The Very Definition of America-Hating Liberal Guilt

A letter to the editor in the Jakarta Times:

As a US citizen, I must accept responsibility for my own nation’s abject failure to take responsibility for its actions.

As the world’s largest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases and as the enabler of a consumerist lifestyle which, if left unchecked, is absolutely certain to submerge the planet in giga tons of toxic trash, the United States has been the driving force behind the climate crisis.

Unfortunately, my country’s responsibilities are unlikely to be met any time soon, for we are in the grip of a political crisis brought about by a national exaltation of demagoguery and ignorance.

Thus our governing bodies are riddled with arrogant men and women who dismiss scientific expertise as irrelevant, preferring the comforts of ancient superstition.

Global warming’s realities are terrifying. But as citizens of ocean states can attest, ignoring those facts will surely lead to outcomes beside which our nightmares will pale into insignificance.

Warren Senders
Medford, Massachusetts

So we start off with a line that could be lifted from just about any Barack Oprompter speech outside the US apologizing for their country.

Breast beating about how we use lots of energy since we manufacture and consume so much that our economy is still 20% of global world output.  In other words – we generate more economic activity and energy in 2 days than the entire country of Indonesia does in a year.  Yeah, that’s something to be really sorry about.

Islamic foreigners think the US is Satan anyway – so knocking your own country as “a national exaltation of demagoguery and ignorance” and “riddled with arrogant men and women who dismiss scientific expertise as irrelevant” will make them feel so good about you.  Of course you little knock about ancient superstition – does that include say Islamic beliefs about having 4 wives and marrying off your 9 year old girls?

And here’s the one sure thing Warren – when Islam takes over America you will be one of the first ones up against the wall.  Regardless of how much you grovel from your centrally heated and air conditioned, 24 hour per day electrically provisioned, suburban house that any Indonesian would chew off their arm to live in.

Criminalizing Dissent

I’ve been thinking about this post for a while.  The starting point was this post on the ultra-liberal Guardian website entitled: “Is climate science disinformation a crime against humanity?”  Let’s go with a few of the salient points:

Although there is an important role for scepticism in science, for almost 30 years some corporations have supported a disinformation campaign about climate change science.

Really?  for 30 years?  In fact, 30 years ago the “science” community was screaming and yelling about the coming ice age.

Disinformation about the state of climate change science is extraordinarily – if not criminally – irresponsible, because the consensus scientific view is based upon strong evidence that climate change:

• Is already being experienced by tens of thousands in the world;

• Will be experienced in the future by millions of people from greenhouse gas emissions that have already been emitted but not yet felt due to lags in the climate system; and,

• Will increase dramatically in the future unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced from existing global emissions levels.

Before the hysteria of the next ice age, er, global warming, er, climate change – I would almost be sure that for all of human history people have experienced climate change – its called weather.  People are killed every year with hurricanes and typhoons, heat waves cause some to die (mainly the very young and the old and sick), cold weather kills thousands every year, tornadoes, hailstorms, lightning–human beings have been experiencing WEATHER for as long as humanity has existed.  So I will grant the first point – tens of thousands of humans experience climate change every year.  I’d go so far so to say that every human being alive has had weather changes.

Point 2 – people will continue to experience weather.

Point 3 – prove it!  There is evidence that the planet has been substantially warmer than it is today and substantially colder.  Is there any evidence that people were responsible for those changes? There is speculation – but as with all things global in scope, there’s no real proof one way or another.  There is carbon dioxide being emitted by all these people breathing in and out!  Of course, there are ice cores and other scientific evidence showing far higher carbon dioxide levels in the past.  I’m almost certain there weren’t any coal-fired electricity generation plants and SUVs 10,000 years ago.  So the possibility that man has very little to do with the changes is dismissed by the hyteria crowd.

But one thing they want for sure – they want blood:

The corporations that have funded the sowing of doubt on this issue are clearly doing this because they see greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies as adversely affecting their financial interests.

This might be understood as a new type of crime against humanity.


We may not have a word for this type of crime yet, but the international community should find a way of classifying extraordinarily irresponsible scientific claims that could lead to mass suffering as some type of crime against humanity.

So just remenber – if you finance any investigations that go against the “scientific consensus” or you question any of the finding of your “betters” who have published “peer-reviewed science” – you could be charged with crimes against humanity!  At least if this little twerp has anything to say about it.

Up Against the Wall Deniers!

A Climate Change Model That Works

One that actually can reflect conditions – and its from NASA too eco-idiots:

Well, well. Congress learned something shattering today, which will have the Church of Al Gore/IPCC running in fear of their lost credibility. It has been scientifically demonstrated that 70% of the Global Warming in the last century (and cooling in the last decade) is due to the Pacific Ocean Oscillations, not CO2:

The gentlemen making this claim is the lead investigator one of NASA’s flagship Earth Observing Observatories (H/T Ice Cap).

I posted on some of these effects yesterday. What this means is no matter how much you change your CO2 footprint, how much you try to be CO2 green, no matter how much liberal governments tax you – you cannot save the planet from its natural cycles. Remember, the draconian actions being proposed by the Church of Al Gore/IPCC, which will run into the tens of trillions of dollars and cripple the world economies, is only meant to reduce today’s CO2 levels by a fraction.

Imagine that!  A model which explains things and you dono’t have to pay extortion to the Great and Wonderful Algore!

Did we say 100 months? We meant 48 months

Yesterday it was 100 months.   Same paper, new deadline:

No surprise that climate scientists have become increasingly desperate for action. In November, for instance, the head of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, said: “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

The increasingly frantic calls for the rape of world-wide taxpayers (especially American ones) gates on the ear of this person who’s pocket is expected to be picked for this man-made hysteria.  No temperature increase in 10 years, the data was not correct in lots of models, temperatures much much higher in the past without any SUVs or power plants – perhaps lots of this information is starting to become more widely known.  And that means more people will realize that the man-made global warming issue isn’t as straightforward as the hystericals want us to believe.

And then they won’t give up their money!  Isn’t that the real cause of the ever-shortening deadlines?

They go to all that work to develop a scheme whereby the developed countries of the world are to use their own resources to destroy their civilization, and a bunch of low-forehead nosepickers won’t give it up.

I mean a 50% global cut is now not enough – they essentially want to move back into the dark ages (literally):

The call for an 80% cut must be heard by Gordon Brown. This is the minimum of what is needed by 2050, and if he really wants to make “massive progress” then he has an opportunity when he gets home.

If we go the full distance, put an 80% cut in the bill and include emissions from international aviation and shipping (both of which are presently excluded), then if might just lead to a global breakthrough.

And never, ever forget.  The fault is all to be laid at the feet of ……..

George W Bush

Judging Bush on the basis of what he has done for our children, their children and the next 50 generations, he has solidified his record of helping ensure that billions and billions of people suffer the grim consequences of catastrophic climate change.

They do realize that they are quite free to destroy all their cars and power plants and go back to living in mud huts and walking in their own filth at any time?  Feel free to lead us on that on you idiots.

Eco-Idiot – 100 Months or DOOM!

Anybody want to raise their hands and actually admit that they believe the earth and all its population is doomed forever?  Here’s one:

The world’s climate experts say that that the world’s CO2 output must peak within the next decade and then drop, very fast, if we are to reach this sort of long term reduction. In short, we have about 100 months to turn the global energy system around. The action taken must be immediate and far reaching.

Which climate experts?  Oh yeah, the ones demanding tax money for funding the institutes to create studies on climate change which demand more tax money for more studies for more institutes.  And after all – its just pocket change:

According to Professor Stern, climate change is likely to result in droughts and floods that will create 200 million climate refugees and it could make two-fifths of the world’s species extinct. Yet to solve it, as challenging as it may seem, would only cost 1 or 2% of global GDP. Roughly what is spent worldwide on advertising. This is pocket change for the G8. Just these eight countries between them account for about 65% of global GDP.

So what is suggested?  Immediate moritorium on coal burning anywhere, an Apollo program to fund renewables, lots of money spent on reducing energy use and waste, and stop cutting down any tree anywhere.  Which translates to:

  • Immediate reduction in available energy world-wide
  • lots of money for lots of fancy institutes and tests and stuff with absolutely no idea whether this work would produce energy on any kind of basis which would keep society going.  The ultimate aim is really population reduction of course, but that’s not actually acknowledged.
  • lots of money for insulation (except for that non-green asbestos and stuff that actually works) and lots of nannying to keep everybody in the world guilty about using even one electron (up to and including public execution probably)
  • no more paper – which also means no more toliet paper too

In other words, pie in the sky answers pulling trillions of dollars for something that may not even give them the outcome they want – a 50% reduction in the world standard of living.  However, lots of climate scientists would get lots of big freaking grants!  In the belief they can actually do anything that would affect this:

Good Liberal Waste of Money

Its nice to know that the Democratic Communist People’s Republic of San Francisco has this kind of money to waste:

In his quest to make San Francisco the greenest city in the nation, Mayor Gavin Newsom recently created a $160,000-a-year job for a senior aide and gave him the ambitious-sounding title of director of climate protection initiatives.

San Francisco has at least two dozen other city employees already working directly on climate issues at a cost to taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In addition to the director of climate protection initiatives in Newsom’s office, San Francisco has an Energy and Climate Program team of eight people in the Department of the Environment, who combined earn more than $800,000 a year in salary and benefits, including a “climate action coordinator.” At least 12 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission staff members work on climate issues related to water and energy, including a $146,000-a-year “projects manager for the climate action plan.”

Also in the name of climate control, the Municipal Transportation Agency has a “manager of emissions reductions and sustainability programs” who works on making Muni’s bus fleet greener, and the San Francisco International Airport has a “manager of environmental services” who oversees such projects as the installation of energy-efficient lighting and solar panels.

The list doesn’t include the scores of staff members who work on broader environmental policies, like the recently hired $130,700-a-year “greening director” in Newsom’s office, or Jared Blumenfeld, who earns $207,500 a year in salary and benefits as the head of the city’s Environment Department, which has a staff of 65 and annual budget of about $14 million.

And you know you have completely gone off the deep end when the flipping Green Party commissioner questions what is going on:

“Although it sounds very well intentioned, and perhaps even necessary, I’m concerned this is a case where eco-chic has gone out of control,” said Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, the only Green Party member on the Board of Supervisors.

And the evidence continues to build that the whole global warming hysteria is a) religious in nature and b) a scheme for smart hustlers to shake down taxpayers.

EcoNazi – Jail Politicians Who Ignore Science

anti-growth, anti-human, anti-logicand heaven help us “to cheering” wants to lock up politicians who ignore science. Who decides what is the right science? Him? Just how much of today’s science was considered completely wrong 5 years ago? And what was considered truth 5 years ago that would be derided as idiocy today?
clipped from

Suzuki underlined the importance of looking backward by explaining that, because the past 50 years have seen a boom in technology and population expansion, ideas of economic growth have been skewed.

“That means you have lived your entire lives in a completely unsustainable period,” Suzuki said to the young audience. “You all think [economic] growth and change is normal. It’s not.”

He urged today’s youth to speak out against politicians complicit in climate change, even suggesting they look for a legal way to throw our current political leaders in jail for ignoring science – drawing rounds of cheering and applause. Suzuki said that politicians, who never see beyond the next election, are committing a criminal act by ignoring science.
  blog it