About Me

Name: BLOGASSAULT
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Those Evil Oil Companies

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 6:46:26 PM
   It is funny when an organizations whole purpose for exsistance is being undermined on a regular basis in the news, and yet they go on...ignoring it. They keep printing stories as if nothing has changed. Like this one for instance. It's a story about how Exxon oil company is making money in a global market economy selling something everybody wants and needs. How they are undermining the global warming industry, and how evil all that is.
 
Exxon is behind one of the most infamous environmental catastrophes of our time, it makes more gross income than most nation's entire GDPs, it does business with nations with unstable governments that are often hostile to the US, and, worst of all, it has done everything in its power to push the misinformation campaign designed to discredit both climate science and the efforts to keep the earth's temperatures from rising to dangerous levels. And according to recent reports, its still up to its old tricks.
 
   Let's just look at a couple of things here.
 
   Okay, the Exxon Valdez was a terrible event, nobody questions that. But that was a long time ago and they spend billions of dollars in cleanup and litigation because of a captain who was drunk. That doesn't excuse them, but it is far from the worst spill that has ever happened. Secondly, the amount of money they make is based on the price of a barrel of oil set by the markets. Supply and demand is setting the price. Yet, because of those large profits, anyone who owns stock in them is making money as well. It is the american way, of course, to own stock in Exxon and reap some of the benefit. As far as doing business with unstable governments, well, what choice have we given them? We won't let them drill here, either on or offshore.
 
   So, what has any of that got to do with the price of tea in China?
 
   Oh yeah, they have to demonize the oil industry along with telling the story about how they give money to evil conservative think tanks. And remember, these think tanks are working with them to disprove global warming.
 
A report in the Independent outlines how the oil giant is still funneling money through various conservative think tanks and organizations in order to propagate the myth that the science behind human-caused climate change is "unsettled."
 
   And right there is the kicker: climate change is "unsettled". In there mind the arguement over global warming is over. But have these folks been reading the news recently? The leaked emails from the CRU, or the massing of evidence against the IPCC's fourth assessment regarding the non-peer reviewed science and the phony data within it? Do they read any of this, or do they just dismiss it out of hand? I think the answer is obvious.
 
   Clearly it is the same-old-same-old over at Treehugger.
   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Michael Mann's Review From Penn State

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 5:48:32 PM
   Here is an update from Wattsupwiththat on the investigation into Michael Mann and the CRU email scandal.

Excerpts:

“It is clear to those who have followed the media and blogs over the last two months that there are two distinct and deeply polarized points of view that have emerged on this matter. One side views the emails as evidence of a clear cut violation of the public trust and seeks severe penalties for Dr. Mann and his colleagues. The other side sees these as nothing more than the private discussions of scientists engaged in a hotly debated topic of enormous social impact.

We are aware that some may seek to use the debate over Dr. Mann’s research conduct and that of his colleagues as a proxy for the larger and more substantive debate over the science of anthropogenic global warming and its societal (political and economic) ramifications. We have kept the two debates separate by only considering Dr. Mann’s conduct.”

“Decision 4. Given that information emerged in the form of the emails purloined from CRU in November 2009, which have raised questions in the public’s mind about Dr. Mann’s conduct of his research activity, given that this may be undermining confidence in his findings as a scientist, and given that it may be undermining public trust in science in general and climate science specifically, the inquiry committee believes an investigatory committee of faculty peers from diverse fields should be constituted under RA-10 to further consider this allegation.

    I will be expecting a "nothing to see here" moment from Penn State when they finish there review of this matter. Professors don't get into trouble: they get tenured.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Minnesota Wind Turbines Frozen

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 5:17:25 PM
   By the time they get to working for the three months out of the year it is not frozen there, these wind turbines might pay for themselves over a period of 285 years. They link to a Star Tribune article that is quite favorable to the wind turbines.

The Startribune has a good article today about the windmills that aren't working because of the cold weather but they put a very positive spin on the whole thing.

The article mentions the wind turbines should start to work in about 2 months, well duh!! It also mentions another solution could be to run electric heaters to warm up the fluid.

Am I the only one who sees the irony here?

First, in 2 months it will be warmer, hopefully.

Second, you would need another electrical source for the electric heaters. Once the windmill starts turning, then hopefully it would generate enough power to run the heaters to warm the fluid so it could turn if it was windy enough so it could produce...
 
   Brilliant...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Happy Birthday Boy Scouts!

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 4:26:14 PM
   Today is the Boy Scouts of America's 100 birthday. Conratulations!
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Green Groups Don't Like Palin Much Either

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 11:52:39 AM
   Ran across this story from the ClimateProgress. They pick on Sarah Palin because she made a note on her hand. Then they go on to explain why her blaming Obama for generational theft is more liinked to conservatives than to Obama.  

Seriously.

The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy — that would be generational theft.

The Iraq war and its trillion dollar liability, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Veteran’s costs for decades to come, all “paid for” with money borrowed from our children — that would be generational theft.
 
   The whole point of the Tea Party movement is less government and less debt. They are not fans of G.W. Bush bailouts and overspending. But here is a graph I have posted before that shows just what generational theft really means:
 
wapoobamabudget1
 
   Bush started us down the debt road, but Obama has quadrupled it...in ONE YEAR. Let's be clear here, Bush did what he thought needed to be done, and so has Obama. So which is more complicite, according to the graph?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

IPCC's Credibility Under Fire...Again

Posted by BLOGASSAULT on Monday, February 08, 2010 10:53:49 AM
   First it was the rain forest screw-up, then came the Himalayan Glacier business, now we have another slight error. (Via Instapundit)
 
 A report in Sunday’s London Times highlights new humiliations for the IPCC.

The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.

There is however one teensy-weensy little problem.  As Professor Chris Field, the lead author of the IPCC’s climate impact team has now told reporters that he can find “no evidence” to support the claim in the IPCC’s 2007 report.
 
   How much more of this can the IPCC take before they come out and retract the whole fourth assessment, and admit they haven't a clue.
Obviously, you wouldn't want to hold your breath, because as Mark Steyn points out, it is still the same old business in the MSM's.
 
Like all the poodles of the environmental beat, Margot O'Neill repeats those magic words "peer review" every couple of paragraphs like a talisman to ward off evil deniers. But, in the course of invoking the phrase "peer review," she never bothers to look at whether the IPCC actually does it. By contrast, without benefit of the resources of a national TV news operation plus salary and benefits, lone blogger Donna Laframboise did a couple of text searches on the IPCC report and discovered multiple predictions of doom — on Himalayan glacier melt and much else — resting not on peer-reviewed science but merely on activist groups such as the World Wildlife Fund and Greenpeace.
 
   Investigative reporting in big media is undeniably missing. But it is being revealed in new media; blogs and other internet based journalism. The days of NBC, CBS, ABC and others are numbered and the new media is taking control. It is exciting! But, as with the O'Keefe story, you have got to be smart. MSM stil has some power, and they won't go down without a fight.
   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »