Monday, July 24, 2017

July, 2017, Part 1, The Unfolding Disaster That Is Obama Care: Republicans That Cannot Plan and Democrats Who Cannot Tell The Truth

Every month for years now we have had to discuss how bad Obama Care is turning out to be under the continuing theme, “the unfolding disaster that is Obama Care.” This month is no different. As the legislation continues to march through America, driving up health care and health insurance prices as it serves as dead weight on economic growth, it cements its rightful place as the worst piece of legislation Washington has ever produced.

It never had a chance to be successful since it really never addressed the underlying root causes of our ever increasing health costs in the country:
  • Americans eat too much of the wrong kind of food, resulting in obscenely high obesity rates for the country.
  • Our food chain is infested with overdoses of high fructose corn syrup, salt, sugar, and other unhealthy additives.
  • Americans smoke too much.
  • Americans do not exercise enough.
  • The country is in serious need of health care tort reform.
  • Barriers to insurance company competition across state lines need to come down.
  • Obama Care never “followed the money” to find out who is actually profiting from the ever escalating healthcare costs in this country and how to get those factors under control.
  • Obama Care never got the immense amount of fraud and abuse in current government healthcare programs, Medicare and Medicaid, under control in order to save money to efficiently fund other government health care initiatives.
  • Obama Care never put serious research money towards curing the major diseases that drive high healthcare costs such as high frequency cancers and dementia type diseases.
  • You cannot resolve any problem unless you understand and address the underlying root causes. No difference here: Obama Care legislation never addressed these listed root causes and thus, has no chance of ever being successful.
But it is not just missing the root causes of our healthcare costs that makes Obama Care so horrible. It resulted in millions of Americans losing access to their favored doctors, hospitals, and insurance policies. It has caused insurance premiums, deductibles and copays to escalate substantially. It will likely add trillions of dollars to the national debt. It has exposed millions of Americans to higher than necessary identity theft chances. It has created government bureaucracies that are wastefully spending taxpayer wealth and being exploited by criminal elements. It has stifled economic growth and job creation.

These are just a sample of the types of idiocy that we have been reviewing for the past several years in this blog relative to Obama Care., To read those past posts, just enter the phrase, “the unfolding disaster,” in the search box above.

1) Let me start this month’s Obama Care disaster review with a quick hit on Congressional Republicans. For like seven years they have correctly ranted and raved about how much of a disaster Obama Care is. They have correctly pointed out that none of the rosy promises Obama made about the legislation came close to becoming reality. Many of their successful election campaigns were based on how bad Obama Care was and how it needed to be repealed and/or replaced. 

Thus, given that they had seven years to come up with a workable and working alternative to this rancid piece of legislation, one would have hoped that when they did regain control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency that would have done their homework and had a replacement bill ready to go the first day they could. That they would have negotiated out any differences within their party over the past seven years to have the best bill possible that would sail through to enactment.

But alas, as always when dealing with the political class, hope does not exist. When it was their turn at bat, they could not find their bat. When it was their turn to go for a touchdown, they could not find their helmet. They had nothing ready to go once the situation was perfect for them and as a result, their infighting has resulted in nothing to replace or repeal Obama Care. Heaven help us from all politicians and their inability to resolve any problem.

2) More than half of those who got health insurance under Obama Care did not get it through robust individual insurance policies purchased on the open market. They got Federal government insurance via Medicaid. While Medicaid is a low cost insurance option, it is also a low quality health insurance and health care option in so many ways, many of which we have previously discussed in this blog.

Betsy McCaughey is the chairperson of the Committee To Reduce Infection Deaths so she obviously knows something about health care and disease. In a July 5, 2017 article for the Heritage Foundation, she lays out her expert opinion on why Medicaid is so frigging bad for your health:
  • First off she destroys the myth that liberals and Democrats are spewing that Republican efforts to fix the damage done by Obama Care will get senior citizens evicted from nursing homes, calling it “sheer demagoguery.
  • But she does imply that in one sense that would be a good thing in some cases since many Medicaid nursing homes are afflicted with “filth, rampant infections, and neglect—conditions routinely tolerated by our indifferent public officials.”
  • For example, New York state pays out some of the highest Medicaid rates in the country but according to the Federal government ratings a whopping 40% of New York state nursing homes provide inferior care.
  • This 40% is not even the worse in the country since 10 other states have higher rates of inferior care in their nursing homes.
  • Across the country one third of nursing home residents, often Medicaid patients, incur serious, often permanent injuries due to neglect according to a recent Federal government inspector general report.
  • The Federal government estimates that annually 380,000 Americans in nursing homes die from infections that they caught in those nursing homes.
  • So you can see, in one sense, getting kicked out of a sub par nursing home might IMPROVE your health.
But that is besides the point. Republicans efforts to fix the Obama Care damage does not “gut” Medicaid spending as liberals and Democrats claim, it just slows down the rate of growth in Medicaid spending. And if Washington was doing its job and cleaned up the massive inefficiencies and criminal fraud in Medicaid that results in horrible nursing home conditions and the criminal pilfering of the Medicaid program then everyone’s health would be a lot better, And their would be more than enough money to help those that truly need better help than what they are getting today.

And by the way, Medicaid spending growth has to be brought under control. As we have reported previously, in four state budgets today Medicaid spending accounts for over 30% of the entire state government budget. As Medicaid keeps growing in costs, there is less and less state government resources for roads, schools, and other needed services. 

Medicaid is like a fifty year old pickup truck that was designed to tow two tons. It was never fixed up and kept in good shape over those fifty years. And then Obama Care came around, without upgrading anything within that old pickup truck, and told it to haul ten tons. As a result that fifty year old pickup truck is falling apart and costing more and more every year to do a job it was not designed to do. Fix the Medicaid truck, Washington or get a new one so that 40% of New York state nursing home patients do not live in squalor.

Depressing stuff to start off this month's Obama Care disaster review. Republicans that cannot plan ahead and Democrats who cannot tell the truth. Lord help us as we continue this week with the unfolding disaster that is Obama Care.


Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w






Sunday, July 23, 2017

July, 2017, Part 5, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Wind Power Is Not The Answer and China Hits The Jackpot In The Paris Climate Agreement

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
  • Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
  • Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
  • Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) While global warming advocates have always been big supporters of solar energy, we have shown research, numbers, and realities over this past week that proved the production and destruction of solar panels cause more total environmental damage than fossil fuel driven energy sources. This obviously should kill the lust of global warming advocates for solar energy.

But what about that other great savior of the Earth, wind power? Maybe that source of clean energy is the great salvation of humanity from manmade global warming and climate change without the destructiveness of solar panel mining, manufacturing, and destruction activities.

Unfortunately, according to the International Energy Agency’s 2016 Key Renewables Trends research and report, wind power is probably not the salvation of the Earth that Al Gore types hoped for:
  • According to the 2016 report, from a total energy perspective (i.e. not just electricity production), wind power provided about .46% of the global energy consumption in 2014 (solar and tidal energy sources were even less productive at a combined .35%).
  • This paltry .46% was achieved despite decades worth of government and taxpayer subsidies for wind power generation.
  • While about 14% of the world’s energy is from renewable sources, the vast majority (75%) of that renewable source consists of energy from biomass including sticks, logs, charcoal, and dung burned for energy by the poor around the world.
  • Another large chunk of that renewable energy is from hydroelectric sources, not wind and solar.
  • The International Energy Agency estimated that world energy demand grew 2% in 2014 or almost 2,000 terawatt hours.
  • This means if we wanted to deploy wind turbines just to cover that incremental 2%, about 350,000 wind turbines would have to be installed just to cover the increase in energy consumption, not replace the energy from other sources.
  • Since only about two thirds of that amount of wind turbines exist today, having been built over the past decades, it is highly unlikely that enough wind turbines could be put in place to even handle the year over year growth in energy needs.
  • Given that 50 acres are needed for each megawatt of wind energy produced, 350,000 turbines would cover half the landmass of the British Isles and doing the same thing for 50 years to cover the annual growth in energy needs would eventually require a landmass the size of half of Russia.
  • This energy source would of course still be subject to the whims of the local weather, no wind = no energy.
  • And land availability is just one problem with wind energy; other problems include the pollution and CO2 created by the manufacturing, shipping, and installation of wind turbine parts and cement needed for their foundations and the other environmental issue of mining impacts on the environment from mining rare earth metals needed for the magnets of the turbines.
  • Oh, and let’s not forget the biological impacts of the untold number of birds and bats killed every year from flying into the turbine blades.
A more detailed discussion of these numbers and other highlights of the International Energy Agency’s findings, including how much dirty coal has to be burned to build wind turbines, can be accessed at:


So yes, let’s talk about global warming and climate change but let’s do it in the context of looking at ALL of the data and ALL of the research, including the tremendous downsides of solar and wind energy courses.

2) A lot of liberals and global warming advocates went nuts when Trump pulled us out of the illegal, un-Constitutional, and stupid Paris climate agreement. One of the primary reasons to pull out was the reality that the U.S. would have been making all of the sacrifices and paying blackmail to other countries not to pollute while other major players in the world economy would have had none of those same burdens placed on themselves.

The primary beneficiary of such a stupid agreement that Obama negotiated was China which was probably laughing all of the way to the bank with what it got away with in the agreement, as outlined by a Heritage Foundation article Michael Bastasch on June 2, 2017:
  • Under the Paris agreement, China would be able to and plans to raise its coal powered energy generation capacity (remember, coal is a VERY big contributor to global warming) from 900 gigawatts in 2016 to as high as 1,100 by 2020, just three years from now.
  • That would make China’s COAL generated energy larger than the TOTAL energy capacity of Canada.
  • But this massive 22% increase in coal burning was somehow legal under the Paris agreement since China is allowed, under the agreement, to allow its greenhouse gas emissions to rise, in absolute terms, for another 13 years until 2030.
  • In other words, China’s economy and citizens would not experience any global warming inconvenience or economic hardships for at least another 13 years, i.e. how badly did Obama handle that negotiating point with a major economic power and competitor and major CO2 emitter?
  • China did promise to cut CO23 emissions per unit of output but that really does not matter if the total CO2 emissions is growing fast, i.e. “China can reduce its emissions per unit of output while increasing overall emissions—that’s what matters in terms of global warming. It’s almost like it is gaming the whole Paris Agreement.”
  • The Energy Information Administration estimates that China’s total emissions will grow a whopping 32% between now and 2040 and the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate will increase 34% over 2012 levels by 2030.
  • Much of this new energy will be coming from coal powered power plants inside China.
  • Oh, and by the way, not only is China getting away like highway robbers relative to its domestic energy production within the Paris agreement, but it is also exporting its coal production expertise around the world, having recently signed an agreement with Pakistan (according to a Reuters report) “to spend around $15 billion over the next 15 years to build close to a dozen coal power plants of varying sizes around the country.”
Bottom line is that the Paris Climate Agreement was a really crappy agreement from a U.S. perspective, an agreement that even Al Gore has publicly admitted would have virtually no impact on the environment. But it would allow countries like China to go along their merry way with little or no negative impact on their economies and citizens while burdening the U.S. and its taxpayers with economic hardships. It is a crappy, illegal agreement that should be ignored.

That will do it for this month’s review under the theme “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” Climate is a difficult animal to understand, made even more difficult and dangerous when people like Al Gore ignore the realities, data, science, and research that do not fit their pre-conceived notions or agendas. The purpose of this theme is to uncover what is real and then decide what, if anything, should be done. More doubts next month.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w








Saturday, July 22, 2017

July, 2017, Part 4, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Solar Panels = Bad, Cold Up North and More

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
  • Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
  • Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
  • Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) Earlier this week we discussed a research report that re-examined government data that had shown an upward trend in global warming of the Earth. The research study was done by a statistician and two climate scientists and had been peer reviewed and approved. 

Their bottom line is that the government had adjusted raw temperature data over the years in a biased manner to show a warming trend that did not exist in the raw data. I was able to find the abstract for their study that summarized their results and have listed it below. As you will see, it is a serious indictment of false science and research that government workers have perpetrated in the field of climate science:

In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU.

As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of GAST using the best available relevant data. This included the best documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and urbanization impacts. Satellite data integrity also benefits from having cross checks with Balloon data.

The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.

Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings.

“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality.” Let me say it again, “not a valid representation of reality.” Seems to be a trend among many climate change/global warming advocates. And while man made global warming may actually be a reality, it is not proven by this government data, the reports and predictions based on this falsely adjusted government data are invalid, and the theory takes another hit from a scientific integrity perspective.

2) In light of this previous point that proved that falsely adjusted government data seriously undermines the theory of manmade global warming, let's take a look at some other data that does the same thing. We have previously talked about this scientific research from Denmark but in light of the fake government data we just discussed, let’s look at some other real data, as reported on the Federalist Papers website:
  • The analysis comes from research done by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) and was reported in by England’s Telegraph newspaper.
  • Since December, temps in the Arctic have been consistently lower than minus 20 C.
  • In April, the Arctic sea ice coverage was back to where it was in 2004.
  • While the ice had been on the thin side for a number of years, this year it is back to being two meters thick.
  • The Greenland ice mass increased in volume this past winter faster than any time in years.
  • While 2016 was a very warm year, with the dissipation of the strong El NIno from last year, satellite records show that in recent months temperatures have quickly dropped more than .06 degrees C, the exact same thing that happened 17 years ago when a similarly strong El Nino dissipated.
  • Global temperatures have been more or less constant for 19 years running, totally blowing away the accuracy of most if not all primary global warming forecast models.
Colder than expected, another global warming forecast myth rattled. But things might be getting worse from a cooling climate according to a recent Daily Wire article:
  • Some climate research is predicting that a natural cooling cycle of the Earth happens every 230 years or so and that the next cooling cycle actually began taking hold in 2014.
  • By 2019, we should see a significant drop in temperatures if this climate research is correct.
  • Some scientists are expecting a big drop in solar activity between 2020 and 2053 which will cause the next ice age.
  • If new ice age if it happens, would devastate crop yields and lead to food shortages around the world.
Given that some climate scientists grossly missed their global warming forecasts, it is entirely possible that other scientists will grossly miss their ice age and cooling forecasts. But the bottom line is to say that the “science is settled” or that 97% of all climate scientists agree with the theory of global warming is simply wrong.

3) A few days ago we reviewed research that showed that the end of the life cycle of solar panels is really bad for the environment:


Well, it seems that other research shows that the the manufacturing of solar panels at the beginning of their life cycle is not that great for the environment either:
  • A recent research study by scientists at Utrecht University in the Netherlands found that if you take into account the amount of CO2 produced from the mining of materials used in solar panels and the output of factories that produce solar panels, then the total amount of CO2 produced in the total manufacturing process of solar panels is generally greater than the amount of CO2 saved by using solar panels.
  • The raw data for the study and research spanned 40 years worth of solar panel manufacturing and CO2 output.
  • The researchers found that it would take decades for solar panels to be friendlier to the environment than burning fossil fuels but since most solar panels do not last decades, the net benefit to solar panels is negative relative to CO2.
  • The research was funded by the Technology Foundation STW which is a government agency of the European Commission, hardly a fossil fuels front.
Again, when looking to solve a problem, look at all layers of the problem because unless you know the root causes, you will never be successful in resolving any problem, climate or other wise.

One more post in the next few days that continues to prove it is perfectly sane and rational to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w







Friday, July 21, 2017

July, 2017, Part 3, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: NOAA Says No To More Storms, More Failed Predictions, and Solar Panels Are Bad,

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
  • Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
  • Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
  • Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) Al Gore, Barack Obama, and other global warming advocates like to claim that man made global warming and climate change are causing all kinds of havoc with the environment. But we have shown that actual government data shows that hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and such are at historical rates or even at lower than historical rates.

And the latest government data from NOAA confirms that this reality still probably holds true:
  • Kimberly J. Smith, writing for the Conservative Tribune website on April 5, 2017, discussed the reality that NOAA has officially come out to state that it is premature to link human activity to stronger storms, specifically hurricanes.
  • The NOAA report and research concluded: “It is premature to conclude that human activities — and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming — have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity,” the NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory report said.
  • This finding supports the conclusions back in March, 2017 from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC - the primary United Nations climate change advoate organization) reported “no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century.”
Real data proving again that it is perfectly sane to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. Especially when science and real data show that global warming should be doubted.

2) A June 29, 2017 article on the CSC Media Group's website by Michael Luckette gave a short but nice summary of some of the failed predictions that global warming advocates are produced over the years:
  • Al Gore predicted back in 2006 that within ten years there would be a “true planetary emergency: “Unless we act boldly and quickly to deal with the underlying causes of global warming, our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes,” 
  • Eleven years later that “true planetary emergency” is nowhere in sight.
  • In 2010, the Guardian newspaper of Britain reported that the United Nations was warning that humanity had as little as 8 years to avoid seeing a dangerous 2 degree Centigrade rise in the Earth’s temperature, a rise that never happened.
  • Three years ago and over 1,000 days ago France’s Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, warned everyone that: “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”
At some point a sane person has to realize that when your theory on anything is ALWAYS wrong, maybe your theory is wrong, as illustrated in just the three examples listed above. 

But maybe that day of reckoning is finally dawning on global warming advocates, as illustrated in a research paper from a recent article in Nature Geoscience that admitted there have been: “differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates. In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble.”

Maybe just maybe global warming advocates are having reality settle in and now we can have an adult conversation on global warming that looks at ALL of the science and ALL of the research and ALL of the data to try and figure out what is really going on, if anything.

3) One of the great options that is supposed to save humanity and the planet from global warming is solar energy. I am sure that all hard core global warming advocates are also big supporters of solar energy, their view likely being that solar is clean and non-polluting and not a contributor to CO2 levels in the atmosphere that cause global warming. Solar energy has a rep for being clean and safe, not like the use of those nasty fossil fuels.

But is solar energy really the savior of the environment and so pure and wonderful? Julie Kelly, writing for the National Review on June 28 2017, has a somewhat different view on solar energy:
  • A new research study by Environmental Progress (EP) warns that toxic waste from discarded solar panels now poses a global environmental threat. 
  • The Berkeley, California-based group, a geographic area certainly not famous for its conservative tenets, found that solar panels create 300 times more toxic waste per unit of energy than nuclear power plants. 
  • They also concluded that discarded solar panels, panels that contain high levels of dangerous elements such as lead, chromium, and cadmium, are piling up around the world, and that nothing is being done to limit their potential danger to the environment. 
  • Michael Shellenberger is the founder of EP: “We talk a lot about the dangers of nuclear waste, but that waste is carefully monitored, regulated, and disposed of. But we had no idea there would be so many panels — an enormous amount — that could cause this much ecological damage.”
  • EP researchers Jemin Desai and Mark Nelson found that scavengers in countries like India and China “burn the e-waste in order to salvage the valuable copper wires for resale. Since this process requires burning off plastic, the resulting smoke contains toxic fumes that are carcinogenic and teratogenic (birth defect-causing) when inhaled.” 
  • Japan is already scrambling for ways to reuse its mounting inventory of solar-panel waste, which is expected to exceed 10,000 tons by 2020 and grow by 700,000 to 800,000 tons per year by 2040.
  • There is a similar problem brewing in this country where we have more than 1.4 million solar energy installations, many of which are nearing the end of their life cycle.
So fixing one perceived environmental hazard might actually be creating another environmental hazard. 

Now, in the interest of balanced discussion, a spokesperson for the Solar Energy Industries Association, Dan Whitten, has come out to dispute EP’s research findings, claiming that solar panels are : “mainly made up of easy-to-recycle materials that can be successfully recovered and reused at the end of their useful life.” 

Mr. Whitten is not only fighting against these findings and pollution estimates about the end of solar panels, he also has to fight some estimates of the pollution caused by the creation of solar panels, as estimated from an Associated press investigation in 2013 that found:
  • From 2007 to 2011, solar panel manufacturing just in the state of California created more than 46.5 million pounds of sludge and contaminated water.
  • About 97% of this polluted sludge and water was stored in waste storage locations within the state but more than 1.4 million pounds were taken to 9 other states which required additional energy to be burned in the transportation of said sludge and water.
  • As the article concludes correctly, “There is nothing environmentally friendly about creating mountains of hazardous waste in an effort to reduce CO2 emissions.”
When analyzing a problem, you must look at the entire problem to fully understand not only the magnitude of the problem but the potential consequences of any solution you propose. Otherwise, you end up with the above situation, where the potential solution of one problem, man made global warming (assuming that is even a reality), creates another, equally bad or worst problem, massive environmental damage.

Three more examples proving that being a global warming doubter and a believer in sciences is a sane, rational person to be.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w








Tuesday, July 18, 2017

July, 2017, Part 2,I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Chelsea Is Wrong Again, Government Lies, and Cold In Greenland

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
  • Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
  • Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
  • Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) Obviously, science is very dependent on data to make progress in understanding the world. If the basic data underpinning scientists’ research and findings is wrong, then in almost every case, their findings and research are wrong.

Well, according to a new study, a lot of the data that is used by global warming advocates has been “adjusted,” and this new study says that the adjustments were not made accurately or in an unbiased manner:
  • A recent study was completed by two climate scientists and a statistician.
  • According to a recent article on the Ipatriot website, citing a Daily Caller earlier article, the purpose of their analysis was to try and validate global warming claims as presented by “global average surface temperature (GAST)” data sets managed by “NASA, NOAA and the UK’s Met Office.”
  • The study is titled "On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data & The Validity of EPA's CO2 Endangerment Finding," was published in June and written by James P. Wallace III, Joseph S. D’Aleo and Craig Idso.
  • These data sets are measuring temperature data as collected by aloft satellites, not surface temperatures.
  • The article claims that their findings were peer reviewed by seven Phd people in the various climate related fields: Drs. Alan Carlin, Harold H. Doiron, Theodore R. Eck, Richard A. Keen, Anthony R. Lupo, Thomas P. Sheahan, and George T. Wolff.
  • NASA, NOAA, and Met Office personnel had been taking the raw satellite data and “adjusting” it in ways that this study found made it look like global warming was happening to a far greater extent than the raw data showed.
  • Joe D’Aleo, a study co-author has proven that, “Nearly all of the warming they are now showing is in the adjustments.”
  • The government personnel adjusting the raw data, according to the study, were adjusting the raw data to make the past temperatures appear cooler than they actually were relative to current temperatures which in turn makes it look like global warming has been intensifying in the present time vs. the adjusted historical data.
  • The study concluded that “These “experts” have duped the public and governments alike by “systematically removing previously existing cyclical temperature patterns.” In other words – they’ve literally scrubbed previous historical warming periods.”
  • The study concluded that, “"In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever — despite current claims of record setting warming."
If your data is wrong or biased, your research and findings are wrong or biased, science is as simple as that. Another set of data and research that proves it is perfectly sane and logical to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science.

2) James Delingpole, writing for the Breitbart website on July 7, 2017, had some news for global warming advocates that is not good for their theories. Greenland recently experienced its coldest July day since temperature tracking began. Now, if global warming was really happening, it is doubtful that Greenland would be experiencing its coldest day ever.

In addition, the overall ice mass in Greenland is also close to all time highs. Again, not something you want to see if your prediction says that mankind is making the Earth warmer and warmer.

To see the original data sources and graphs for this “chilling” information go to:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/07/delingpole-record-breaking-cold-in-greenland-alarmists-look-an-arctic-squirrel/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

3) Chelsea Clinton is not my favorite person. She has virtually no real world experience, having been raised and protected by millionaire parents and has a tendency to act like she is an expert on many different topics when she really is not. And many times she wants to appear to be an expert on climate science even though her formal education has nothing to do with science.

And every time she does speak out on science she usually makes a fool of herself. In the past she has claimed that higher rates of diabetes will occur as a direct result of climate change and/or global warming but providing not data that really supports a causality link between diabetes rates and Earth’s temperatures. 

She has also claimed that climate change/global warming is increasing the number of child brides around the world. As with most global warming advocates, anything wrong in the world can be traced back to global warming, proving that Chelsea and many others have no idea what the difference is between two events being highly correlated and two events truly having an impact on each other. i.e. causality.

But being wrong in the past has not stopped from continuing her losing streak. She recently made a reference to a single newspaper article and claimed that if humanity does not get its act together within three years, humanity is doomed because of climate change: “These experts say we have 3 years to get climate change under control. And they’re the optimists-The Washington Post”

Chelsea, please pardon us if we do not swallow this kernel of knowledge from you since:
  • In the 1970s we were told a new Ice Age was coming, that did not happen.
  • In the 1980s and beyond we were told that Earth’s temperatures would be rising dramatically, they did not, having been relatively flat for the past two decade.
  • In 2009, Al Gore told us that there was a 75% chance that the North Pole would be totally melted by 2014, it did not melt.
  • ABC News told us that coastal U.S. cities would be underwater within ten years, that did not happen.
  • Famous climate alarmist James Hansen predicted that New York City would be underwater by 2018, that is not going to happen.
  • Climate change/global warming advocates told us that polar bear populations were going extinct, that is not happening.
So Chelsea, given this abysmal track record you and other global warming "experts" of being wrong, please excuse us from AGAIN not taking you seriously. One article from one newspaper and you have to broadcast it as if it is gospel when these types of horrible forecasts have NEVER been close to be accurate.

As we reported earlier this week, James Hansen at least had the good sense to predict that climate disaster would happen sometime in the next “50 to 150” years, long after most of us have passed, making it impossible for him to be proven wrong...again. I would suggest you do the same thing since in three years I think that most of us will be fine, the Earth will be fine, and you would have joined a long list of people with idiotic Chicken Little forecasts on your resume/Twitter feed.

So what did we learn today: Chelsea is at it again and being wrong again, Greenland is getting cold, and government agencies lie. Some things never change. More reasons to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science to follow.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w








July, 2017, Part 1, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: 100 Year Predictions and Massive C02 From Electric Cars

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
  • Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
  • Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
  • Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) We have frequently reported in this blog how climate alarmists have almost always been wrong in their predictions and forecasts. Back in the 1970s they predicted that a new Ice Age was imminent. When that did not happen they predicted that massive global warming was imminent. When that did not happen they rebranded themselves to freak out over climate change, covering both ends of the climate spectrum, global warming and global cooling.

In 2009 Al Gore predicted that by 2014 there was a 75% chance that the North Pole would be completely melted. Did not happen. ABC ran a freakout news report over ten years ago that predicted by now major cities along the U.S. coasts would be under water. Did not happen. Every UN, government, and “expert” who predicted the future global warming of the Earth have been embarrassingly wrong.

But the global warming and climate change alarmists keep on trying to scare us and warn us even though their track record of being accurate is abysmal. But they found a way around them being wrong all of the time according to a recent article by Stephen Kruiser on the Independent Journal Review website: Climate alarmist James Hansen, who once predicted that New York City would be underwater by 2018, decided that he cannot be that wrong again if he changes his prediction to say that New York City will be underwater “50 to 150” years from now.

Nicely done, make a prediction that will come true long after just about anyone alive today will be dead by the time the new timeframe comes around, making it impossible to be wrong again in our lifetime.

How many times does this nonsense of being wrong have to exist before we have an adult conversation about the climate that involves ALL of the available research and science?

2) Most global warming advocates and climate change advocates are so into alternative energy sources and alternative energy transportation technologies. We have already shown studies in this blog that prove that the mining, manufacturing, shipping, and installation of solar panels is worse for the environment than fossil fuels.

Today let’s take a shot at how an alternative car technology, i.e. Tesla electric cars, are actually worse for the environment than fossil fuel driven cars:
  • Johan Kristensson, writing for the Principia Scientific International website on June 20, 2017, discussed a new study that showed that the production of Tesla car batteries released as much CO2 gas as 8 years of driving a similar car using gasoline.
  • The study was done by the Swedish Environment Institute at the request of the Swedish Transport Administration and the Swedish Energy Agency.
  • They studied the total climate impact of lithium ion batteries over the complete life cycle of the batteries, including car lithium batteries.
  • The study technique is a so called meta study which is a comprehensive review of previously done research studies.
  • The study estimated that for every kilowatt of storage capacity in a lithium battery, 150 to 200 kilograms of carbon dioxide gas is created.
  • Since each Tesla battery has a capacity of 100 kilowatts, simple math says that a Tesla battery creates 15,000 to 20,000 kilograms of carbon dioxide in the manufacturing process.
  • The study then estimated how long one would have to drive a gas or diesel car to generate as much CO2 as what went into the production of car lithium batteries.
  • The answer: the break even point of a gas or diesel car for CO2 production was a whopping 8.2 years for a Tesla sized battery.
  • Which means up to 8.2 years driving a comparable gas driven engine would have been better for the environment than a Tesla battery powered car.
  • After 8.2 years the benefit to the environment goes to the Tesla but who knows if the average life of a Tesla car is 8.2 years; if it is less than 8.2 years Tesla never becomes environmentally more friendly.
  • The deal is much better for a Nissan leaf model which has a much smaller battery, meaning it is less powerful, since its breakeven point environmentally is less than three years.
  • But very few people have bought Leafs over the years, possibly because of how under powered they are.
The bottom line reality is that electric cars, as are solar panels, are not necessarily the golden solution that global warming advocates hope for. In fact, they may be worse than the current status quo. But often facts and realities are of little importance to people like Al Gore.

That’s enough to get us started on this month’s, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” Making predictions that cannot be proven and claiming technology that works that maybe does not. More to follow.


Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:


www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org

http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w