About Me

Name: Average Voter
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Eureka Alert!

Posted by Average Voter on Monday, August 31, 2009 12:43:04 PM
   Here is your Eureka Alert! for today. If you eat less red meat, you can prevent cancer, heart attacks, and global warming!
And that is not all!

Cardiovascular disease and cancer are two human diseases caused by similar factors influencing climate change. Others are the infectious disease influenza and salmonella, which are also related to animal elevation (zoonoses). Further examples not specifically related to agriculture, are respiratory diseases resulting from the burning of fossil and other fuels for transport and heating.

A different group of diseases cannot be said to share the causes of global warming. Instead they are caused by, or exacerbated by global warming. Examples are thermal stress, accidental and intentional injuries, and malnutrition or famine, all of which are expected to occur more frequently as the planet warms up and the climate becomes less stable. Health care systems all over the world will have to adapt to these changes.
 
   Accidental or intentional injuries are made worse by global warming? How do they come up with this stuff?
 
Human disease and global warming are therefore related in several ways, and the World Health Organization (WHO) as well as national medical associations, have adopted policies to take these interrelationships into account.
 
   The real problem is that this is becoming common practice. It's like the six dgrees from Kevin Bacon theory. Everything is linked to global warming in some way, shape or form; sometimes in less than six degrees. 
 
   All of this reminds me of the old 1/2 hour news hour show that FOX had on for a very short stint. This was a good one:
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

High School Hyginx

Posted by Average Voter on Sunday, August 30, 2009 1:00:20 PM
   Here is why we are losing the battle with our youth. They proponents of global warming, health care and a host of other overly hyped topics is they take it directly to the public schools. Here are two examples:
 
Fresh off a stint on "The Colbert Report," author and educator Bill McKibben arrived at Edina High School to talk about global warming Tuesday, Aug. 18.

McKibben said scientists know what needs to be done to reduce the effects of global warming. The question is whether people can put those ideas into practice fast enough to reduce its spread.

"We may have waited too long to get started, but maybe not," he said.

McKibben joined arctic explorer and Richfield native Will Steger for an Edina Dialogue event entitled "Our Clean Energy Future." The Edina Community Foundation, the Edina Environment and Energy Commission and other groups put the event together when they found out McKibben would be in town for the Summer Institute for Climate Change Education. The summer institute event provides high school teachers with tips and tools on how to teach about climate change.
 

Denver –  August 29 2009 – The Obama administration has sent out Organizing for America – the successor organization of Obama for America, which was Obama’s campaign organization, to drum up support for his unpopular Obamacare initiative. The coast to coast bus tour arrived in Denver Friday.

Shockingly, opponents to Obamacare are being bullied, and consent manufactured by the White House and Obama activists. Although the White House denies their single payer goals, that seemed to be the main message at the rally in Denver, where the message was carefully controlled. I arrived early at North High School for Friday’s, Organizing for America rally in Denver. OFA community organizers were hard at work. 
   Even if they are not talking directly to the kids they do all there work on school grounds. Why is that?
 
   Oh, right! i almost forgot. It's always about the children!
 
 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Taking Global Warming to Court

Posted by Average Voter on Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:25:07 AM
   Here is a interesting story a freind emailed me from the L.A. Times. It seems the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to take the EPA to court to determine if man is warming the planet. It would be interesting, but probably won't happen.
 
"It would be evolution versus creationism," said William Kovacs, the chamber's senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. "It would be the science of climate change on trial."

The goal of the chamber, which represents 3 million large and small businesses, is to fend off potential emissions regulations by undercutting the scientific consensus over climate change. If the EPA denies the request, as expected, the chamber plans to take the fight to federal court.

The EPA is having none of it, calling a hearing a "waste of time" and saying that a threatened lawsuit by the chamber would be "frivolous."

   
   It is pretty clear that this will end up going no where. No court is going to take up a case that simply can't be proved or disproved.
 
   Environmentalists, of course, are laughing at the idea of a trial.
 
Environmentalists say the chamber's strategy is an attempt to sow political discord by challenging settled science -- and note that in the famed 1925 Scopes trial, which pitted lawyers Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan in a courtroom battle over a Tennessee science teacher accused of teaching evolution illegally, the scientists won in the end.

The chamber proposal "brings to mind for me the Salem witch trials, based on myth," said Brenda Ekwurzel, a climate scientist for the environmental group Union of Concerned Scientists. "In this case, it would be ignoring decades of publicly accessible evidence."

   Here is the crux of the story...

In the coming weeks, the EPA is set to formally declare that the heat-trapping gases scientists blame for climate change endanger human health, and are thus subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The so-called endangerment finding will be a cornerstone of the Obama administration's plan to set strict new emissions standards on cars and trucks.

   This is why I disagree about the "publicly accessible evidence." This has a lot more to do about politics than science. Obama needs this ruling to help his legislation through congress. Once that happens, his second large democratic activists "payoff" gets set in motion. You can believe that man-made climate change is real, but until it is proven, inacting trillion dollar govenment programs and tax increases on the general public tomake little to no difference on climate seems ridiculous. But hey, that is just me.

    The good thing is, like the health care bill, citizens are seeing these government monstosities for what they are; government takeovers.

   
    
  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Even Europe Is Getting Tired Of Green

Posted by Average Voter on Monday, August 24, 2009 10:57:09 AM
   Germany is pushing hard to get electric cars on the road, but the public is losing interest. 
 
Germany wants to lead the pack when it comes to electric cars.
 
   Germany has moved up a gear in its bid to get viable electric cars off the drawing board and onto the streets. However the government's plan to get a million electric cars running by 2020 sparked more boos than cheers on Thursday, with some commentators complaining the high-profile plan is more about the election than the environment.
 
   They are starting to sound like republicans!?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Envirovegenists

Posted by Average Voter on Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:58:28 AM
   Doing some searching for my last post, I came across this recent posting on GreenPeace's website. It is really nothing more than a whinning plea for Obama too drop everything and focus all his energy on global warming.
 
   What caught my attention was one of the comments...
 
Comment from: Debra [Visitor]
The largest cause of environmental damage on this Earth can be eliminated without any action by politicians - it is in our hands. The industry that is the second largest source of greenhouse gases (greater than all forms of transportation combined) also uses 70% of our water, is the main cause of dead zones in our oceans, and pollutes our rivers. it is the meat industry. Reducing or eliminating meat consumption is the easiest and quickest way to stop global warming.

If you aren't a vegetarian, you can't call yourself an environmentalist.
Permalink 08/17/09 @ 09:15
 
   Wow! Really? So does that mean we don't have to listen to Al Gore any longer? Or Pelosi, or Reid, or all the other climate nutters?
Sounds good to me!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Former GreenPeace Leader Comes Clean

Posted by Average Voter on Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:36:13 AM
 
   The outgoing leader of Greenpeace has admitted his organization’s recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was “a mistake.”  Greenpeace made the claim in a July 15 press release entitled “Urgent Action Needed As Arctic Ice Melts,” which said there will be an ice-free Arctic by 2030 because of global warming.                                                                                                                
  Under close questioning by BBC reporter Stephen Sackur on the “Hardtalk” program, Gerd Leipold, the retiring leader of Greenpeace, said the claim was wrong. 
   “I don’t think it will be melting by 2030. … That may have been a mistake,” he said.
 
 
 
   Global warming activists have always hyped the facts; he even admits as much.
 
Although he admitted Greenpeace had released inaccurate but alarming information, Leipold defended the organization’s practice of “emotionalizing issues” in order to bring the public around to its way of thinking and alter public opinion. 
 
   I would call them scare tactics.
   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What If It's Too Late?

Posted by Average Voter on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 7:31:46 PM
   Some people have bought into the doom and gloom of global warming to the point that they are now worried that we are not spending enough time and money trying to find a way to adapt. Obviously, H.D.S. Greenway has bought it hook-line-and-sinker.
 
The effects of humanity's industry, piggy-backing on a normal warming trend that has been going on since the 19th century, is causing temperatures to climb at an unprecedented rate. On that most of science agrees. But what if the centuries-long build-up of gasses and nature itself have conspired to make this trend irreversible?

Where will we put the island peoples whose nations are inexorably disappearing? What can we invent that will keep crops growing in higher temperatures and less water? What can we plan now that will mitigate — and maybe even prevent — some of the worse horrors that we can now quite accurately predict?
 
   Who's islands have been disappearing? And haven't we already developed crops that are more heat resistant? The private sector has been doing that since we learned how to manipulate plant genes.
 
   The hysteria is mind boggling.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Training Them Early

Posted by Average Voter on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 7:17:06 PM
   Now, it seems, we are willing to take a first year college student out into the tundra to investigate global warming.  A National Science Foundation gave out a $1.6 million grant for 11 students to go to the Siberian Arctic to do some testing of the effects of global warming.
 
   The line I thought amuzing is this...

“We went to Duvannyi Yar along the Kolyma River where the permafrost is thawing and turning the hills into muddy slush, like the mud pots in Yellowstone National Park,” she said. “It’s very surrealistic, with trees clinging on for dear life.”

Chandra said most Russian scientists don’t believe current global warming is caused by humans, “but after visiting that site, there is no doubt the warming is human-induced. The amount of what is natural and what is human-caused still needs to be researched further.”
 
   So, there is "no doubt" it is human induced? How exactly did she come up with that scientific fact? And of course the reporter didn't put anything in the article questioning the statement. "It's perfectly clear, just look at it! Permafrost doesn't melt unless humans do something to make it melt!"
 
   This is an excellent example of why our media is not a news gathering organization any longer. Instead the are a propaganda desseminators. They just write what they hear, they don't test what they hear and wright about it. Some 19 year old nobody decides in her brillant scientific judgment that there is no doubt of human induced global warming and the news article prints it and accepts it. They don't question it, they don't put up another point of view, they just print it.
 
   And the reason why? Because the discussion is over with for them. Some people in Europe with alot of letters after their names said that global warming is real and that the only thing to talk about now is how to get the money to fix it.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Promoting Carbon Taxes

Posted by Average Voter on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:30:42 AM
  The Washington Post put up an editorial today on how the health care reform debat is ruining the cap and trade deal. So the Post has decided that the administration should drop the cap and trade part of the bill and instead institute a carbon tax.

 
   Great idea...put another tax on the back of the general public while the economy is still trying to recover. They even mention that at the beginning of the article: Many are worried about how a new system will be paid for in an economy that has unraveled...
 
   What is wrong with their thinking is that they believe falsly that if they tax the pollutors of carbon they will not pass that on to the customer. It is a fantasy that those on the left believe. Business does not pay tax...period. It will always be passed on through higher prices.
 
   They also mention the fact that the Obama Admisnistration has banked totally on cap and trade:

Dropping cap-and-trade from the Senate bill is considered a non-starter by Mr. Reid and environmental advocates for two reasons. First, a long-stated goal of congressional leaders and the president himself is to have emissions-limiting legislation passed and signed into law in time for international climate talks in Copenhagen in December. Second, there is no Plan B. The leadership has put all of its eggs in the cap-and-trade basket.

    Actually, there is a third part as well. There are alot of people in power who stand to make a lot of money dealing in cap and trade credits. Al Gore himself was questioned on that exact question in this FrontPageMag.com article.
 
   Moreover, Gore hopes to make further big profits by creating financial vehicles that ostensibly promote investment in renewable energy sources – not that he would want anyone to know that.

On April 24, Gore testified before the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee about pending cap-and-trade legislation. Cap-and-trade policies, which Gore supports, enable businesses to purchase credits for exceeding government-mandated limits on carbon-dioxide emissions, thereby avoiding fines.

During the hearings, Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn asked Gore about his involvement with Kleiner Perkins, an environmental venture-capital group that Gore joined as a partner in 2007. Kleiner Perkins, Blackburn said, “invested about a billion dollars in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation that we are discussing here today.

“Is that something that you are personally going to benefit from?” Blackburn asked.

Gore replied: “The transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge.”
   
   Regardless, cap and trade will be money making proposition for many environmentalists and business men all over the country. So, maybe a carbon tax is better. Either way, the american middle class will pay, and someone will get rich because of it.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

I'm Back

Posted by Average Voter on Monday, August 17, 2009 5:00:52 PM
   Seems like I was always trying to get a post in, but simply couldn't find the time. So, I quit trying. I came to the conclusion that I needed to step back and get a better hold on what I was trying to get across in my blog. Climate change is such a tough topic for most people, and trying to convey a written product that can be understood by most of them is even more difficult.
 
   My blog has always concentrated on the somewhat ridiculous side of climate change or global warming or whatever they are calling it now; especially how it is protrayed in the media. That part will not change. What I want to change is the way I present it. I have yet to fiqure out what that presentation will be, but I have a few ideas.
 
   First off, I intend on presenting a better case. I have always been clear that while I don't buy into the global warming hype, I do not believe it has been disproven either. Like so many other topics that wind up on the general publics political radar, climate change is one of the least understood. The political parties use talking points from there given institutes because very few if any could have an intellegent conversation about the facts of climate change. That leads to the next thing...the facts. Because climate change is nothing more than a "theory" in progress, one has to be careful what is portrayed as a fact. If you get the chance to talk to a honest climate scientist (usually one that is not interested in getting into a public arguement to get his name in the paper) you will find that that person is willing to acknowledge that global climate is a very complicated and not fully understood science. They are still learning how things like gamma rays from space to the temperature of the ocean play into the way climate is affected.
 
   Secondly, I will try to include more video. In this age, nearly everything is being recorded. So much of what is said about climate change is on YouTube and other sites that can give you exactly video-bite your looking for. So many great things have been said by those in power who no nothing of what they are talking about. (I wonder if Joe Biden has had anything to say about global warming yet?) It is high time that we see it straight from the horses mouth.
 
   Maybe, one day we will figure it all out. In the meantime, we can always make fun of the ridiculous. And believe me, there is plenty of that out there. Thanks to the internet and the creation of the blog, anyone can post anything about whatever, including global warming. That in itself is a good thing. In China, only the government can do that.
 
   We as citizens of this fine country need to be a little more educated about what we are tralking about. Hopefully my blog can help with that. Most of the hard science I will leave with other more capable blogs, and I will link to them on a regular basis. My job will be to lay it out in a form that is educational and funny at the same time.
 
 Let's Roll!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »