October, 2018, Part 4, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Who Needs Paris (And Its Climate Agreement) and Screwing The Poor In California

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 man made 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 on 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 post 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) Just a couple of quickies today to wrap this month’s global warming discussion. We have previously discussed a few topics as they relate to the infamous United Nations Paris Climate Agreement:

• Trump was right to pull the U.S. out of the agreement since we as nation would have made all of the sacrifices while the rest of the world would make minor, if any, energy sacrifices.
• For instance, Pakistan’s pledge in the treaty was that they would reduce their carbon footprint an unspecified amount at an unspecified point in the future, hardly taking a bullet for the cause.
• India and China, along with other countries, continue to build thousands and thousands of coal burning power plants that would have wiped out any carbon reductions that the U.S. would have incurred.
• The agreement had no teeth in that there was no way to punish any country who did not meet their goals, it was more of a gentleman’s agreement.
• And as we recently reported, only nine out of the dozens and dozens of countries who actually signed the agreement have actually met their assigned carbon reduction goals, only a few years out from the agreement.

Trump, of course, got brutalized for the decision even though it was best for the American taxpayer and our economy. So how is the U.S. doing even though it is no longer bound by the agreement? Have we allowed our carbon footprint to explode, endangering the future of every living thing on Earth? 

Joseph Curl, writing for the Daily Wire website on October 28,2018, brings us up to date with the latest official statistics:

• Despite a red hot economy which should have resulted in higher and higher carbon emission levels, according to the EPA after Trump’s first year in office, our country’s greenhouse emissions actually went down despite not being a part of the Paris Climate Agreement.
• The EPA report found the U.S. carbon emissions went down 2.7% last year.
• A lot of this decrease was because emissions from U.S. power plants went down an amazing 4.5%.
• All of which makes Al Gore’s prediction/statement back in June 2017 sound so stupid today, another global warming prediction that apparently was also grossly wrong: "I think it [pulling out of the Paris agreement] was reckless. I think it was indefensible. It undermines America's standing in the world. It threatens the ability of humanity to solve the climate crisis in time."
• Another, non-EPA report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, found that U.S. carbon emissions from major energy sources dropped to the lowest levels since 1993 in 2017.
• Still another study from the June 2018 BP Statistical Review of Global Energy found that the U.S. led the world in reducing carbon emissions in 2017.
• The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) estimates that the U.S. reduced its carbon emissions by 42 million tons in 2017, far ahead of the second leading reducer, which, believe it or not, was the Ukraine, at a 20 million ton reduction.
• Canada, Spain, the European Union, and China, all of whom signed the Paris agreement, all saw their carbon emissions rise last year.
• China saw its 2017 carbon emissions go up a whopping 120 million tons, three times the size of the emission reduction of the U.S.
• The European Union increased its 2017 carbon emissions by about the same amount, 40 millions, that the U.S. reduced its carbon footprint in 2017.

So, Trump pulls the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement, and despite a red hot economy, the U.S. leads the world in reducing its carbon footprint. Many of those that actually signed the agreement actually added tremendous amounts of carbon emissions to the environment. Go figure, I guess Al Gore and global warming advocates were wrong AGAIN, when they predicted that exiting the Paris agreements would kill off humanity. 

The Paris agreement was a joke, an ego trip for Obama to strut around with in his pocket. It has no enforcement teeth, it was vague and non-committal in many areas, and it allowed the fastest growing economies, e.g. India and China, to bring havoc from an emissions perspective while the U.S. and its taxpayers would have paid the price.

2) The Freedom News Report website had a recent article that shows how out of control global warming enthusiasm is bad both logically and financially relative to the less wealthy in the world:

• The state government in California recently enacted legislation that would force the entire state to be carbon emission free by the year 2045 as it relates to its use of electricity.
• In other words, all electricity generated in the state by that date would have to come from renewable resources, e.g. solar and wind.
• The state’s governor, Jerry Brown, fancies himself a sovereign nation at least relative to the bogus Paris Climate Agreement we just finished discussing, claiming that his state was “sending a message to California and to the world that we’re going to meet the Paris agreement.”
• Given that California residents currently pay, on average, 60% more for electricity, and this proposed transformation will further increase the state’s power costs, this plan/dream will not come cheaply.
• For example, since renewable sources of power, solar and wind, are not constant and vary according to the current weather, massive amounts of storage would have to be set up to store non-renewable electricity generation for times when the wind was not blowing or the sun was not shining, further increasing the cost of the state’s electricity, the cost of which has been rising five times the national average over the past years.
• Research by the Boston based Clean Air Task Force estimates that for California to reach just 80% of its energy from carbon free sources, somehow a whopping 9.6 terawatt hours worth of electrical storage would have to be put online.
• With today’s technology, 9.6 terawatt hours of storage would require the purchase and installation of 500 million Tesla Powerwalls which currently cost $6,000….not including installation in order to constantly supply the state’s 40 million residents with uninterrupted electricity.
• As an aside, one wonder where the state would actually place 500 million Powerwalls, that would take up a lot of real estate.
• In today’s dollars, this comes out to a cost of $3 TRILLION or about $75,000 per resident (excluding installation costs).
• Even if you could find a way over time to reduce this cost by say 80%, you are still looking at a per resident cost of $15,000, the burden of which would be paid by the state’s resident’s.
• Thus, a California family of four would be on the hook for about $60,000 if the cost of this law’s impacts could be reduced by 80%, more than $60,000 if the cost did not come down that much.
• At that point, I would bet that the wealthier residents would say screw that and would install their own solar and wind projects to generate the electricity they need for themselves, something they could do for far less than $75,000 per person, further burdening the less wealthy residents who cannot afford their own power installation.
• Which is exactly is being anticipated by a coalition called “The Two Hundred,” a group of civic organizations who lobby for and try to protect the interests of less wealthy citizens.
• This coalition realizes that the burden for this ambitious and ego driven plan will eventually fall to those in the state that can least afford higher and higher electricity rates, a situation that will get worse with this carbon free by 2045 law and thus, they have filed suit to stop this plan.
• In the lawsuit, the group correctly claims that these types of policies “have a disparate negative impact on minority communities and are discriminatory against minority communities and their members.”
• Furthermore, “Every time they pass new regulations, the burden falls on the people who can least afford it,” Two Hundred representative John Gamboa reportedly said. “That’s the history of the environmental movement: They care more about spotted owls than brown babies.”
• The article points out that Germany’s effort to get to more renewable energy sources has seen the average cost of electricity go up 50% in the past ten years, a harbinger of what would happen under this new California law.

The U.S. is doing just fine, in fact better than anyone else, in reducing its carbon footprint even though it is not part of the Paris Climate Agreement. And California is screwing its lower income citizens just to chase what is becoming more and more likely, the global warming myth. More myth busting 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

April, 2015, Part 6,Political Class Insanity: Tax Freedom Day Despair, Massive Conflict Of Interest and Coal Fallacies

It is the beginning of another month which means it is time to review the latest political class insanity that has cropped up over the past 30 days or so. As regular readers of this blog know, political class insanity comes in many different forms including, but not limited to, the following craziness:

• Spending taxpayer wealth on idiotic programs and projects.
• Wasting taxpayer wealth on their own selfish financial and political needs.
• Implementing legislation to resolve problems that make the original problems worse or which created unintended bad consequences as a result of their legislation.
• Implementing legislation that supports their political donors and financial backers rather than the typical American citizen.
• Issuing idiotic and stupid comments.
• Overseeing government organizations that are incompetent, inefficient, ineffective, and wasteful of taxpayer wealth.

As always, we identified new forms of insanity over the past week or so as we reviewed the past ineptness coming out of Washington and other bastions of American politicians. We will finally get through all of the latest insanity below:

1) According to a recent New York Times article, that was reviewed in the March 13, 20915 issue of The Week magazine, since Mary Jo White became chairwoman of the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), she has had to recuse herself from more than four dozen current SEC investigations, many of which involve Wall Street firms, in order to avoid conflict of interest potential. 

She is a former Wall Street lawyer and her husband works for a corporate law firm. The four dozen cases involve former or current Wall Street clients of both her and her husband. Tough to do your job when you are so deeply involved in the industry you are supposed to oversee that you have to stay out of the very investigations you are supposed to be managing. Maybe she was not the best choice for the job.

2) A famous quotation from early in our history was “no taxation without representation” and it was part of the rallying cry for the American Revolution against England, the over taxation of American citizens. A recent, cynical spinoff of that quote is “taxation with representation isn’t so great either.” That was driven by the high amount of taxation every American faces from all levels of government. 

Well, it turns out that 2015 will be another bad year for taxation since the “Tax Freedom Day," the day when Americans stop working for the government and the political class and start working for themselves and their families worsened again. According to the latest analysis from the Tax Foundation:

• The national Tax Freedom Day in 2015 is April 24.
• This is a day later than Tax Freedom Day in 2014.
• For comparison, in 1900, the Tax Freedom Day was January 22.
• Americans will pay $3.38 trillion in Federal taxes and $1.57 trillion in state and local taxes this year, for a total of more than $4.8 trillion, or 31 percent of the nation's income. 
• If you were to spread that tax burden evenly across every American household, the individual household portion would be over $40,000 each.
• In total, American taxpayers will spend more on taxes in 2015 than they will on food, clothing, and housing combined.
• Taxpayers will work 43 days this year to pay all levels of income taxes, 26 days to pay payroll taxes, 15 days for sales and excise taxes, 12 days for corporate income taxes, 11 days for property taxes, and seven days for estate and inheritance taxes, custom duties, and other levies.
• The latest-ever Tax Freedom Day was May 1, 2000 so we are close to the all time record.
• Tax Freedom Day varies by state with Tax Freedom Day arriving the latest in Connecticut and New Jersey, May 13, and in New York on May 11.
• The earliest Tax Freedom Day in Louisiana (April 2), Mississippi (April 4), and South Dakota (April 8).
• "Tax Freedom Day gives us a vivid representation of how much we pay for the goods and services provided by governments at all levels," Tax Foundation economist Kyle Pomerleau said in a release. "Arguments can be made that the tax bill is too high or too low, but in order to have an honest discussion, it's important for taxpayers to understand the cost of government."

Truly insane how much we are taxed in what is supposed to be a free country with minimal government interference in our lives. Given the $40,000 per household calculation done above, ask yourself: are you getting $40,000 worth of services and benefit back from any level of government? How much more freedom would you have to send your kids to better schools, have a better vacation, start your own business, give more to charities, etc. if you could just keep half of that $40,000? 

This is a prime example of why you cannot have personal and political freedom if you do not have economic freedom. The first step towards what this country should be about was outlined in Step 1 in “Love My Country, Loathe My Government,” which called for a 50% reduction in all government spending over a five year period. This would force government and the politicians that operate it to become more efficient with our tax dollars and get our Tax Freedom Day down to a saner level than what is has become.

3) I always love it when politicians do not look at the underlying numbers and realities of their faulty reasoning and policies. In fact, if you enter the phrase, “by the numbers” in the search box above, you will see a whole host of previous posts that examined the numbers that truly define what is going on rather than relying on the spin and deceptions of politicians. 

Consider the faulty reasoning of the Al Gore types and other global warming advocates, including President Obama, when it comes to using coal as an energy course. It is not a secret that Obama has never liked the coal industry and his plans to reduce U.S. carbon emissions another 15% or so is mostly going to be accomplished by forcing the coal industry to repress its energy production.

But that will just be only an incremental reduction in the current emissions of the the U.S.’s 600 coal fired plants. However, according to an article in the March 27, 2015 issue of The Week magazine, China, which currently gets 70% of its electricity from burning coal, plans on building 363 additional coal plans in the near future. 

India, which has 340 million people who currently do not have access to electricity, plans on building 455 coal fired power plants. Thus, China and India are planning to bring at least 818 new coal fired plants online while Obama wants to reduce the output of 600 U.S. plants. 

Thus, you can see how even if the U.S. does reduce its carbon footprint by 15%, that reduction will be overwhelmed by over 800 new power plants in just two other countries. This will cause the cost of electricity to go up for American businesses and customers, depressing our economic growth, while the rest of the world inflicts far more carbon impacts that increases their economic growth. Insanity.

That wraps up this month's insanity. Six days of stupid government programs, wasteful spending, over taxation for under performance, and a whole host of other forms of insanity. Please consider visiting our term limits website at:

www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com

Because, really, how much worse from a political insanity perspective could it get if we replaced every Washington politician with a new person. Hard to see how much worse it could get.

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

September, 2014 I Am A Global Warming Doubter And a Believer In Science, Part 3: Hillary Gets It Wrong, The Media Start to Get It Right, and More

On a semi-regular basis we have taken an in-depth look at ALL pertinent and relevant global warming/climate change data, statistics, trends, and science under the theme, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” It was our feeling and position that the people who believed and supported the theory that humanity’s actions was causing global warming and climate change were not being completely honest in their discussion, 

It seemed that they were cherry picking information to prove their point rather than looking at all of the information available to reach a scientifically sound basis. To make matters worse, their attitudes to towards those of us that were believers in science but were skeptical about the whole global warming thesis to be honest with you just ticked us off. People like Al Gore go about bashing folks like our selves, calling them ignorant of science, racists, homophobes, and other derogatory names just because we want to look at the entire picture, just not a slanted, narrow and quite possibly incorrect view of reality.

Past discussions under this theme in this blog can be accessed by entering “I am a global warming doubter” in the search box above. By reviewing those discussions and posts with an open mind, you will find that the science on man made global warming/climate change is far from settled, contrary to the views of global warming advocates. That conclusion is further verified by the latest research and realities that we started discussing over the past two days, a discussion will finish up today and tomorrow.

1) The Independent Journal Review from September 8, 2014 reported what Hillary Clinton considered the most urgent challenge facing the country. It was not:

• Crushing national debt of about $18 TRILLION.
• A worldwide Islamic terrorist movement that is getting stronger every day.
• Anemic economic growth that is fall below any other recovery in the past hundred years.
• Widespread wasteful government spending due to inefficiencies, stupidity, and criminal fraud.
• Russian and Chinese aggression around the world.
• The fact that almost twenty million Americans are unemployed or under employed.
• The destruction of the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments by an over reaching and over bearing Federal government.

No, Hillary things that climate change is the biggest challenge facing the country today: “Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face.”… “The threat is real, and so is the opportunity… if we make the hard choices.”

She feels this way even though every global warming and climate change forecast models from the past few decades have been wrong. She feels this way even though kids who graduated from high school this past spring have not experienced global warming in their life times. She feels this way even though U.S. government data on everything imaginable including wild fires, rain fall, hurricane frequency, etc. shows no deviation from long term trends. She feels this way even though anything the U.S. tries to do from a carbon footprint reduction perspective will be overwhelmed by what the rest of the world is going to do with carbon.

Bad priorities, bad understanding of science and reality, bad.

2) The Center for Public Policy Research recently published a research paper on climate change entitled: "Top Ten Reasons Washington Should Not Impose New Global Warming Laws or Regulations." The reasons for their conclusion it in the title includes the following realities:

• The Earth has not warmed since the Hillary Clinton lived in the White House, about 18 years ago.
• New global warming laws and regulations implemented around he world have harmed all citizens and harmed lower-income and minorities disproportionately without having any positive effect on the climate.
• U.S. energy related CO2 emissions have already fallen a whopping 12.6% between 2005 and 2012 without much unneeded political class and government actions. Conversely, as we have been saying for years, while the U.S. carbon footprint has been shrinking, worldwide CO3 emissions went up 17.7%, wiping out any U.S. contributions to the climate during the same period.
• The global warming and climate change models upon which President Obama's belief in human-caused catastrophic global warming is based are useless since 1979, over 96% of climate models predicted far more warming by now than has taken place.
• As we have discussed and proven in previous posts, claims that 97% of scientists endorse the global warming theory are wrong and propaganda.

"President Obama is going to hurt the American people today," said Amy Ridenour, author of the paper and chairman of the National Center for Public Policy Research. "Jobs will be lost and electricity prices will rise, and it's all for nothing. Even if the alarmist position on global warming were to turn out to be true - and it hasn't been coming true - the most optimistic case is that President Obama's regulations would have a negligible impact on global warming. So why does he insist on doing this?"

Well said, fact based, and so true, regardless of what Hillary says.

3) Maybe Hillary should read what the media and scientists are now saying about global warming and climate change before embarrassing herself with the inane comments that climate change is the biggest issue facing the country. Consider some news headlines that were recently compiled by Kyle Becker, writing for the Independent Journal Review:

1. Humans are NOT to Blame for Global Warming, Says Greenpeace Co-founder… (Daily Mail)

2. James Hansen Admits Global Temperature Standstill Is Real (The GWPF)

3. ‘Gaia’ Scientist James Lovelock: I Was ‘Alarmist’ About Climate Change (NBC)

4. Climategate U-turn as Scientist at Centre of Row Admits: There Has Been No Global Warming Since 1995 (Daily Mail)

5. Climate Expert von Storch: Why Is Global Warming Stagnating? (Der Spiegel)

6. Warming Plateau? Climatologists Face Inconvenient Truth (Der Spiegel)

7. German Public Television Stuns Its Readers, Concedes Medieval Warm Period May Have Been 0.5°C Warmer Than Today! (Wetterthema via No Tricks Zone)

8. Why Has Global Warming Stalled? (BBC)

9. Global Warming Pause ‘Central’ to IPCC Climate Report (BBC)

10. There Has Been No Global Warming Since 1998 (Telegraph)

11. Senator Barbara Boxer’s Own Experts Contradict Obama On Global Warming (Forbes)

12. ‘Global Warming’ is Rubbish says Top Professor (Yorkshire Evening Post)

13. Global Warming ‘Hiatus’ Puts Climate Change Scientists on the Spot (LA Times)

14. Man-made Global Warming: Even the IPCC Admits the Jig is Up (Telegraph)

15. RSS Global Temperature Data: No Global Warming at All for 202 Months (Christopher Monckton at WUWT)

16. ‘Nothing Off-limits’ in Climate Debate (The Australian)

17. 95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong (Dr. Roy Spencer)

18. 2013 Atlantic Hurricane Season Ends – No Major Hurricanes For First Time Since 1994 (MyFoxHurricaneBlog)

19. 2013 is a Record Low Year for U.S. Tornadoes (WUWT)

20. Accumulated Cyclone Energy (Weather Underground)

21. 2013 Will Finish One Of The Ten Coldest Years In US History, With The Largest Drop In Temperature (Real Science)

22. And Now It’s Global Cooling! Return of Arctic Ice Cap as it Grows by 29% in a Year (Daily Mail)

23. Deaths From Hurricanes, Floods, Droughts, and Other Weather Events Are Down 98 Percent Since 1920s (Reason Foundation)

Comments and quotes within and follow up to these headlines can be viewed at the original article:

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/146586-andrew-klavan-pretend-crisis-fake-global-warming/

The bottom line is that many people around the world are waking up to the fact that it is perfectly okay, sane, and logical to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. The facts and realities, along with the thousands of incorrect predictions from hundreds of global warming models proves the reality. All one has to do is look at ALL of the science, ALL of the research, and ALL of the realities, something that people like Al Gore, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have never done.

This ends our current update to our theme of “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” I am sure we will revisit’s the theme in the near future as people like Hillalry and others continue to ignore the reality of our times.

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

July, 2014, Why I Am A Global Warmng Doubter and A Believer in Science - Part 4

Today may be the last of four days we have spent going over a continuing theme in this blog, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” The justification for this series was the fact that I just got fed up being yelled at and called a whole slew of not nice names by people like Al Gore simply because I choose to look at the entire spectrum of global warming, and its rebranded them of climate change, rather than the rantings and ravings of people like Gore that look only at the science that supports their viewpoint and not at all science, both pro and con.

Rather than try to have an adult conversation, people like Al Gore have caused us doubters racists, homophobes, science illiterates, etc. We maintain that if you look at ALL of the climate science, you will see the fallacy and emptiness of Gore-like viewpoints and rantings. To do anything else would not be scientific, it would be scientific heresy.

To view the dozens of posts we have done in the past where we quote famous and credible scientists, cite credible and independent reports, and use logic to show that the global warming scare and climate change mania is probably just that, scare tactics and mania, put the following phrase, “I am a global warming doubter” in the search box above to get a complete list of previous related posts. If you are an Al Gore fan, a dare you to read all of the science put forth in these posts before you commence with the name calling again.

Let’s see what new science evidence has come about since our last update to the theme, I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.”

1) A Mr. James Taylor wrote a piece for Forbes magazine in January, 2013 that discussed many aspects of the global warming myth along with pointing out the futility of the Untied States and President Obama unilaterally imposing carbon taxes and restrictions on the United States without the rest of the world dong the same:

• He points out scientific data that shows that indeed, global carbon dioxide emissions have risen more than 33% since the year 2000.
• He also correctly points out that U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have declined during that time and should continue to decline for the foreseeable future.
• He cites the U.S. Energy Information Administration which has reported that just during 2012 alone, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions declined by 8% compared to 2011. In other words, the U.S. is doing exactly what Al Gore and Obama want us to do, reduce our carbon footprint, and we are doing it without and thing close to a carbon tax or government intervention in the market and our wallets.
• Mr. Taylor points out that China emits far more carbon dioxide than any other nation and Chinese emissions are growing rapidly year over year.
• In fact, China alone accounts for 75% of the global increase in carbon dioxide emissions since 2000. 
• His article maintains that if the United States completely eliminated all of its carbon dioxide emissions, the only thing that would accomplish would be to delay by about five years an equal increase in Chinese emissions. 
• And since eliminating all of the U.S. carbon footprint is impossible, the advantage to the rest of the world and the environment would be substantially less than five years.
• Since China has repeatedly and strongly shown it will not agree to any restrictions on its own carbon dioxide emissions. Anything we do do ourselves only would result in a much lower standard of living, a more anemic economy, and have no significant impact on the earth if manmade climate change and global warming somehow turn out to be reality.

Given the realities pointed out in this Forbes article and other examples and data that we have already discussed that showed the U.S. is leading the world in reducing its carbon footprint. But the good we bring to the global warming table is more than offset by the dramatically coal and fossil fuel usage in the rest of the world, which renders our domestic sacrifices moot. Somehow that simple reality is not able to penetrate the dogmatic approach that people like Obama and Gore bring to the table.

The sad part of the whole matter is that if, somehow, manmade global warming and climate change are realities, the chance of Obama saving the world from itself is near zero. His inability to lead both on the domestic front and on the world stage has proven to the rest of the world that he is not to be followed, trusted, or taken seriously. This makes any effort on his part to convince China, Brazil, India, and other developing economies to forsake cheap carbon based energy forms futile.

2) An article from the may 9, 2014 issue of The Week magazine reported on scientific research that was described on the Smithsonian website. Apparently, 40- 50 million years ago, way before the global warming scare tactics of some scientists and people like Al Gore, the average temperature in Antarctica was around 57 degrees Fahrenheit. The temperature of the surrounding Pacific waters was about 72 degrees.

During that time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air was five times higher than what is today. And those levels were attained before man burned the first piece of coal. Kind of kills that statement form the President that we discussed earlier this week, namely that the ten hottest years ever have occurred in the past twelve years. Probably not true relative to an almost balmy Antarctic temperature levels 40 to 50 million years ago.

The lesson to be learned is that the earth has been going through warming and cooling periods since the first day of its existence, with and without mankind’s presence. To just look at a very small set of data and claim that the world is burning up is not science, that is fear mongering.

3) People like Al Gore want desperately stop the completion of the Keystone pipeline, claiming it will make a substantial contribution to more carbon in the air and thus more global warming and/or climate change. But, as always, this miss out on several realities:

• If the U.S. does not complete the pipeline that would take dirty oil from the Canadian tar sands to American refineries for refining, that oil will go elsewhere to be refined and eventually burned, the U.S. notwithstanding. 
• Thus, would environmentalists prefer that we refine it and use it under our relatively strict environmental laws or prefer it to go to China and elsewhere where we know the environment is usually not a consideration when it comes to cheap energy? That oil is going to be pumped and refined, it is just a question of where those events take place.
• A short article in the May 16, 2014 issue of The Week magazine showed the futility of opposing the pipeline. According to the Washington Post article, if the pipeline were approved, the EPA estimates that the additional carbon emissions from the burning of that oil would be only .286% of the total CO2 domestic emissions. Ten times that much of carbon emissions are released each year by cow burps and cow flatulence.

Thus, the environmental impacts of building the pipeline are minimal or nil while the job creation potential and national security and economic upsides are huge, facts and realities lost on the Obama administration.

4) An article in the May 16, 2014 issue of The Week magazine showed the futility of the U.S. going it alone on taxing carbon usage. The government of Ecuador has decided to allow oil drilling development in the country’s Yasuni National Park. Apparently the park is “one of the most biologically diverse spots in the world.”

In 2007, the president of Ecuador promised to ban drilling in the park if the world would pay his country $3.6 billion not to do so. However, only a mere $13 million was raised towards the $3.6 billion figure, indicating that the rest of the world did not care much to prevent another source of fossil and carbon based fuel from being developed and used.

5) More futility of the U.S. going it alone. An article from the June 13, 2014 issue of The Week magazine pointed out this inconvenient truth for Al Gore types: The EPA has estimated that if the U.S. shut down EVERY coal fired power generation plant in this country, it would reduce the Earth’s temperature by one 20th of a degree in the next hundred years.

Closing less than every plant would have an even smaller, minimal impact. But that is exactly what the Obama administration wants to do. The environmental impact would be minimal but the increase in the country’s electricity prices and the loss in jobs would be dramatic and negative. 

Okay, I thought we might finish up this series today but we will need at least tomorrow to present the latest proof that it is entirely possible 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:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science Update, Part 4: More Realities Disputing Global Warming, A Political Oops! In Califronia, and a Solution To The Whole Mess

This is our fourth post this month to a regular series themed “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” This theme and premise came about when it became obvious that global warming advocates like Al Gore were 1) ignoring much of the science that was contrary to his global warming beliefs, and 2) his rants, slander, and slurs against those of us that do believe in science but have our doubts about global warming were starting to tick us off. 

Contrary to what Mr. Gore might claim, the science as it relates to global warming, or its rebranded marketing campaign, “climate change,” is not settled. Over the past few years we have exposed and discussed valid and proven scientific research efforts that cast doubt or are in direct contrary positions to what Gore claims to be “settled.” He cannot acknowledge that his position could be scientifically wrong, an easy thing to do when you ignore what you do not want to see.

All of our past posts on scientific rebuttals of global warming can be accessed by typing in “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science” in the search box above. The first post in this update series can be accessed at:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2014/05/i-am-global-warming-doubter-and.html

1) We start today with another list of global warming fallacies. In two previous posts we looked at how wrong the environmentalists and climatologists were in their 1970 Earth Day predictions. We also listed the realities of what the weather and climate have been for the past few decades, realities that were in stark contrast to the wrongful predictions of people like Al Gore.

Today’s list of global warming fails comes from a recent web post on the Heritage Foundation website. The article is written by Mr. Stephen Moore and according to Heritage, the piece originally appeared in the Orange County Register. The article was entitled, “Obama Channels Jimmy Carter on Climate Change” and started with a review of how wrong President Jimmy Carter was back in the late 1970s when he tried to predict environmental change: 

It was 34 years ago that Carter issued his own primal scream, called “The Global 2000 Report,” about the coming mass starvation from food shortages, the planet running out of oil and drinking water, overpopulation and other horrors. It was all bunk and contradicted by the subsequent real-world events, but now Obama is adopting the role of fearmonger in chief.

Mr. Moore points out that President Obama, in his fear mongering, fails to mention that the famous, or infamous, climate change forecast models have all been woefully inaccurate in their projections of climate and warming. How wrong? Consider the following FACTS, not forecast model predictions, as researched and presented in the article:

• The global warming fiasco we were supposed to have experienced already has never occurred despite China, India, and Mexico and many other nations having created record amounts of carbon and other greenhouse gases which ended up in the atmosphere. 
• The last 10 years have been cooler on Earth than the 1930s, long before so much carbon was thrown off into the air around the world.
• The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says, “There has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.”
• NOAA’s U.S. Climate Extremes Index of unusually hot or cold temperatures finds that over the last 10 years, five years have been below the historical mean and five above the mean.
• While higher than average portions of the country were subjected to extreme drought/moisture in the past few years, the 1930s, 40s and 50s were more extreme in this regard. In fact, over the last 10 years, four years have been below the average and six above the average.
• Government statistics and academic research show that hurricane activity is actually at historic lows. According to the National Hurricane Center, in 2013, “There were no major hurricanes in the North Atlantic Basin for the first time since 1994. And the number of hurricanes this year was the lowest since 1982.”
• And there is still more good news: The eastern Pacific Ocean had only one major hurricane in 2013. Only 1968 – which had no major hurricanes in either the Atlantic Basin or eastern Pacific – was more calm in the regard.
• According to Ryan Maue at Weather Bell Analytics, “We are currently in the longest period since the Civil War Era without a major hurricane strike in the U.S. (i.e., category 3, 4 or 5). The last major hurricane to strike the U.S. was Hurricane Wilma during late October of that record-breaking year of 2005.”
• Maue also reports that “the global frequency of tropical cyclones has reached a historical low.”
• Roger Pielke Jr., past chairman of the American Meteorological Society Committee on Weather Forecasting and Analysis, reports that “floods have not increased in the U.S. in frequency or intensity since at least 1950. Flood losses as a percentage of U.S. GDP have dropped by about 75 percent since 1940.“
• Pielke concludes, “There is no evidence that disasters are getting worse because of climate change. … It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate time scales either in the United States or globally.”
• One of the best measures of extreme weather events is losses to insurance companies, which protect against catastrophic losses. 
• Worldwide, weather-related insurance losses have actually decreased by about 25% since 1960.
• More than 100 years ago, some statisticians looked at the rising level of the Nile River and extrapolated that the entire Middle East would be underwater by now. Has not happened yet.

A lot has not happened that was supposed to happen as predicted and shouted ten to twenty years ago. That is why global warming had to be rebranded as climate change, the old marketing scheme of fear and fake or skewed science was not working with reality. 

The article concludes with this insightful observation that is sure to send Al Gore over the edge: 

Liberals wonder why the nation is filled with so many global warming skeptics. It is because of shoddy research like this that seems designed to scare the American people into surrendering more of their freedoms and reducing their standard of living. Here’s some good news: we don’t have to.

2) Lying by politicians has always been a staple in their marketing arsenal but recent politicians have taken the art and deception of lying to all new heights. President Obama himself landed three lies in the Washington Post’s “Top Ten Lies of 2013,” including the top lie of all, if you like your health insurance policy you can keep it under Obama Care. Thus, whenever a politician speaks we should always be on guard with a liar filter in place.

Which is what was needed recently when Governor Jerry Brown of California spoke in the context of the state’s budgeting process. According to the Governor, he claimed that some scientists are claiming that in the next hundred years, the seas could rise up to four feet higher which would put the main Los Angeles and San Francisco airports under sea water:

If that happens, the Los Angeles airport’s going to be underwater. So is the San Francisco airport. You’re going to have to move all that … That’s billions, if not tens of billions. Luckily, we can take a few years.

Wow, doomsday, dire type stuff. We need to get moving, the governor has to be telling the truth, he’s the governor for Pete’s sake. Let’s start moving those runways today.

Uh, not so fast. Within 24 hours, an official retraction was issued for the LA airport. Seems the governor did not bother to check and find out that the LA airport is located more than one hundred feet above sea level so even if a four foot increase in the seas does occur in a hundred years, it would still be at least 96 feet below the LA Airport.

Which raises an interesting point. Was the governor just being ignorant of facts and reality when he spoke out as an alarmist on the LA Airport and global warming or was he intentionally being deceptive, hoping that no one was smart enough to fact check his claims? Whatever the reality, this is why we must not knee jerk to what politicians like Brown, Gore, Obama, and Carter say, they have been wrong so many times in the past, either intentionally or ignorantly, what they say always has to be checked against science and reality.

3) One of the heart wrenching, and incorrect assertions by global warming advocates has long been the vision of the polar bear species going extinct as it loses its natural habitat at the North Pole which, according to many global warming forecasts, should have melted away by now. Nice marketing but poor forecasting since we have cited any number of sources in previous posts which show that the ice caps at both poles are increasing, not decreasing, leaving the bears safe at least for the foreseeable future.

However, it appears that the bear population is actually in danger, not from global warming but from too much ice at the pole. Currnelty, the ice cap up north is about 16 feet thick and that is threatening the survival of polar bears in the Southern Beaufort Sea region along Alaska’s Arctic coast, according to Dr. Susan J. Crockford, an evolutionary biologist in British Columbia who has studied polar bears for most of her 35-year career. 

Why? There is a danger that the thick ice could prevent ringed seals, a staple in polar bears diets, from creating breathing holes in the ice that they need to survive. No seals, no food for the bears: “Prompted by reports of the heaviest sea ice conditions on the East Coast ‘in decades’ and news that ice on the Great Lakes is, for mid-April, the worst it’s been since records began, I took a close look at the ice thickness charts for the Arctic,” Crockford noted in her Polar Bear Science blog on April 18th. “Sea ice charts aren’t a guarantee that this heavy spring ice phenomenon is developing in the Beaufort, but they could be a warning…[that doesn’t] bode well" for the Beaufort bears.

Who knew? The bears could well suffer because of too much ice, not the melting of ice that global warming advocates had forecasted.

Look, I do not know what is going on relative to the climate now and in the future but neither does Al Gore. In fact, I think that over several posts we have presented a very credible case that both global warming and climate change hysteria is just that, hysteria, based on the many scientific and reality facts and research we have pointed out.

Previously, we have proposed a common sense solution to the whole mess which was independent of who is right and who is wrong about man made global warming:

http://www.loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/united-states-of-purple-presidency_09.html

But as usual when it comes to politics and people who seek control over others, a common sense approach never has a good chance.

But for those of you that still think man made global warming is a reality, I ask you this: what are you going to do about it? Obama thinks he is doing great by closing down a few U.S. coal burning plants. But the following and latest facts from the U.S. Energy Information Administration easily shows how inane that action would be:

• From 2009 to 2040, the U.S. is expect to throw off a constant amount of carbon dioxide emissions every year, about 5.4 to 5.6 billion metric tons.
• However, India is expected to double its carbon dioxide emissions over the same time frame, going from 1.6 billions of metric tons to 3.3 by 2040. 
• For comparison, the U.S. would have to reduce its emissions by a whopping 30% just to offset the growth in India’s emissions.
• Even worse, China is expected to also more than double its carbon emissions in the same time frame, going from 7.3 billion metric tons in 2009 to 14.9 billion metric tons by 2040.
• Thus, even if the U.S. reduced its carbon footprint to zero, the world would still see an annual net gain in global carbon emissions from just India and China of 3.7 billion metric tons by 2040. 

Thus, there are really only two solutions if you think that man made global warming and climate change is a reality and you really want to make a difference. First option: Obama would have to convince the world, specifically China and India, to drastically reduce their carbon footprint. and probably sacrifice economic growth in the process, to get emissions reduced, not increased. The odds of that happening are nil for any number of economic, political and social reasons, plus the fact that Obamas’ status as a world leader is not very strong at all.

Second option: use science and technology to find a way to reduce emissions from coal and other carbon spewing materials. Technology and science have done wonderful things to make life better for humans and the planet, why not focus on science to do the same in this area? 

That is why I am still a believer in science, there is no other solution if man made global warming and climate change are a reality. It’s a shame that people like Al Gore do not see it the same way, i.e. science as an answer rather than a weapon and tool of fear.

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

I Am A Global Warming Doubter But A Believer In Science Update, Part 2: Is Global Cooling More Of A Threat Than Global Warming/Climate Change?

This is the second of two posts that review the evidence over the past two year's worth of posts in this blog that prove you can be a global warming doubter and still be a firm believer in science and the scientific method. The first eight instances which scientifically cast doubt on the whole global warming/climate change theory can be accessed at:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2013/11/i-am-global-warming-doubter-and.html

The remaining past evidence of global warming doubt, from a scientific basis, is listed below. Over the next few days, we will update these peices of evidence with new science that provide further evidence that man made global warming/climate change could actually be much adieu about nothing and no reason for the government and the ruling political class to use such potential nonsense to increase the taxes and control of our lives that they love to do.

9) An article earlier in 2013 in the well respected magazine, The Economist, pointed out how reality is not matching up with the dire, doomsday predictions of global warming advocates. Even though greenhouse gas emissions have soared during the past 15 years, with 100 billion tons of carbon having been added to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, both air and ground temperatures during that time have remained unchanged. 

Surface temperatures have been at the lower end of the projected range of various global warming models since 2005. If the temps remain flat, they may shortly actually begin to fall below projections, i.e. the global warming forecasts are not close to the reality of the cooler temperatures found on earth today.

The Economist article proposes several theories of why this gap between expect climate behavior is different than actual climate behavioral but basically concludes: we really do not know what is going on climate-wise.

10) As a follow up to the Economist article findings, consider what David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation notes: “The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations. If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change.”

Uh-oh. Forecasts not matching reality. Could it be the forecast methodology and assumptions are wrong and are not matching up to the scientific reality because man made global warming does not exist?

11) On February 18, 2013, the Space and Science Research Center (SSCR), located in Orlando, Florida, issued is annual Global Climate Status Report for 2013. According to this organization’s website, the Mission of the SSRC is “to provide an independent un-biased resource for governments, media, corporations, and the people on important areas of scientific research, in particular the cause and effects of climate change, and to serve as an objective resource for the planning and analysis of the next climate change - predicted to be one of decades of record cold weather.”

What? A climate research group of scientists is predicting a coming a global COOLING period ahead, not global warming???? How can that be, Al Gore said that ALL climate scientists agreed that global warming was an oncoming issue? How dare the SSCR differ from Al!

I do not know anything about the SSRC. For all I know, they could be a front for the oil and coal industries and their research is pure propaganda. However, they apparently do deserve a hearing, a peer scientific review of their findings to either verify or refute their findings and conclusions. That is what science is all about. Because, if they are right, and a global cooling/ice age is about to hit us, that is a whole different set of problems and agendas vs. global warming. 

12) Forbes magazine reported on a recent survey of over 1,000 geoscientists and engineers regarding global warming. The survey was done by peer-reviewed Organization Studies. 

The bottom line results found that only 36% of those scientists surveyed agree with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that human activity is causing a serious global warming problem. A majority of scientists in the survey believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem. 

The article goes into detail defending the results and comparing the findings to assertions of global warming advocates who, rather debunking these findings with science, seem more content to attack the integrity of the survey and those who participated in it.

13) The United Kingdom’s Daily Mail newspaper reported in an October 13, 2012 article on the latest worldwide temperature readings and research:

• The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released in early October, 2012. 
• The temperature readings and findings come from over 3,000 measuring points, on land and sea, around the world. 
• The latest measurements reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures. 
• This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. 
• Before that, world temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years. 
• Since 1880, the first time reliable temperature statistics have been kept, the average world temperatures are up only .75 degree Celsius. 

Judith Curry, who is the head of the climate science department at Georgia Tech university, said it was clear that the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’. Is she right? I do not know but she is a scientist whose view is worthy of considering, especially based on the non-warming of the earth over the past 15 years.

14) Last fall, Hurricane Sandy devastated the Middle Atlantic states and caused widespread destruction with high winds and flooding. On cue, before the death and destruction had been totaled, Al Gore was out and accusing those of us who had our doubts about global warming to shut up because Hurricane Sandy, one storm, proved global warming or climate change. However, he failed to mention the following realities: 

• In September of 1938, a hurricane grew to become a huge Category 5 hurricane before making landfall as a Category 3 hurricane, obviously a huge storm, larger in ferocity than Hurricane Sandy’s Category 2 status. 
• The hurricane glanced by NYC and hit land on Long Island on September 21. 
• The hurricane was estimated to have killed between 682 and 800 people, more than Hurricane Sandy is expected to have killed despite higher population density than Long Island in 1938. 
• The 1938 storm damaged or destroyed over 57,000 homes and caused property losses estimated at $306 million ($4.7 billion in 2012). 
• As late as 1951, damaged trees and buildings were still seen in the affected areas. 
• According to Wikipedia, this 1938 storm “remains the most powerful, costliest and deadliest hurricane in recent New England history, eclipsed in landfall intensity perhaps only by the Great Colonial Hurricane of 1635, 377 years before Hurricane Sandy." 
• The Great September Gale of 1815 which hit New York City directly as a Category 3 hurricane, caused extensive damage and created an inlet that separated the Long Island resort towns of the Rockaways and Long Beach into two separate barrier islands. 
• The 1821 Category 4 storm made four separate landfalls in Virginia, New Jersey, New York, and southern New England, created the highest recorded storm surge in Manhattan of nearly 13 feet and severely impacted the farming regions of Long Island and southern New England. 
• The 1869 Saxby Gale affected areas in Northern New England, decimating the Maine coastline and the Canadian Outer Banks. It was the last major hurricane to affect New England until the 1938 storm. 
• The 1893 New York hurricane, a Category 2 storm, directly hit the city itself, causing a great storm surge that pummeled the coastline, completely removing the Long Island resort town of Hog Island. 

Thus, to think that one storm proves man made global warming is ludicrous and certainly not scientific reasoning or research. Stronger storms over the past few centuries, before global warming could have even been considered, have come and gone with the resultant damage and loss of life. 

15) According to an article in Salon.com that was summarized in the September 28, 2013 issue of The Week magazine, carbon dioxide global warming gases in the U.S. are at their lowest point in 20 years, down 14% from their peak in 2007 as a result of fracking and the expanded use of natural gas, which is less damaging to the environment than coal and oil. This reduction is resulting in 500 megatons worth of emissions not going into the air, which is twice the amount of positive impact than what the original Kyoto agreement had on every other country in the world. 

16) An article from the Washington Post that was summarized in the March 1, 2013 issue of The Week reported similar numbers when it claimed that U.S. carbon emissions had fallen 13% relative to 2005 levels with a large part of that due to the increase use of natural gas and wind power. 

17) A Reason magazine article that was summarized in the January 18, 2013 issue of The Week magazine reported that U.S. power plant emissions were down 12% from their peak in 2007 even though the economy is larger than it was six years ago, mainly due to the wider use of natural gas. 

18) And finally, a Business Week graph in the January 7, 2013 issue of Business Week claimed that the demand and use of coal is up in every region of the world except the United States, with coal energy production almost catching up to oil energy production, not a good thing if you believe in global warming. 

The continual preaching and whining by Gore and others like himself get really tiring over time. To accuse folks like myself, global warming doubters, is an insult to our beliefs and trust in science. We believe that unbiased scientific research and sane and rational approaches to a problem are the correct way to go, not the pop science and sensationalism that Gore and others scream from the roof tops without looking at ALL of the research

So please, believers of global warming, or climate change if you prefer, a little sensitivity to those of us that feel, based on scientific processes and violation of scientific processes, that there is a valid scientific reason to doubt man made global warming and climate change. Yelling at us and calling us ignorant is no way to arrive at a conclusive consensus of what is going on in the environment and what to do about it. 

Besides, based on the 18 points we have made above and yesterday, there is plenty of scientific research and analyses to prove that if anything, we have as much science and proof that man made global warming and climate change DO NOT exist, despite Al Gore’s rantings. 

Polar ice packs are growing, temperatures are flat, the earth has been hotter in its past than today, some science is indicating global cooling, the premier scientific lab in the world (CERN) says no to global warming, and anyway, the U.S. has done an outstanding job, without government and political class help, in reducing the nation’s carbon footprint, something everyone should be happy with. 

In the next two days, we will review further proof that the global warming, climate change hysteria needs to chill as we review the latest research and science which occurred after we reported on the 18 points we just made. After that, we will propose an approach that makes for a cleaner world and handles global warming regardless of whether it is a myth or a reality.

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

I Am A Global Warming Doubter and Believer In Science, Part 1 Update: I Believe CERN Before I Believe Al Gore

Today begins a multiple part series on “global warming,” or as the new brand campaign goes, “climate change.” Having been unable to prove that global warming definitively exists, those in support of global warming have expanded their definition of environmental disaster into a broader, more murky concept called climate change. Their purpose, of course, is to prove that mankind is perverting nature and causing widespread environmental damage, actions that require massive government and political class intrusion into our lives and our freedoms. 

Those of us that have expressed our doubts about global warming have been the target of childish and brutal slurs by those that believe in the global warming process. Al Gore, the most ardent global warming supporter, has been the most vocal and disgusting taunter of those that have their doubts. We will review his latest slurs in a few days but constantly yelling at someone who does have quite a bit of science on their side in an effort to convince them of your point of view is stupid and fruitless.

Today and tomorrow we will review some summary findings from previous posts that we have done in this blog under the theme, “I am a global warming doubter but a believer in science.” See, those that doubt the many global warming theories are often accused of being blind to reality and not believing in the “science” of global warming. 

We must be ignorant dunces not to believe what Al Gore states. These previous posts debunk that fallacy by reviewing a slew of scientific findings and research from credible scientific sources that cast many a doubt on global warming, now climate change, hysteria.

The detailed original posts from “I am a global warming doubter but believer in science” can be accessed at:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/i-am-global-warming-doubter-and.html

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/10/i-am-global-warming-doubter-nd.html

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming+doubter

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming+doubter

The following is a summary of the detailed findings that can be read at these links, a summary which we will complete tomorrow. After these two days of summary, we will look at the latest scientific findings and research that further support our position that you can be a believer and devotee of science but still have serious doubts of anything Al Gore states.

1) A climate study published in the journal, Nature, in the summer of 2012 seemed to debunk previous claims that earth’s temperatures in recent decades are in any way historic. The research study was done by Professor Dr. Jan Esper at the Institute of Geography at Johannes Gutenberg University. 

He used tree-ring density measurements from ancient pine trees native to Finnish Lapland to produce a climate reconstruction reaching back to 138 BC. He found that the earth’s climate was much hotter on this planet during Roman times than previously believed, long before man was driving cars around and throwing carbon into the atmosphere.

According to the article, his researchers were able to precisely demonstrate that the long-term trend over the past two millennia has been towards climatic cooling. According to Dr. Esper: "We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low. Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today's climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods." 

A novel scientific approach, based on scientific data and measurement that casts some serious doubt on the assertion that we are in a unique period of man made global warming.

2) The data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), as reported in several sources including the website Real Science:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/sea-ice-sets-all-time-record-high/ 

indicate that the Antarctic ice cap has never been larger. If global warming is occurring, and the Antarctic ice cap is many times larger than the Arctic ice cap, why is the southern hemisphere ice cap bigger than ever? I have no idea, I am not an expert on these things, but it seems a reasonable question to ask and try to answer in light of what the global warming alarmists are trying to tell us.

In fact, as we will review in a couple of days when we review the latest global warming findings, the Artic ice cap grew tremendously in the past year, making it larger and more expansive than it is been in quite a while. Is global warming, climate change causing more ice to form in the Arctic?

3) On March 28, 2012, a joint letter signed by 49 former NASA engineers, astronauts, and scientists was sent to upper management personnel at NASA, accusing NASA of short circuiting the scientific process by presupposing certain facts and theories that support the man made global warming theory without a sound basis for doing so.

The attached signatures of the 49 people included their years of NASA service and included veterans with over thirty and forty years of service. Now, none of these 49 appeared to be experts in climate studies. However, most of them appear to be experts in scientific methods, methods that they felt were not being properly used or not being used at all to support the man made global warming theory. They are like myself, believers in science but perhaps doubters of the man made global warming theory.

4) According to a recent article in Slate.com written by Bjorn Lomborg:

• In 2012, United States’ carbon emissions, the assumed culprit in man made global warming, dropped to their lowest level in 20 years. 
• The emissions are down 14% from their peak in 2007. The main reason for the drop is not due to government intervention in the marketplace with massive legislation, taxes, and bureaucracy but the simple fact that the growth in natural gas development, mostly via fracking, which has resulted in low cost natural gas availability. 
• High gas availability has led to lower prices and costs for natural gas which has led utilities to increase the use of cleaner burning gas vs. dirtier burning coal, which is about twice as carbon intensive than gas. 
• In total, the U.S. carbon emissions dropped by a whopping 500 megatons a year, about twice the total impact of the infamous Kyoto Protocol on emissions throughout the rest of the world, without any cap and trade laws being passed. 

Looks like we are doing exactly what the global warming advocates want us to do, reducing carbon emissions, but that is happening due to nothing the government is doing but because of scientific and technical breakthroughs in mining energy sources. In fact, I would contend that this great leap in reducing carbon emissions would not have happened if the political class got involved and mucked up the market forces that led to the reduced emissions.

5) Several years ago the Environment Protection Agency suppressed a report from one of its own employees that called into question and raised doubts about the validity of the global warming theory. The author, Alan Carlin, an EPA employee, was told not to release his findings and was also told to discontinue working on climate change issues entirely.

Carlin and his co-authors accused the EPA and other government agencies of ignoring scientific analysis that is casting doubt on global warming and for relying too much on the work of outside organizations that "have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation." Their report also went into some degree of detail which contests the global warming claims of these organizations.

I have no idea if Carlin's accusations and report are accurate and valid. But as someone who believes in the scientific process, the report should have been released and rebutted on a factual, peer reviewed, scientific basis. Instead, he was told by his boss at the EPA, Al McGartland, "Please do not have any direct communications with anyone outside of (our group) on endangerment. There should be no meetings, e-mails, written statements, phone calls, etc." Not very scientific, and very suspicious, when you suppress data, research, and analyses just because it conflicts with your view. That is not science, that is politics.

6) An article in the December 9, 2012 issue of The Week magazine reviewed how a recently released set of illegally hacked emails, taken from the leading global warming science establishments, one in England and one in New Zealand, cast doubt on whether those scientists who believe man made activities are causing global warming are actually being unbiased in their work. 

According to the article, the emails reveal that the people working in these establishments state that their global warming forecasts models are not correctly predicting reality, that they needed to ensure that “inconvenient data are ‘well hidden’ though various tricks.” According to Christopher Caldwell, writing in the Financial Times, after reviewing at least some of the emails, the scientists "openly discuss how to make the threat of climate change seem as urgent as possible and how best to wage a political and PR campaign against their perceived enemies."

It gets very scary, and very suspicious, when scientists admit that their models do not work, their science and data are being manipulated, and they are just as involved in PR campaigns and politics as they are in research. Hardly a scientific approach or mindset.

7) According to an article in the Boston Globe, Ivar Giaever, a Nobel laureate, quit as a fellow of the American Physical Society over the Society's unequivocal position that man made global warming is "incontrovertible" and his personal position that no "scientific assertion is so sacred that it cannot be contested."

As a Nobel laureate, I am assuming that Mr. Giaever is well aware of unbiased scientific research protocols and procedures in order to find the truth. I am also assuming that that the accusations he puts forth against the American Physical Society are based on data, reports, or actions he witnessed and were not made up. If they were, I am also assuming that a reputable paper like the Boston Globe would not have published them.

8) The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) is comprised of some of the top physics scientists in the world. CERN is the organization that is primarily responsible for the development of the World Wide Web and it built the multi billion dollar Large Hadron Collider in Europe. It is affiliated with 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities in 60 countries. I do not think there is any doubt that CERN is the epitome of quality, unbiased scientific research.

In the summer of 2011, CERN scientists conducted global warming experiments where they actually modeled global warming conditions in a lab environment. To do so, they "built a pristinely clean stainless steel chamber that precisely recreated the earth's atmosphere." (Source: European Union Times, September 3, 2011). The experiments they conducted were carried out by 17 European and American institutes and 63 CERN scientists. Their findings were then written up and published in the highly acclaimed scientific publication/journal, Nature.

Their findings and conclusions: the sun's changing cosmic rays and their role in cloud formation, rather than man made carbon  emissions, are responsible for the earth's warming temperatures. Wow, real scientists working at a prestigious research facility using scientific means concludes that global warming is not caused by anything man is doing.

All of those people who believe that science is a great way to learn, even if it upsets their belief that man is causing global warming, should have been hungry to learn about this new, scientifically derived knowledge. However, I could not find mention of these findings in any main stream media. Al Gore has not embraced this new scientific information. The EPA has not announced it is reconsidering its position its position on global warming, given this new scientific information and data.

In fact, the follow up controversy to these findings is the belief of some of the scientists involved that the Director General of CERN, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, was trying to suppress the findings, wanting "the results to be presented clearly, but not to interpret them." 

But isn't that what trained scientists do, develop experiments and interpret results? Is this another case of suppressing information and findings that are not coherent with man made global warming side? If so, isn't this a misuse of science, scientific principles, and scientific integrity? 

CERN proves there is great validity to the fact that man made global warming is potentially a myth. Global warming advocates misuse scientific principles and fail to admit when their models are wrong. The U.S. Federal government represses the scientific principle of peer review when it suppresses taxpayer funded work from its own employees.

This completes the first half of our reviewing previous scientific work that proves you can be a global warming doubter and still be a firm believer in science. We will finish up the second half of that review tomorrow and then follow with new evidence that proves global warming doubters are not as evil as Al Gore would have you believe.

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