Change is to be Expected

Change is to be Expected

There are many who believe that Algore is a true believer in the Global Warming scenario he is pushing. One wonders if he can be an honest messenger if his film is so thouroughly shot full of lies and exaggerations. Atmospheric physicist S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service, a climate physicist, reveals the truth about this and other things in his weekly column, The Week That Was. Human Events Online has an article summarizing the latest from Singer. A sample:

The basic flaw in the argument for global warming is its assumption that the Earth's surface temperature is a constant, and that, if it threatens to vary in some inconvenient direction, mankind's puny efforts are capable of maintaining it within a degree or two of its present level.

The truth is that the Earth's temperature is always changing to some extent, up or down. Within historic memory, the canals of Venice froze solid during the medieval Little Ice Age, and Greenland was verdant enough, during a warm spell, to earn its (currently) wildly inappropriate name. Over longer geological periods, the Arctic has sported palm trees (no polar bears then!) and the latitude of Connecticut was under a mile-thick layer of ice. Just now, according to Dr. Singer, we are seeing a warming trend of about one-tenth of a degree centigrade per decade, or roughly a degree per century.

There is nothing we can do about this, and no reason why we should try -- let alone spend hundreds of billions of dollars trifling with titanic forces we can't even comprehend.

Read the whole thing. After that, Singer's site has the details. If you want sources to refute Algore's new propaganda film promoting the Global Warming hoax, it is all there.

Inconvenient Truth Inconvenient TruthAlgore is on a mission - a mission of propaganda and self-aggrandisement. As quoted in Canada Free Press:Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. [snip]Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."A lot of good information there, a pithy retread of some reasons to believe that all the answers are not in, and the world might just survive, even without Algore as president.

Inconvenient Truth

Algore is on a mission - a mission of propaganda and self-aggrandisement. As quoted in Canada Free Press:

Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?

No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
[snip]
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

A lot of good information there, a pithy retread of some reasons to believe that all the answers are not in, and the world might just survive, even without Algore as president.

Bush Upbeat

Bush Upbeat

President Bush just got back from a lightning strike into Baghdad, and he emerged in one of those moments of clarity that he has from time to time. He was quotable and confident. He said:

"If we stand down too soon, it won't enable us to achieve our objectives," the president said.

He said the withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces would depend on how well the Iraqi people accept al-Maliki's new unity government.

Bush said enough American forces would remain in Iraq "for the government to succeed."

Pulling out too soon "will make the world a more dangerous place. It's bad policy," Bush said.

"My message to the enemy is, don't count on us leaving before we succeed," Bush said.

As to war critics, Bush said, "my message to the critics is, we listen very carefully, and we adjust when needed to adjust."

These moments of eloquence are all too rare from him. Expect his poll numbers to rise.

UPDATE: The Washington Post has more quotes.

A Small But Significant Victory A Small But Significant VictoryLast night the terror leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi was killed by American action, along with his "spiritual leader."Many observers, including President Bush, downplayed the significance of the action. Yet the importance of the death of this man and much of his staff cannot be underestimated. This was an especially effective leader, and the director of a strategy of quasi-random killing. Without the head, the organization he built will be crippled, at least for a time. Of course, Wretchard at Belmost Club has much more.

A Small But Significant Victory

Last night the terror leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi was killed by American action, along with his "spiritual leader."

Many observers, including President Bush, downplayed the significance of the action. Yet the importance of the death of this man and much of his staff cannot be underestimated. This was an especially effective leader, and the director of a strategy of quasi-random killing. Without the head, the organization he built will be crippled, at least for a time. Of course, Wretchard at Belmost Club has much more.

Happy Food

Happy Food

There are many people whose view of reality is so estranged from common sense that they would (at least in their fantasy world) create a society where everyone is healthy, wealthy, and wise. They can only posit such a world if they ignore the fact that such a life is an attainment that is only, and can only, be available to an elite portion of the population. Even if energy could be produced cheaply enough that material wealth was available to everyone, there would be those who would make different choices than your elitist utopian tenured professor.

Such a view has been espoused by University of California at Berkeley journalism professor Michael Pollan, who has argued in the New York Times Sunday Magazine (Note: Link will only work for elite readers, who pay tribute to The New York Times Online) that it would be anathema to the organic foods movement for such victuals to be affordable to the common man, i.e. available from Wal-Mart.

A hilarious sendup of Pollan's essay appears in today's TCS daily, and is available for the price of a click to anyone, us regular people as well as Pollan's beloved BoBos (otherwise known as Granola people with money). If you want a good laugh, and have the time, try the link to Pollan's article, as it will be free for a few more days (and thereafter might just be available through oversight) but for an even better laugh read Joyner's piece in TCS Daily. It's much funnier. Try this:

The perfect should not be allowed to become the enemy of the good. In an ideal world, local farmers would produce delicious foods grown without any harm to the environment at prices we could all afford while simultaneously making an excellent living. The livestock would all live happy lives, singing their little animal songs, dying a natural death and yet remaining tender and tasty. We would then get together and cook them over our campfires which produce no smoke, sing our little campsongs, and eat our meals in perfect harmony.

That world, unfortunately, does not exist.

At least Joyner is trying to be funny. Uncaring elitists like Pollan are not really funny. They are pathetic, and dangerous.

Are They Even Immigrants?

Are They Even Immigrants?

We are a nation of immigrants. A "melting pot." Every one of us, including those who consider themselves and their ancestors indigenous, immigrated here from somewhere else. Anti-immigrant or nativist tendencies are therefore rare. But. There must be a balance between the needs of those who have made their lives here and those who want to come here. We can divide that latter group in two. We will call the first part immigrants. The other part, for lack of a better word, are aliens. What is the difference?

An immigrant is a person who wants to make a better life in a new country. An alien wants a better life, and wants to use our country to do it. It is easy to tell the difference. An immigrant is proud of America, learns the language, follows the rules. An alien flies the flag of a foreign power, sends money back to his homeland, and waits for any opportunity to go back. To visit. For once he gets here, he often wants to stay.

That is the situation as it is today. Immigrants face a draconian set of laws and regulations - obstacles set up precisely because We the People value citizenship so highly, and do not allow it to be given to others lightly. In short, we make immigrants prove themselves worthy, before we bestow all the blessings of liberty upon them.

Most Americans have no idea how difficult a course it is that we have placed in the immigrant's path. Draconian is not too strong a word for it. For the penalty for failing to do something required, or missing a deadline, by even a single day, is expulsion, often forever. For minor infracions, up to a decade. If they intend to become citizens, and most immigrants do, they must learn the language, and our history. A new citizen knows more American history than most native born High School graduates. We place time limits and deadlines upon them, and if they fail to perform up to standards, they are out. Some immigrants become aliens when this happens, but most of them do their utmost to qualify. They are, after all, immigrants, and their fondest wish is to become Americans.

It is an almost uniquely American phenomenon, but an immigrant can become an American. One can not go to France and become French, nor to Italy and become Italian. nor to India, and become Indian. These, and most other countries have so-called second generation immigrants, with nominal citizenship, even voting rights, but significant barriers remaining to what we call naturalization. It takes several generations before an immigrant can become Mexican. But an immigrant to the United States of America can come here, and within ten years can become an American. A citizen with all the rights and responsibilities of any other American. Maybe with an accent, but an American nonetheless.

So we do not just confer upon immigrants a legalistic protection scheme, but we welcome them into our family. We therefore, quite properly, have certain requirements before we do so. We require, for instance, that immigrants not be common criminals in their previous life. We will not allow those with contaigious disease to immigrate. We expel those who violate our laws. Other than the President and the Senate, the vast majority of Americans likes these things the way they are.

If we can agree that the one million or less who are newly arriving immigrants each year are not enough, then, and only then, we should increase the various programs that allow them entry. But aliens? Illegal aliens? First thing, and the consensus exists for this right now, close the border. Next, and this is more tricky, we need to get control of those who come here legally, and overstay their vises. Official estimates puts the number of these at as much as half of our illegal alien problem. Then we must stop the ease with which aliens can get lawful employment. Once we have done these things, the flow of new aliens will slow down, and we can decide what to do with those who have slipped between the cracks. It is entirely reasonable to stop the bleeding before beginning the surgery. Senate S.2611 would attempt to do both. We can not. We must not. Immigrants follow the laws, and pay their taxes. Aliens do neither. We must treat them differently. We need immigrants. Aliens, we do not.