read or hear such a story…

Caveat Emptor!

It’s Anthropogenic Global Warming! Until it isn’t…or maybe it’s the scourge of Climate Change. Uh, nope. Or, perhaps it’s just the weather being the unpredictable weather. Hey, I think we’re onto something! An interesting tidbit from the cyclone and hurricane observers at Florida State University (Dr. Ryan Maue): Recent historically low global tropical cyclone activity. Maybe it’s just me, but I thought that all manner of bad things, meteorologically-speaking, were going to befall us due to AGW and our continued use of all things CO2-producing. Who would have guessed that  the DIRE predictions of super-strong hurricanes and cyclones that made Katrina look like a kitten in comparison would be dashed…at least they’ve been if we’re to believe the good Dr. Maue. Oh well, maybe these things are caused by, now take a seat you climate scaremongers, THE VAGARIES OF THE RANDOM WEATHER!!! I dunno…seems like a theory to me.

Tipping Point? There are incidents which occur that leave you scratching your head and make you think “What were they thinking?” There are other incidents that occur that make you think that we as a nation have reached a tipping point, and that perhaps the scale is weighted such that we are at a point of no return. Behold, a tipping point: Elderly woman asked to remove adult diaper during TSA search. Where has all logic and sanity gone in our government when an incident such as this may occur? It is abundantly clear that the TSA is no longer concerned just about our “safety,” whatever the hell that may be. No, I’m afraid that their intentions are more sinister at heart: They are gaining control over us! Now, I assume that we’re all still freeborn American men and women with certain inalienable rights: like those pesky attributes life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness spelled out in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution. For example, situations like what happened with the ailing, 105 pound, wheelchair-bound, 95 year old woman in her “encounter” with the TSA are most handsomely covered in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Read that passage very carefully and tell me that what the TSA is presently doing in the name of “safety” has any constitutional basis whatsoever. I’ll cut immediately to the chase for you — it doesn’t. This unfortunate lady was subjected to an unreasonable search of her person, without the benefit of a court order and furthermore was humiliated in her having to remove a very personal hygiene product at the order of a TSA “official.” Benjamin Franklin was right when he opined so many years ago:

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

His words ring true…as an ominous warning, even today.

Liberalism/Progressivism Has Failed. OKAY, it’s high time to start stating the obvious: that the precepts, agendas and programs that constitute the ideology called liberalism/Progressivism have failed. Spectacularly. Since the nascent probings of Progressivism by Teddy Roosevelt to the full-bore adoption of Progressive/socialist programs by Franklin Roosevelt, the US has suffered a great harm regardless of the “good” that all the hard-earned money spent on this ideology is alleged to have done. Regardless of the party line and the hype, we have come to the end. We are BROKE! There is no way to tax and spend our way out of the fiscal, social and moral abyss that we have backed ourselves into. For Americans, the FAILED ideology of liberalism/Progressivism isn’t the answer. It is the illness. The only way out of the present mess we find ourselves in is to re-adopt the prudent, frugal and austere precepts that are found in the Constitution. We must abandon our profligate and sinful ways and become the perfected society, based on constitutional and free-market principles, that we should be. I think that many Americans are waking from their profligate stupor; and they are realizing that the math that the Progressives espouse just doesn’t add up. There are no free rides, and you can’t get something for nothing (or almost nothing.) That taxing the “rich” only gives you the wages of sin (sloth, greed and envy) and that “helping” the poor with perpetual government alms and “charity” only breeds contempt and idleness from the “beneficiaries.” it’s time to shout the failure of this cancerous, unproductive ideology from the rooftops! “Liberalism/Progressivism is DEAD! Long live freedom and capitalism!!!”

Nothing New Under the Political Sun. It is indeed the silly season. Since the beginning of the 2012 presidential campaign we have seen the Dems/Progs/Libs ramp up their rhetoric and redouble their ad hominem attacks on the GOP candidates. One need to look no further than Michelle Bachmann for this political and media fold and spin job. Rep. Bachmann is truly a woman of substance. She has numerous scholastic, personal, business and political achievements to her credit. But unlike the Marxist Barack Obama, she is hated by the media and reviled by her political opponents for her strong conservative beliefs. See, regardless of the cries for more “civility” in the political discourse after the tragic shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Rep. Bachmann has been the recipient of some odious “scrutiny” for alleged gaffes and misstatements. In a recent interview on FOX News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked her if she was “a flake?” Rep. Bachmann is definitely not a flake…and such a question is both demeaning and insulting, regardless of Wallace’s intent. If the “flake” question by Wallace can be considered friendly fire, Ms. Bachmann had better steel herself for a fusillade of invective and insults that are now being dreamed up by the “civilized” left — from both media and politicians. Because the one thing we can count on is that there is NOTHING new under the political sun, particularly where desperate Democrats are concerned.

German Chancellor Angel Merkel has started down a road to close ALL nuclear power plants presently operating in Germany based on the recent tsunami-based crisis in Japan. Merkel has begun the process to close the oldest plants as soon as possible.

This decision is a prime example of the sad fact that politicians can take actions out of fear and/or ignorance that have wide ranging unintended national and economic consequences. Germany’s present nuclear power generation capacity is 20,339 megawatts, or 26.1% of the total national capacity. What will happen to Germany when this 26% capacity disappears from their power grid? What form of energy will be utilized by Germany to take up the slack left by the absence of nuclear power? Does Merkel think that magical windmills and space-hogging solar facilities will replace the significant power capacity as provided today by nuclear energy? These are all questions with no substantive answers for the German people.

All the panic and rash political decisions as a result of the Fukushima nuclear plant issues after the tsunami are simply Theater of the Absurd…and Theater of Political Desperation. The best thing we can do as the collective human race, regardless of national status, is learn from the Fukushima crisis. We need to learn what are the costs to human safety, what are the costs of decontamination and, finally, what are the costs to the nation from the loss of this power generating plant — with no viable backup for many years? The answers to these questions can then be used to then implement government regulations affecting new nuclear power plant construction that will prevent another Fukushima crisis. This would be a very prudent use of government energies, actions and plans.

Humans learn from our mistakes. If we fail to learn lessons from what happened at Fukushima, then we have truly let a crisis go to waste. Irrational actions by the likes of Angela Merkel in Germany might appeal to greenies and Luddites, but they cheat average German citizens from a safe, viable, clean and effective source of power generation for a long, long time. There can be no (NO) long-term national energy policy that may exist without the inclusion of nuclear power. For any leader or any government to claim otherwise is a lie and a sham.

Angel Merkel’s actions have shown that decisions for politically-correct motivations may appear at face value to be in the best interests of a nation or a people. But upon closer inspection, Ms. Merkel has ultimately returned Germany to a reliance on technologies, wind and solar, that are firmly rooted in the 15th century and that cannot provide sufficient power for Germany to remain a play on the worked economic stage. Because of a single crisis, surrounded by extreme fear-mongering by the international media, she is turning her back on an energy source that will provide all humans with cheap, safe and effective energy for centuries to come.

If that was Ms. Merkel’s intention, then MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. If it wasn’t…then don’t bet on Germany any time soon. They will be going nowhere.

In the mid 1950′s, during perhaps the zenith of cold war tensions, the US government sought a means for demonstrating to the world our nation’s supremacy in technological achievement. At that time there was an urgency to get a man into space, which was considered the next frontier of human scientific exploration. Making this mission to space all the more urgent was our Cold War political and technological rivalry with the Soviet Union. So out of this urgency, and created as a means for the exploration of space and the advancement of aeronautics, was created NASA – the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

The history of NASA is quite clear, and I won’t spend any time rehashing the long, storied and successful past of this organization other than to say that they put a man on the moon (fulfilling President Kennedy’s dream and challenge to do so), they made orbital space flight and almost routine endeavor, and they made possible the exploration of the cosmos (with, for example, the Hubble Space Telescope and numerous unmanned probes to the planets and beyond.) The mostly distinguished record of NASA is largely unassailable as an exemplar of man’s cooperative pursuit of science and achievement.

However, with recent statements made by NASA administrator Charles Bolden, the future mission and potential accomplishments of NASA must be called into question. In an interview with Al Jazeera, Mr. Bolden said the following:

“When I became the NASA administrator — or before I became the NASA administrator — he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science … and math and engineering…”

These three “things” are a fine mission for the the educational or foreign services arms of our government, but how do they bolster and support any aeronautical or space activities at the present time? In a nutshell, they do not! This is unfortunately PC crazy talk. I can understand that inspiring children to pursue math and sciences is a noble priority — we need young, engaged minds to train as tomorrow’s scientific leaders. However this should be done through the accomplishment of SOMETHING. Nothing inspires young minds like accomplishments, whether it be home run records, best selling songs, or the piloting of the world’s fastest aircraft. One cannot dredge up inspiration out of best wishes and butterfly kisses.

Expanding international relationships is not a traditional NASA task, unless it is performed under the aegis of in-space or scientific cooperation as demonstrated by the ISS (International Space Station.) However, this notion of relationships must be linked closely with scientific endeavors with specific goals and milestones…and not just a blanket feel good statement. Again, a pathway to accomplishment and achievement would provide the perfect framework for successful international cooperation.

As for Bolden’s third, and in his words “foremost” mission to reach out to dominantly Muslim nations and help them “feel” good about their contributions to the sciences, this is pure and unadulterated nonsense. It is politically-correct inanity raised to the power of madness. What would be the goal of such an outreach? Jihad in space? Sharia law on the moon? The naming of the “Great Satan” nebula by distinguished Islamic scholar? To borrow from Ebeneezer Scrooge — “Bah, Humbug!” This “mission” has NOTHING to do with space exploration, space travel or the advance of our understanding of aeronautics and science. It represents the worst of a flawed new-age liberal mindset where we can somehow convert the world to a 1970′s Coca Cola commercial, with all the inhabitants of the world singing “Kumbayah” with locked arms. It is foofarall and nonsense…and is an indication of just how deeply in trouble we are as a nation vis-à-vis our leadership. Or, by all indications, the lack thereof.

Yet, here we are in 2010, a time when the dreams of former star-struck children from the 50′s, 60′s, 70′s and 80′s should be coming to fruition as viable space programs. But this is a time when the NASA budget has been cut, key missions (like returning a man to the moon and the manned mission to Mars) have been canceled or greatly curtailed out of political expediency and a lack of scientific zeal at the uppermost levels of our government. And NASA is then given this grand “mission”…a slap in the face to men and women of pure science. An insipid mission that not only contradicts the vision and spirit of accomplishment of past missions and past administrations, but one that chafes at the sensibilities of most thinking Americans who, by the way, have to pay for this foolishness.

This is yet another example of how refreshing it will be to have a real change in administration in Washington in 2012.Perhaps we will be served by adults with authentic feelings and appreciation for America’s traditional values and exceptionalism as nation. Perhaps we’ll put this four year experiment in “change” for change’s sake behind us…and admit our failure to be more vigilant of our precious votes as a nation. This us unlikely to happen, but it would be refreshing.

Because right now, as this essay is being typed, the “mission” of our crown jewel in national technological achievement has been changed from pure science to political science. And when politics is brought into the equation, only bad things will come as a result. So, goodbye National Aeronautics and Space Administration and hello No Americans (in) Space Anymore.

I’m sure that millions of American schoolchildren will be suitably “inspired.”

Proponents of the proposed “Smart Grid” initiative for utility-provided electrical power cite the energy saving and user friendliness of this system. The smart grid is basically a means for a utility or some other organization, external to your home, to monitor and control the usage of power within your home. At least that’s the plan. The proponents also tout the ability of homeowners and consumers of electricity to monitor and control energy usage via a computer…a supposed benefit to the consumer.

Outside of the home, the smart grid is designed to provide the electrical utilities a means of matching loads to shifting demands…for example during the heavy use periods in the summer months when air conditioner use (and subsequent power demand) is at its highest. It would also allow utilities to “steer” power to high demand areas and around areas where damage from storms or other disasters may exist.A smart grid would also allow utilities to better integrate secondary, “clean” sources of power into the grid — as these power sources are transient on nature due to the vagaries of sunlight and wind.

The smart grid, when implemented, would allow the utility to charge a customer based on their power usage on a continuous basis — and apply time of  day dependent rates. This differs from how billing is done now where the time-varying rate is averaged over the day to yield a single billing rate.

So far this all sounds kind of innocuous and nonthreatening, right? Well, it is if we ignore the “monitor and control the usage of power within your home” part of the equation. See, part of the intent of the smart grid is to give the electrical power utilities the the ability to “shed” loads during times of high demand when brownouts and blackouts may be inevitable. The theory is that using a combination of the smart grid and smart appliances/consumer products that the utility could shed non-essential devices in order to reduce the overall load demand on the utility.

The theory is that the consumer would have tacit control over what appliances were “controllable” by the utility, with the exception of very special circumstances (like an impending black out.)

This still sounds pretty tame stuff…however…

When we have a build out of this smart grid, what stops another organization, say like the US government, from monitoring the power usage of individuals? A story today notes that the FCC is allocating more frequency spectrum for wireless communication relating to the smart grid. A LOT more frequency spectrum. The FCC also announced a panel to study the spectrum requirements for a built-out smart grid system. Why would they be doing this? Why would they, the government, be so concerned over the internal workings of a utility (which is obviously a commercial, private enterprise?)

The ability to monitor and control our electrical power usage would give the government a great control over our individual freedom and liberties. Not only would a maliciously used smart grid be a blatant invasion of privacy (someone else knowing what appliance or electronic device that I was using  and when chafes at my concept of privacy), but it would also present a great temptation for abuse. And we have numerous examples where the government has abused the powers given to it with our consent, let alone for those assumed without our consent. Utilizing a smart grid to monitor and potentially control power usage would be an unconstitutional assumption of political power and would bring the individual closer to the gulag.

As an electrical engineer for over 30 years, and an individual involved in power and communications systems, I understand the full ramifications, both positive and negative, of a smart grid electrical utility grid. The positive aspects are those that an informed consumer may gain from the ability to monitor and control their personal energy consumption, and the ability of the utility to better control and provide energy to their customers. But the smart grid has the potential for myriad unintended consequences…not the least of which is the invasion of privacy and an increased role of the government in the energy delivery system. These unintended consequences should concern and perhaps frighten any freedom/liberty-loving individual.

There is going to be a great push for the smart grid from both the government and commercial concerns alike. Why? Because there is a lot of money to be made! The utility stands to make more money from time-dependent rate billing, electrical equipment manufacturers stand to make a ton of money from all the smart metering equipment required, appliance and electronic equipment manufacturers stand to make a lot of cash too by providing the “next generation” smart grid enabled appliances and other devices (like TV’s, entertainment products, tools, etc.) and there are also a whole lot of other industries that stand to make even more money from the build-out of the smart grid.

I fear that most people will trade buckets of money for their liberties if given the choice. As for me, I’ll pass on this fad. I will not convert my home to this intrusive utility system unless I’m forced to do so. I love my privacy…love my liberty…love the Constitution too much to compromise.

There is no convenience or amount of money that I could earn or save that would convince me to abandon my hard-earned Constitutional rights.

It’s official! Our Dear Leader and his cast of congressional Democrat minions are certifiably crazy. With the full court press conducted yesterday with the release of the “favorable” analysis of the Kerry (D-MA) and Lieberman (I-CT) cap-and-tax legislation…followed by the 17 minute droning by our Dear Leader (of course punctuated by the grand push for cap-and-tax legislation), one can only come to that inescapable conclusion.

Obama’s speech, although it contained words, phrases and sentences that addressed BP and the Gulf oil leak situation, was NOT about the Gulf oil leak. Not by a country mile! The leak and spill were merely tools of political rhetoric — devices he tried to use to drill home (pun intended!!) his Quixote-esque quest for the next jewel in the crown of statist societal control, a universal energy tax. But I think even the most marbled-in-the-lean liberals, like Matthews and Olbermann at MSDNC, oops, MSNBC weren’t suitably impressed with the leadership acumen or vision put on display last night by the Dear One. No, last night’s lecture was just the opening round in Obama’s full court press on cap-and-tax –  a desperation move by a desperate man way over his political head. Rather than take a temperate approach to this crisis and work just on solving the leak and the effects of the spill on the Gulf Coast, he chose to go “all in” politically. And he’s going to do it while blowing the political equivalent of a vuvuzela all the while.

Listen, Obama might think that he is the Entrepreneur-In-Chief, but I assure you that he doesn’t have a single capitalistic idea floating around in his socialist/statist skull. Perhaps with the exception of buying lunch on his various forays among the suffering hoi polloi at the oil-stained Gulf Coast. His insistence that viable alternatives to fossil fuels are just around the corner if we burn enough time/effort/wishes looking for them is, well, crazy talk. Real crazy talk. In order for there to be an alternatives, there have to be an underlying theories or materials that prove themselves viable (given the proper money/time/effort/wishes): there could have been no Manhattan Project if the theories undergirding nuclear fission and fusion were not established to some confidence level. No amount of research would have resulted in a man-made nuclear fireball without the solid background theory in place.

No such situation exists for replacing fossil fuels. Sure, we have “alternative” and “green” solutions to supplying some of our energy needs. But these are transient, secondary sources of power that are incapable of replacing the steady primary power sources (that is they’re always ON even at night or when the wind doesn’t blow!) provided by fossil fuels. Of course, then there is nuclear power. This is a viable alternative as a primary power source for our electricity needs, but the science-illiterate American public fears nuclear power for its destructive power (Three Mile Island and Chernobyl had a lot to do with this) than it appreciates this power source for its usefulness. Unfortunately, NIMBY rules the day when it comes to siting anything nuclear, so there is a lot of public push back when this discussion arises.

And, beyond petroleum for transportation and electricity generation, we have the myriad uses of petrochemicals in our daily lives. How can we replace the chemicals and compounds that we depend upon on a daily basis (think plastics, medicines, detergents, etc.) that are extracted from oil along with gasoline and heating oil? Simply put we cannot or, I propose, it would have been done already!

Poor misguided President Obama and his power cronies in the Congress need to step back and away from their single-minded quest to make fossil fuels so expensive as to change the fabric of our society, for the worse, forever. If they wish to cheer lead for their schemes, and try to influence American citizens to adopt alternative energy usage voluntarily, then I suggest that they go for it. But to try to jam another complicated and unintended consequence-filled piece of legislation down our throats by partisan fiat at a time when the US economy is both stagnant and fragile is foolhardy and CRAZY.

But we all know now that the die is cast…that there is going to be the incessant push for this cap-and-tax legislation because it’s “good for us.” The same way that all other socialist schemes, like Obamacare, are “good for us.” Until they aren’t. Obama has let the proverbial cat out of the bag starting last evening — he’s now put his dog in the fight and he has too much to lose politically if he caves in on this. I suspect, though, that Obama may have to go this alone or with token support as there are many shell-shocked Dems who will be facing the equivalent of locked cage death matches come November for re-election. They simply don’t have the stomach to follow their Anointed One off the cliff in the same manner that they did with Obamacare. Most are still wiping the political blow-back off them from that fiasco! They might be ideological fellow travelers with Obama, but they’re also craven vote whores first and foremost, so in that light,  they’re not crazy enough to touch this political third-rail just yet. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I don’t think so!

Obama on the other hand has nothing to lose…his foray into insanity last night only costs him political capital (just wander over to Rasmussen if you need to be convinced). He’s got two and a half years to possibly regain his footing, so what the heck. See, for a true believer like Obama, the totems of his ideology (like spreadin’ the wealth, etc.) are more valuable than reality or moderation or compromise. He sees himself as righteous — exploiting this oil leak/spill crisis — by proposing his means to an end. Unfortunately it means the end of prosperity and American exceptionalism. Still, Obama sees himself the Changer-In-Chief iconoclast: particularly when it comes to capitalism. He thinks himself the knight in shining armor saving us from greedy oil companies and greedy, hostile Middle Eastern emirs and potentates.

Unfortunately for him, the rest of us see him as just plain CRAZY…

In spite of the unfolding disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, we need to redouble our efforts to exploit the oil reserves located in our coastal waters, beneath the ocean floor. But this effort comes with a caveat and a philosophy. The caveat is that we cannot force petroleum exploration into places where only the foolhardy or desperate would go, especially for purely political reasons. The philosophy part of the equation is that we have extensive exploration and drilling experience in shallow waters along the coast. We need to exploit this experience and exploit the reserves that presently go untapped because of excessive government restrictions.

If we are blunt and honest about our modern lives we are forced to admit that our dependence on fossil fuels is not going to diminish as a result of political speeches with lofty rhetoric. At the present time there are no viable alternatives to petroleum, and gasoline in particular, that combine the energy per pound or gallon along with the convenience of the material. For example, there are electric vehicles that can mimic the performance of gasoline powered vehicles under a narrow set of conditions. But when all is said and done, when the fuel (coulombs of charge) runs out, there is the need for  a not-so-insignificant wait period before the vehicle may be used again. This is the key disadvantage of such alternative energy-based vehicles.

But just focusing on transportation ignores all the other valuable uses that petroleum products play in our daily lives, from chemicals to pharmaceuticals to plastics to electricity generation. In short, we are highly dependent upon petroleum and petroleum-derived products in our modern lives. Without them, we would be leading dreary 17th century existences.

So, to me, the government taking the approach of  ‘retreat at first crisis’ is counterproductive and narrow-minded. It is a situation where the government has become so risk-averse that it threatens the very future existence and productivity of our nation. Having said this I feel that the Gulf oil leak is a tragedy of epic proportions. There are millions of lives that will be disrupted, livelihoods that will be ruined and countless miles of pristine shoreline that will be scarred for a long, long time. And then there is the cost to the wildlife in the area. How many creatures will suffer and die due to the effects of the entrapping oil? It is heartbreaking and it is frustrating.

But let’s not forget what got us to this disaster in the first place. It was government regulations and restrictions that forced oil exploration and recovery into deeper waters. Just on first analysis it is counter intuitive to encourage oil exploration into deeper water without a proven, reliable and foolproof  fail-safe method of preventing such leakages from occurring. This one simple qualification should have been the key to allowing drilling to commence, and should have been the government’s job one. Alas, it wasn’t — just the push to stay away from the shoreline for whatever political reasons. But in life, isn’t hindsight always 20/20??

So now we have a full-blown disaster on our hands. And rather than step back and analyze the root cause of the disaster as a nation, we are taking the easy and expedient path towards a ‘solution.’ We are making a hasty retreat. But history has taught us time and time again, that for every great risk, there is a great reward. But we ned to be acutely aware that associated with every risk is the corresponding disaster that may occur. This is the course of human learning and understanding. Humans (usually) learn from their mistakes, and many of the improvements and advancements to our lives have been accompanied by disasters, and the incremental improvements from this knowledge. In the past, did we experience disaster or failure and quit? Did we abandon our national interests in favor of sniveling political expediency? Did the nations of the world abandon sea travel because of the Titanic disaster? When so many brave men were killed on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day during WWII, did we retreat? Did the US abandon space travel after the dual space shuttle disaster — when the ships Challenger and Columbia evaporated before our eyes?

Hell NO!

We grieved the dead, took full measure of the consequences and sought a better way to do things. We took our collective lumps, fixed the problems, re-calibrated our techniques and moved forward. We didn’t retreat — we thought our way out of the problem, and we survived despite the failures and he disasters. Unfortunately, the real world and life are like that.

From here on, before we do any further deep water oil recovery, we need to have a well-thought out method of capping a deep water well if the unthinkable happens, like the explosion and destruction of the Deep Water Horizon oil rig. Isn’t this the most important thing we’ve learned from this tragedy of events? And we desperately need to re-think the manner in which the government ‘regulates’ and ‘restricts’ oil exploration and recovery. Rather than being a tool of political gainsay, the restrictions should focus on safety and economy. Not on cosmetic or NIMBY reasons. We’re presently living through the failings of this flawed thinking.

Until that day happens, then we must substitute shallow water drilling for its highly risky (as we’ve all become oh-so-aware) deep water counterpart. If we are to prosper as a nation and as a people, we need petroleum and petroleum products.

We need to drill baby, drill!

  • The EU is in serious fiscal and financial trouble, and we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg when it comes to countries that are faltering or in grave economic danger. For about 60 years, since the US liberated Europe from Nazi oppression, many counties in the EU have been living the large life, and treating themselves rather nicely. It’s as though they’ve been living on financial room service and ignoring the check…or forwarding it to the good old USA. Well, the check has come due, and as the premiere example of the harm of this great excess, the Greeks will have to learn to live as mere mortals rather than as citizens of a socialist Utopia — a situation they’re finding particularly hard to accept. Unfortunately, there will be many more EU nations that will have to suffer swallowing this bitter pill, and begin to embrace reasonable “entitlements,” more modest social benefits and more Draconian fiscal expenditures. You know, social concepts like you’ve had to work and pay into the system before you can get benefit from it and, oh yeah, only to the level of your former contribution. In the end, this is a good thing that will help insure a stable future for these troubled countries. And perhaps our proto-Marxist/socialist administration and Congress will witness firsthand and learn something from the unraveling of practicing national systems based on theoretical egalitarian principles and socialist doctrine rather than on good old-fashioned hard work and frugal living.
  • The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is going to become the largest excuse for the government spanking the oil producing industry since the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska. But, unfortunately, only half of the culpable parties involved will be punished or savaged. Unfortunately, the real villains in this most recent act in the Theater of the Unintended Consequence, the Congress, will get off scot-fee as always. To be sure, BP will be keel-hauled and excoriated for their role in this mess, and rightly so. They should have seen this disaster coming — what with drilling and recovering oil from over a mile beneath the ocean this situation couldn’t have been imagined by a simple risk assessment? But Congress shares the blame in this fiasco because their Draconian drilling regulations and leases forces oil exploration into deeper-and-deeper waters (ostensibly due to “environmental” concerns), and into the jaws of untenable situations like we presently have in the Gulf. If the laws regarding oil and gas exploration had been drafted with common sense in mind rather than for political gainsay and gotchas, then we might not be in the dire circumstance we are in right now. Because it seems clear to me that it is infinitely easier to cap a leaking oil well in several hundred feet of water than it is at bone-crushing depths where only submersibles can operate.
  • The “immigration” demonstrations yesterday (on May Day) didn’t have the turnout that were portended by the mainstream media. But that didn’t stop the media from hyping the number of mostly ILLEGAL ALIENS who took to OUR streets in opposition of a law that they never read the provisions of. Listen, we law abiding citizens can’t argue with the flawed logic being used by the illegals and their vociferous supporters. Regardless of what they call themselves, or what a sympathetic government administration and mainstream media choose to call them, in the end they are present on our soil ILLEGALLY. Meaning that they chose to break our laws — our social compact with each-other that assures each and every one of us that we will not fall into a state of anarchy from doing whatever each of us wants to do. We can only trust we can rely on the laws of our land to handle this completely out of control situation, but past practices and actions by the federal government have shown that we cannot. So the government of Arizona has acted out of self-preservation and self-interest to protect its citizens from the hordes of invaders and criminals that enter the state on a daily basis. They have taken the fist, faltering step in assuring us that the inmates do not run our national asylum — even though emboldened illegal trespassers at May Day rallies would have us think otherwise.
  • President Obama made an off-script comment at a recent political pep rally in Quincy, Illinois: “We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.” I added the emphasis because now our chief Marxist wants to become the Salary Coordinator-In-Chief. This coming from a man who “earned” more than $5 million last year! As US citizens, it’s none of our damn business how much our neighbor makes as a result of an honest, hard day’s work. Whether it’s fair to us or not, the achievements and rewards of our neighbors are theirs and theirs alone and not ours (even though the government has insinuated themselves in this process by redistributing the fruits of their labors to the rest of us via “progressive” taxes.) No matter how hard the gods and goddesses of the presidential teleprompter would have him stay strictly on script, his ad-libbed forays into streams of consciousness cause him to “step in it” on a consistent basis. The teleprompter text is just so much hot air and political psycho-babble…BUT those small “gaffes” are a peek inside a president’s true nature and feelings. He’s apparently a president who embraces an alternate view of the American dream than the vast majority of the citizens and common folk.
  • The eruption of the Eyjafjallajokull volcano has showcased the recent, palpable lack of climate change and global warming talk on the worldwide political stage. The “Climategate” scandal and the subsequent revelation of “inaccuracies” in the most recent IPCC report on climate (Details? We don’t need no stinking details!) have made this topic a political hot potato.Then comes along Eyjafjallajokull which, aside from being the world’s most difficult word to pronounce, dumped more stuff into our atmosphere in a weeks time than man has for about a decade. It’s kind of humbling when God and Nature remind us of our true, insignificant place in the scope of things. Man may conjure up the hubris to declare that he may influence “big things,” such as the climate on our planet. God obviously has other ideas on that topic…

The New York  Times and various other organs of the US mainstream media have, in the eyes of many of their critics including yours truly, refused to give adequate reportage and coverage to the ever-expanding, so-called Climategate story. The Times has used several print “journalists” to pooh-pooh the brewing scandal involving scientific corruption at the University of Norwich’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia, UK. But the silence at the NYT regarding this important scandal is deafening, particularly so in light of the now-convened Copenhagen conference.

I won’t bore anyone with the the gory details of the Climategate brouhaha except for this brief chronological summary:

  • Approximately 8-10 weeks ago hackers stole 60+MB of e-mails, programs and data from the CRU. The after several attempts elsewhere in the world, the e-mails were posted on a public-access web server in Russia. within days, the e-mails were being reviewed and analyzed by countless global warming skeptics and others in the worldwide scientific and journalistic community.
  • Multiple, credible sources have evaluate the e-mails and found them to be damning of the scientific methods and practices in regards to evaluating climatological data collected/warehoused by the CRU. This includes data manipulation to force trends and cherry-picking data to suit preconceived notions. It also revealed that the group of in vogue, esteemed climate scientists are practicing a new, seemingly politically-motivated, brand of the scientific method. In their own words they exclude contrary scientific opinions from the debate and ostracize those they deem dangerous to their orthodoxy.
  • Multiple, credible analyses have been performed on the snippets of computer programs pilfered from the CRU. Many contain “fixes, ” “cheats” and “tricks” to cherry-pick data and then plot the results in a biased manner…and always towards global heating owing to the numerical offset coefficients purposely included in the programs.
  • The e-mails were authenticated by members of the CRU staff and purportedly have not been altered or edited.
  • The Climategate story catches fire on the internet and becomes one of the more popular news stories worldwide in spite of the dearth of coverage in the US mainstream media.

An excellent summary of the entire Climategate affair is available from the SPPI by Lord Christopher Moncton, a notable and articulate skeptic of the global warming movement. You can find it in PDF form HERE. You should notice that not a single mainstream news organization, with the exception of FOX News, has covered Lord Moncton’s scathing recap of Climategate and its implications to the present negotiations in Copenhagen. The New York Times, it seems, is AWOL on this issue. See, they have journalistic principles that won’t allow them to publish the purloined e-mails — it just wouldn’t be fair. This coming from the same “news” organization that had no compunction in printing leaked or stolen memoranda and documents during the years of the Bush administration that would tarnish reputations or otherwise place egg on that administration’s face.

But the global warming alarmists and “scientists” enjoy protected status among the so-called journalists in our mainstream media because they share the same ideological bent as does the editorial and rank-and-file staffs of these so-called news organizations. If you’re a neo-socialist or progressive thinker, you’re embraced with open arms and feted with glowing ‘Page 1, above the fold’ reportage. (Which also might happen if you’re a contrarian thinker or ideological foe who has an embarrassing issue!) How many dire stories have we had to endure about suffering Polar bears and melting glaciers, even when the underlying stories and causations are patently untrue? But I digress…

So, with Climategate, the Times et. al have been provided a red meat news story to cover. It might not fit their established ideological bent, or represent a precious totem of their world-view. But so what, news is news…right? So what do they do? They outright ignore it as though in the internet age that it will just “go away!” The media may well feel smug in the self-absorbed knowledge that if they ignore the story, then it isn’t really a story at all. Or so they think.

It hasn’t gone away…and in fact many news organizations outside of the US, particularly in the UK (just Google Climategate and UK Telegraph, for example!!) have embraced the story as the world-wide scandal that it is. even the über politically correct BBC has picked up on this story and is giving it fair, if meager, coverage. The extra-US media recognize that the potential hoax being perpetrated on the world by the “credible” climate scientists pushing their “established” science that is “settled” and “beyond dispute” renders the conclusions of the UN’s IPCC and the and the US’s EPA regarding global warming and CO2 toxicity utter rubbish (or at least calls them into serious question as they relied heavily on the data provided by the CRU)  now in light of the CRU e-mail revelations.

However, the world media, it seems, recognizes real news when it sees it. And furthermore reports the news as it occurs. News is news, regardless if it chafes against your principles or contradicts your beliefs. By not reporting this important story, which by the way portends to impact the life of every man, woman and child on the planet, the US mainstream media gives it’s consuming public short-shrift and in essence treat us as though we, given all the information available, can’t come to our own conclusions. Perhaps some can’t think for themselves and they prefer that the NYT or some broadcast media outfit does their thinking for them…but fortunately the vast majority of us can — and do think for ourselves and rightly use the news as part of our thinking and decision process.

By ignoring Climategate and eschewing news for political ideology, the US mainstream media has relegated itself into further irrelevance as the place to go to get the real story — the or the unvarnished truth. It’s no wonder that many of the US’s major newspapers are in financial trouble and that the news organizations of the three major broadcast networks suffer viewership and credibility problems. By ignoring the REAL news and substituting their alternative view of what is or isn’t news, these alleged news sources tarnish their credibility with an increasingly news savvy public.

Until these conventional sources of news stop editorializing both in the news stories that they do chose to and by which stories they select to report, they will insure that conventional journalism suffers the same fate as the contemptible pseudo-scientists at the CRU. Because in essence both sets of so-called professionals, scientists and journalists, have done or are doing the same thing — crafting their own versions of reality out of thin air.

And once the people know the truth, we’re just not buying it…

I read this brief, but to-the-point, essay on the whole Climategate matter by Australian scientist and businessman Ian Pilmer, who is also an outspoken critic of global warming and climate change science. It appeared on the Pajamas Media web site.

Unfortunately, it is a view that I doubt will ever see the light of day in the US mainstream media:

Climategate: Alarmism Is Underpinned by Fraud (PJM Exclusive)

I cannot understand why major US media outlets (besides FOX News) don’t see this revelation as a major scientific scandal and a major news story. Sadly, they are content in perpetuating a lie that fits their ideological world-view. And they are willing to compromise their “integrity” (if the US MSM can be attributed to having any integrity left after the sloppy political media coverage of the past year and a half) to prop up their sagging ideological totems.

My advice to the average citizen…turn off their channels and eschew buying their newspapers and magazines. If they’re going to lie to us and support politicians who would do us all damage with their decisions based on faulty conclusions, then we need to punish them in the manner they most assuredly deserve!

These bastards understand money, and so we must remove the nutrients (think of it as withholding water and oxygen from a stubborn weed!) that help them to flourish even thought they stubbornly seem to be comfortable with either altering or simply ignoring the truth and reality.

If they are comfortable in abandoning their constitutional advocacy of the people, then we must take up the cause ourselves and get the word out in spite of their recalcitrance.

Pig-headed world leaders are set to make our existence much harder and much different with their upcoming agreements and treaties in Copenhagen — all of which is based on data that has been rigged — gleefully mutated by craven, venal pseudo-scientists in the UK and the USA.

Now is not the time to bury our heads in the sand and retreat from this issue because we don’t have any expertise skin in the game. We all have common sense and can make decisions based on available data (if that data is correct and honest) and we all have a vested interest in the remedies that are planned and implemented.

So, PLEASE, use you wallets and voices to make sure that the media, and more importantly, your elected representatives hear and understand your concerns regarding this scandal. And make them understand that given the recent scandal, and its potential implications, that making climatological deals in Copenhagen in two weeks is simply the wrong thing to do.

Next Page »