In the article below, the climate research center—an oxymoron these days—was exposed for fudging their numbers, to make sea level elevation appear 20% higher than actual.  The researchers argue that the oceans are getting bigger because of shifting continents, and so they should add to the sea level—since if the continents weren’t moving, the level would be higher.

In other words, the sea levels aren’t increasing as much as they say, but if the continents were not shifting, the levels would be higher—so they will just pretend that they are higher.

Very strange logic.  But what would you expect from climate scientists, who used to argue that the planet was warming, until data showed that it isn’t—so they instead argue that the planet is cooling and warming at the same time, which is why we can’t measure it.

The actions of these ‘researchers’ show why political zealots and science don’t mix.  To lefties, the ends always justify the means—so the research doesn’t really matter, since they already know what the planet needs.  Not to mention that writing grants for ‘climate change’ has become the low-hanging fruit in the quest for funding.

I’ve always said that the lefties have a major problem—that copies of Gore’s movie will eventually be as serious as ‘reefer madness’, as people watch him talk about the countries that will be under water—while standing in the countries in the years that they are supposed to be gone.  I wonder—will there be calls for Al to give back the Nobel Prize?  Maybe he can take Obama’s Peace Prize with him, and drop them both off to save the taxpayers the cost for the trip…

The article:

Is climate change raising sea levels, as Al Gore has argued — or are climate scientists doctoring the data?

The University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters — or about the thickness of a fingernail — every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, sparking criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.

“Gatekeepers of our sea level data are manufacturing a fictitious sea level rise that is not occurring,” said James M. Taylor, a lawyer who focuses on environmental issues for the Heartland Institute.

Steve Nerem, the director of the widely relied-upon research center, told FoxNews.com that his group added the 0.3 millimeters per year to the actual sea level measurements because land masses, still rebounding from the ice age, are rising and increasing the amount of water that oceans can hold.

“We have to account for the fact that the ocean basins are actually getting slightly bigger… water volume is expanding,” he said, a phenomenon they call glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA).

Taylor calls it tomfoolery.

“There really is no reason to do this other than to advance a political agenda,” he said.

Climate scientist John Christy, a professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, said that the amount of water in the ocean and sea level were two different things.

“To me… sea level rise is what’s measured against the actual coast,” he told FoxNews.com. “That’s what tells us the impact of rising oceans.”

Taylor agreed.

“Many global warming alarmists say that vast stretches of coastline are going to be swallowed up by the sea. Well, that means we should be talking about sea level, not about global water volume.”

In e-mails with FoxNews.com, Nerem indicated that he considered “sea level rise” to be the same thing as the amount of water in the ocean.

“If we correct our data to remove [the effect of rising land], it actually does cause the rate of sea level (a.k.a. ocean water volume change) rise to be bigger,” Nerem wrote. The adjustment is trivial, and not worth public attention, he added.

“For the layperson, this correction is a non-issue and certainly not newsworthy… [The] effect is tiny — only 1 inch over 100 years, whereas we expect sea level to rise 2-4 feet.”

But Taylor said that the correction seemed bigger when compared with actual sea level increases.

“We’ve seen only 7 inches of sea level rise in the past century and it hasn’t sped up this century. Compared to that, this would add nearly 20 percent to the sea level rise. That’s not insignificant,” he told FoxNews.com.

From Prison Planet.com Saturday, February 5, 2011 – Lies about Texas not being affected by draconian EPA rules on greenhouse gases. – Deception about clean burning coal-fired plants producing “carbon pollution”. – Spin in denying EPA and Obama administration have publicly stated and openly embarked on mission to destroy coal industry by blocking construction of new power plants. The White House has publicly responded to the controversy surrounding the Obama administration’s agenda to bankrupt the coal industry and its connection to this week’s blackouts across the country, by attempting to deny the link in a rebuttal that amounts to nothing more than a tissue of lies, deception and spin. In a blog that appears on the front page of WhiteHouse.gov, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer begins by claiming that the story came from a “questionable” source and is “unquestionably false,” without even naming the source. Frightened that Americans might actually read the source and make their own minds up based on the facts, Pfeiffer fails to provide a link to our original article that was subsequently picked up by the Drudge Report, Fox News and numerous other media outlets. Pfeiffer then oversimplifies the debate by building a straw man argument based around the premise that “the Obama Administration is somehow responsible for the rolling blackouts in Texas,” before blaming the outages on cold weather. By framing the argument to make out as if we claimed Obama flipped a switch and the lights went out is completely deceptive. Of course the cold weather has shown that the country is vulnerable to blackouts, but that vulnerability is a direct result of the Obama administration’s stated goal to bankrupt the coal industry and its proven track record, through the enforcement of EPA regulations, of blocking power plants from being built that would be able to handle the extra demand. Pfeiffer then claims that the blackouts were a result of power plants experiencing “mechanical failures,” completely ignoring the fact that the blackouts were planned and were made necessary because of a lack of supply to meet increased demand. That’s why Texas had to rely on Mexico to meet its power shortfall, an offer that was subsequently suspended. Pfeiffer then attempts to counter the manifestly provable fact that desperately needed new coal-fired plants are being mothballed under the weight of draconian EPA regulations on CO2 emissions by claiming that Texas isn’t subject to such restrictions. Firstly, Texas supplies power to surrounding states that have been impacted by the new EPA regulations, leaving less energy to meet the demand of those living in the lone star state. Secondly, despite Texas’ best efforts to fight the new Clean Air Act standards, the EPA has aggressively enforced existing regulations, a process that has both delayed and prevented new plants in Texas from being built, such as the Las Brisas Energy Center, which has been the subject of a near three year battle between the EPA and state authorities. Indeed, a federal court ruling last month gave the EPA permission to proceed with greenhouse gas regulation in Texas, temporarily superseding Texas’ non-compliance with the new regulations which came into force on January 2. The White House’s claim that EPA regulations are not currently affecting Texas is a complete fabrication. The wider argument that the EPA is simply trying to implement reasonable measures to prevent “carbon pollution” is also a complete misnomer. Modern day clean burning coal-fired plants go to great lengths to remove all hazardous chemicals before any emissions leave the plant, through the use of sophisticated scrubbers and other techniques, to the point where the only emissions are water vapor and carbon dioxide. Watch the video below for a demonstration of these techniques. There can be no doubt whatsoever that the Obama administration has deliberately pursued a policy of bankrupting the coal industry by means of crippling EPA regulations. Candidate Obama himself explicitly stated this objective during a January 2008 interview. “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted,” he stated. This policy has led not only to new coal plants not being built, but also to existing coal plants being threatened with termination. EPA regulations are forcing power plants out of business across America – leaving the country vulnerable to more enforced blackouts and higher energy prices. – Back in July 2008, a Superior Court judge in Fulton County blocked the construction of a coal plant in Georgia, citing global warming concerns and the need to limit CO2 emissions. – In January 2009, the Obama EPA blocked approval for a coal-fired power plant in South Dakota, claiming the state, “didn’t meet requirements under the Clean Air Act in part of its proposed permit for the plant.” – As Governor of Kansas, Obama’s current Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius slapped a de facto ban on the construction of all new coal-fired plants across the state. – Last month, Senators in Obama’s home state of Illinois blocked the construction of a clean-burning coal gasification and power generating plant. – As a result of the EPA’s recent remand of air permits, Shell Oil announced this week that it has “dropped plans to drill in the Arctic waters of the Beaufort Sea this year and will concentrate,” ensuring more shortages and higher prices for Americans Last month Dayton Daily News reported that, “The power industry nationwide might have to spend more than $80 billion and retire 45,000 megawatts of coal-fired power plants over several years in adjusting operations to meet current and possible new EPA regulations.” The shortage of power plants to meet the demands of Texans and other Americans as cold weather grips the country is down to the EPA holding local utility companies hostage and blocking them from building desperately needed new power plants. Obama’s January greenhouse gas rules restricted the amount of emissions allowable for new power plants, while giving an exemption to General Electric, an intimate financial supporter of his administration. The Obama administration has crippled US infrastructure and its ability to meet the needs of Americans by declaring war on the coal industry. While smaller independent power plant companies are being squeezed out of existence by EPA rules, transnational giants are busy creating artificial scarcity to jack up prices and eliminate their competition. Indeed, we only have to recall how Enron shut down power plants on false pretenses during the 2001 blackouts in California as a ploy to raise prices to understand how the restriction of energy is used as a political and financial tool of oppression. Energy prices continue to skyrocket nationwide while the EPA prepares to shut down more plants, ensuring only higher prices in the years to come. The federal government’s siege against independent power companies’ efforts to build coal-fired plants is part of the unfolding globalist agenda to cripple American infrastructure even as China and Mexico build new power plants at ever accelerating speeds. The fact that the White House is so concerned that this agenda is being exposed that they feel the need to address it with a tissue of lies and deception on the front page of WhiteHouse.gov is a telling indication that the Obama administration is panicking about Americans becoming aware of the move to completely de-industrialize the United States.

From the Washington Times:

Noticeably absent from President Obama’s latest economic-stimulus package are any further attempts to create jobs through “green” energy projects, reflecting a year in which the administration’s original, loudly trumpeted efforts proved largely unfruitful.

The long delays typical with environmentally friendly projects – combined with reports of green stimulus funds being used to create jobs in China and other countries, rather than in the U.S. – appear to have killed the administration’s appetite for pushing green projects as an economic cure.

After months of hype about the potential for green energy to stimulate job growth and lead the economy out of a recession, the results turned out to be disappointing, if not dismal. About $92 billion – more than 11 percent – of Mr. Obama’s original $814 billion of stimulus funds were targeted for renewable energy projects when the measure was pushed through Congress in early 2009.

Even some of the administration’s liberal allies have expressed skepticism over the original stimulus package’s use of green investments as a way to spur quick employment growth at home.

“Spending on renewables is slow to get out of the door. Leaks to foreign companies is an inadequate driver of jobs and growth and may not create a strong exporting industry,” said Samuel Sherraden, an economic analyst at the New America Foundation, a Washington-based progressive think tank.

Only about $20 billion of the allotted funds have been spent – the slowest disbursement rate for any category of stimulus spending. Private analysts are skeptical of White House estimates that the green funding created 190,700 jobs.

The Department of Energy estimated that 82,000 jobs have been created and has acknowledged that as much as 80 percent of some green programs, including $2.3 billion of manufacturing tax credits, went to foreign firms that employed workers primarily in countries including China, South Korea and Spain, rather than in the United States.

Peter Morici, a business professor at the University of Maryland, said much of the green stimulus funding was “squandered.”

“Large grants to build green buildings don’t generate many new jobs, except for a few architects,” he said. “Subsidies for windmills and solar panels created lots of jobs in China,” but few at home.

In one of several embarrassing disclosures for the administration, a report last fall by American University’s Investigative Reporting Workshop found that 11 U.S. wind farms used their grants to purchase 695 out of 982 wind turbines from overseas suppliers.

That report raised alarms in Congress. Leading Democrats insisted that the money be spent at home, but restrictions on the funds proved impossible without the specter of a trade war.

While lawmakers fumed, economists were not surprised that green energy companies used the funds to purchase inexpensive Chinese wind turbines. Renewable-technology firms are under the gun to bring down costs so they can compete with cheaper traditional fuels, such as gas and coal, for electricity customers.

But without restrictions that prohibit the funds from being diverted overseas, Mr. Morici said, any further spending on green energy would only continue to enrich foreign producers. Chinese manufacturers in particular have taken the lead in making renewable-energy components, just as they have come to dominate many other industries because of advantages derived from state subsidies and the country’s abundant pool of cheap labor.

In a trade complaint against China on Thursday, the United Steelworkers union charged that Beijing is trying to corner the market on green jobs by showering billions of dollars of subsidies on domestic producers and discriminating against foreign firms and goods.

With growing proof that green jobs are heading overseas, even administration sympathizers and environmental advocates have largely abandoned the idea of pushing green funding as a way to stimulate the economy.

While he requested no additional stimulus funding for renewable-energy projects this week, Mr. Obama now portrays his green-energy agenda as good for the economy and jobs in the long term, as the government assists the private sector in evolving away from dependence on oil and coal.

“We see a future,” he said in a speech Wednesday in Cleveland, “where we build a homegrown clean-energy industry, because I don’t want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or in Asia. I want to see them made right here in the U.S. of A. by American workers.”

Time magazine recently reported that the White House last year saw the stimulus bill as a vehicle for enacting the president’s ambitious, long-term environmental program, knowing that most of the economic effect would be felt years from now rather than immediately when the economy needed it.

The New America Foundation’s Mr. Sherraden said it was “unwise” of the administration and congressional Democrats “to rely so heavily on the renewable-energy sector to drive the recovery.”

The progressive think tank and other allies urged the administration to refocus its efforts on traditional road and transit projects, which economists say are more likely to provide quick jolts to the jobs market. The administration appears to have followed that advice in advancing a $50 billion program for building roads, transit and rail as the centerpiece of its latest stimulus plan.

“Green-energy projects in the United States are unusually slow to roll out because the industry is small and rife with political and market uncertainty,” Mr. Sherraden said.

Despite the massive infusion of government funding in recent years, renewable technologies have captured only a tiny share of the energy market and remain heavily dependent on government funding to be viable. Because of the need to constantly renew government funding, private investors remain skittish about committing to new projects.

Mr. Sherraden said the problem with job leakage overseas promised only to get worse, because governments in Europe and Japan – which in years past spent lavishly on renewable energy – now are drastically cutting back their green subsidies as they try to pare enormous budget deficits.

With the United States left as the only major developed country still flooding the market with government funding, competition from overseas suppliers promised to be more fierce than ever, Mr. Sherraden said.

“It is impossible to guarantee that clean-energy stimulus is not leaked abroad,” he said. “We have to recognize that we are funding job-creation programs in Germany, Spain, Japan and China.”

Even if the green-energy funding is viewed as a long-term investment to replace dwindling reserves of oil rather than as pure economic stimulus, advocates have greatly exaggerated the benefits, said Kerry Lynch, senior fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.

“For all the hype over wind and solar, the reality is that they contribute very little to our energy supply,” she said, saying that wind accounts for less than 1 percent of total U.S. energy production and solar power for just one-tenth of 1 percent. “Together, they could power the country for all of three days a year.”

I have been too busy lately to do my part to keep readers entertained, and I am sorry for that. There is so much nonsense in the world lately that it is getting more and more difficult deciding where to start! There have been a number of events consistent with the things I have written about on my companion web site ’Warmal Globing’… for example, I write on one of the pages about the way science works, or more importantly the way scientific funding works. As a former scientist and former grant applicant, I know that one must apply for the right things if one is to get funded. The applicant ALWAYS looks at who is funding the grant, and what that agency ‘wants’ to find. Yes, the grants always come with wording like ‘unrestricted funding’, but all scientists know the ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ behind that statement! And sure enough– we recently found that a number of very respected scientists have engaged in ‘unscientific’ behavior by covering up or distoring data, hiding messages that admit to doubts caused by the REAL findings– the findings that they can’t report, for fear of losing the golden goose that is global warming. Just think about it– can you imagine how much money will be lost by so many people, if global warming turns out to be a crock?! And it is a crock, of course. And eventually the truth will come out, because as much as Al Gore wants it to happen, the low-lying areas of the world will not be inundated with the floods– beyond the floods that they have ALWAYS been inundated by.

Which brings up another point that is also on my web site… the global warming zealots get to blame everything on ‘warming’! We recently had a cold spell and nasty snowstorm across the southeast US– in fact, it shut DC down for several days, just as they were getting ready to pass more carbon taxes ‘to stimulate the economy’ (you truly cannot make this stuff up). One of the Kennedy clan had just penned an op-ed about the good old days when it snowed so much more…. suggesting that it snows less now because of ‘global warming’. BTW, even the smart people out there who are idiots about global warming will admit that what they refer to as the current ‘climate change disaster’ has nothing to do with the snow that a Kennedy is writing about– that all of the local phenomena people tend to point to as they nod their heads in reality have nothing to do with ‘climate change’. But as he pens this piece, this massive snowstorm hits. But what does the mainstream media do? They BLAME GLOBAL WARMING FOR THE SNOW!!! They truly get it both ways– because in their odd world, warming causes cooling. Yes, I understand what they are saying- that the contrast in temps and the increased ‘thermal energy’ somehow causes storms that include snow and ice….. but it is not reasonable for them to claim that warming causes less snowstorms (ala Kennedy) and at the same time say that the snow is FROM the warming. And besides– also on my web site there is a copy of the Newsweek article from the 1970′s about the coming disaster of global cooling, and in that article the same scientists who are cited now were saying that the Earth would have increased glaciers and tornados and snowstorms, all from ‘global cooling’.

The other thing that happened just recently was that another leading global warming alarmist announced ‘never mind’, admitting that the Earth’s temp has not changed significantly in over 15 years.  Never mind.  Think about all the money wasted over the last few years, and the raised taxes, the increased government control, the sagging economy, the disastrous election of Democrats–  all over something that doesn’t exist.  Can we sue Al Gore?  Maybe he and Obama can travel to Stockholm together and both give their silly awards back at the same time!  You know what?  They are both so shameless that they would each give a speech about why it is OK flying separately, now that ‘they were right all along that the Earth wasn’t warming’.  And people would actually believe them, and some would credit them for finding out that global warming is a myth.

Another realist’s thoughts on the issue of global warming were sent my way.  Here is the link:  75 reasons to be skeptical of global warming

I used to be quite Left in my thinking.  My views changed midway through the Clinton Presidency when I could no longer overlook the hypocrisy of my position.  People wedded to liberalism avoid the truth like subway-dwellers avoid the glare of bright sunlight, but at some point the light is bright enough to shine through the thickest sunglasses!  I am often surprised at how much hypocrisy the Left can ‘overlook;’ in the Clinton era a liberal needed only a bit of hubris to ignore the media double-standards, but now huge distortions of logic on the level of delusional thought are required in order to maintain the liberal argument!  As I try to understand how an entire country can fall victim to ‘folie a deux’,  I find order by dividing the delusional Left into two groups– the ‘low insight Left’ and ‘high insight Left.’   I will use a practical example to explain the difference.

Obama promised that HIS administration would be much more open than the Bush administration.  He said that all bills winding through Congress toward his desk would be debated and discussed openly on C-span (something that was already happening under Bush, by the way, but that has largely disappeared under the Democratic ownership of the government).  Obama promised there would be no back-door sessions, no private meetings with lobbyists, no kickbacks or bribes, and that every new piece of legislation would be published for at least 5 days on the internet for all citizens with a computer to see and review.  He promised to seek bipartisanship and to listen to the ‘middle’ of the country.  Of course anyone with even half a mind knows what has INSTEAD happened  (and if you don’t already know all of this, you must have quite a blind spot!!).  We can look at the ‘stimulus’ bill– a piece of legislation that spent more money than 99% of the bills that ever pass through the legislature.  Obama sent it to Congress demanding passage, without allowing time for even Congress or the Senate to review the bill– let alone the American people!  There was no bipartisanship, and no allowing for debate.  Anyone from private industry who stood in the way was called out publicly by the President in a way that I have not witnessed during my 50 years—and in a way I hope I never have to see again.  Obama literally provoked death threats against bankers and company executives—openly, without complaint by the media!  Given the way it was thrown together, it is not surprising that studies of the ‘Stimulus’ Bill show that most of the money goes to districts where Democrats hold power.  Even worse, more money goes to wealthy Congressional districts than to poor districts!  Secret meetings with lobbyists were not disclosed, and that the press did not asked about them.  The process was more secretive than ever before– forget ‘more open!’  The result was a mess;  pay-offs to liberal groups and spending that occurs years after the recession ends, rather than targeted stimulus.   And not surprisingly we have had no job creation beyond what happens after every recession– perhaps even lower job production from the fear of higher taxes for businesses instilled by Obama spending a trillion extra dollars.  It is one thing to avoid trimming government too far during a recession, but another thing to waste of massive sums of money, resulting in deficits four times higher than the worst deficits under Bush (Obama also promised to trim the ‘immoral’ Bush deficits, by the way). 

The low-insight Left can be divided again into ‘true believers’ and ‘simple idiots.’  The true believers WANT to tell the truth, and really mean it when they say they want things to be truthful and open– but they believe so strongly in their liberal principles that things that aren’t liberal causes don’t ‘count’.  They don’t consider it lying; they think that keeping our own money instead of paying it to the government is a selfish, silly idea– and so fair and open debate doesn’t need to include that opinion.  Similarly, they believe that the Earth is going to be destroyed, so the climate debate doesn’t need to be ‘fair’– in fact, they think that evil businesses fight dirty, so they CAN’T be fair in return– that NO serious, ‘good’ person would even EXPECT fairness when dealing with evil business people.  The minds of true believers simply dismiss opinions that differ from what THEY believe to be true, but still consider themselves open, honest and fair, even if every counter opinion is suppressed—because the counter opinions are not ‘valid’ enough to count.  If a respected scientist makes a discovery that causes his/her opinion to change to the counter-argument, the true believer actually believes that the person was paid off or became mentally ill– and so the ideas don’t deserve ‘fair and open’ expression.  The other half of the low-insight group– the idiots– believe whatever they hear without question, as long as the messenger fits a certain image.  Obama was the perfect messenger to appeal to this group, and they continue to buy into him hook, line, and sinker.  Emphasis on sinker.

The high-insight Left can also be further divided into the ‘manipulators for a cause’ and the power-hungry egomaniacs.  Rahm Emanuel is probably in the first group, and I would put some of Hollywood into this category— at least the few Hollywood and media types who have a decent education.  These people know they are being hypocritical, but justify their hypocrisy by believing that the ends justify the means.  Tom Daschl’s book about reforming health care displays this type of thinking very clearly.  The reform is needed, so lying, cheating, breaking promises, and double-speak are all OK as long as they lead toward the correct goal.  They cannot trust leaving such complicated decisions in the hands of regular people, because they consider regular people to be a bunch of fools that they push this way and that way around election time.  Their contempt for average Americans was obvious during the TEA Parties, when Nancy Pelosi literally cried at the thought of meeting up with those unwashed masses.  The insight of this group of liberals is somewhat limited, as they cannot see the self-righteousness that their position requires.  They see people as good or bad depending only on party affiliations.  When someone from the Right gets into trouble, these liberals scream from rooftops about hypocrisy.  But when someone on the Left does something far worse, the transgression is a ‘fluke’– devoid of any meaning or importance.  Packwood, to these liberals, was a ‘serial groper’.  Clinton on the other hand was ‘victimized by a right-wing conspiracy’.  Go figure!

Finally, there are the high-insight liberals who don’t even care about the cause; they only care about the power that the cause can bring.  We know that Obama is in this group because of his efforts to distort the meaning of words and phrases to try to look good, without any effort to really DO good.  Measures to prevent privacy while voting about unions are called ‘Free Choice Acts.’  Pay-offs for favors from unions are called ‘stimulus acts.’  Government takeover of health care is called ‘insurance reform’ or ‘healthcare reform’, depending on the polls.  Worst of all are the outright lies.  Obama is not an idiot, so he surely knows that the passage of his health care bill will raise insurance premiums and eventually destroy the insurance industry—and the competition that it brings.  Obama knows that the bill cuts Medicare spending, and he knows that it will reduce the freedom to choose one’s own doctor.  But his speeches claim the exact opposite!  He claimed that the bill will LOWER premiums (watch yours and see), PROTECT Medicare (watch that as well), and INCREASE choice (good luck!).  Everybody watching the game knows by now that Obama couldn’t care less about the content of health care legislation– he just wants a win.  He doesn’t care that all of his promises will be untrue, as long as people keep believing him.  I used to put him in the first group of high-insight liberals, thinking he was saving up his ‘honesty’ for something important.  Before that I even gave him credit as a ‘true believer.’  But we have seen him lie about pretty much every issue!  There are no more issues to ‘save up for.’  He does not care about the future of the planet, the future of the economy, or the future of health care in America.  He just wants his applause.  He goes to the Middle East and bends over, in order to get a roomful of people to stand up and applaud him– even if there are others in the basement of the same building working to destroy us.   Obama’s lies are too complete to be accidental.  He has become utterly reliable in what he says, as long as you just substitute the opposite.  If he says ‘I will cut spending,’ you know that he is planning on a major spending increase, and is simply preparing for the response. He uses the forgetfulness and ignorance of the American people to avoid being found out– and members of the press are true believers, so they don’t call him on it.  Obama could give a speech claiming that the sun rises in the West every morning, and the press would either ignore the comment or print it as true, boycotting any stories that claim the opposite.

Many of the climate types are in this group, by the way.  How else do you explain people like Al Gore living with Carbon footprints the size of Rhode Island, while selling books and movies about cutting back?  I chuckled at the stories about the shortage of limos in Copenhagen–  they were shipping limos in from thousands of miles away, rather than forcing attendees at the climate summit to drive hybrids– or take the bus!!  Many scientists have hopped onto this gravy-train for years, knowing that any research proposal with ‘warming’ in the title is more likely to win support than a proposal seeking only the truth.  I put Soros in this latter group as well.  Streisand and Huffington are probably true believers or simple idiots.  Pelosi is probably in the low-insight group somewhere;  I used to thing she was smarter, but after watching the ‘deer in the headlights’ look in response to the Town Hall meetings and TEA parties, I have to assume that the insight isn’t there.

With all of that as a background, some of the people who are trying to follow the truth have come to the opinion that the climate nonsense is a front for something else– namely for control.  This was certainly in evidence at the Copenhagen Climate Summit—people talking about seizing global power that made Obama’s selfish desires seem amateurish in comparison!  I supposed the ‘one global government’ folks have their ‘true believers’ as well– those who picture a world ruled by one leader, with all people believing together in the same, noble goals.  They are the same people who hate the US, and want us to pony up trillions of dollars for ‘past carbon sins’—ignoring the amazing advances in technology and medicine that came from our enviable Capitalist system, and that raised the standard of living for every person on Earth.  But take away the true believers– the peace fairies and blind idealists– and you have a frightening group of people who are to the current world, as Hitler was to Europe.

We are lucky that the modern Left as a whole lack the intelligence and insight to go very far;  the most insightful are also the most power-hungry, preventing any meaningful collaboration as each new leader is eaten by the others who want to sit on the throne.  But the power-driven efforts of the insightful Left combined with the sheer mass of ‘useful idiots’ can easily cause damage to our economy that will take decades to repair.  We are already at a point where half of the population pays no Federal income tax, opening the door to confiscatory tax policies.  It would be asking too much for a large number of idiots to recognize the hypocrisy of the President who they elected.  But the rest of us should at least keep OUR eyes open!  Please join me at my blog, where I do my best to read between the lines of the weakest and most secretive government to rule our country in decades. 

I’m tired of writing– you can read more about this issue in an article by a gentleman named Monckton, a member of the British Parliament, using the link below.

British Peer:  Copenhagen Summit Has Established A World Government;  “Institutional framework” paves the way for unelected international bureaucracy

Remember back when the US was the LEADER in free thought, independent thinking, free and fair press, open government, and science UNFETTERED by the whims of special interest?  The Dems made a go of accusing Bush of ‘stifling science’ over the years;  now, of course, any Dem with any ability to think freely (many can’t, as that would mean admitting to themselves the disaster that they have invoked upon our country in electing Obama) can see what REAL control looks like!   We now have ‘Czars’– or do we call them Tsars?–  unelected friends of Obama who pretend to know more than other people and who get to control huge segments of our economy and society.  Obama found out that it is much easier to do things if you just ignore the ‘usual way’– going through Congress, debating issues, looking at science… can you imagine if Bush did half the things that Obama has done in the past few months?

The other thing I find amusing is when an Obamite points out that the Chosen One has done ‘so much’…  I point out that Bush could have done some amazing things too, if he spent 3 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!   Yes, Bush was ‘bush league’– he worried about the deficit, about destroying the country for our children– little things like that.  He didn’t make headway in his own efforts to reform Social Security about 6 years ago because the Democrats said his plans would add an IMMORAL several-hundred billion to the deficit.  Remember the complaints of Dems a couple years ago– Bush took the Clinton surplus (which was all imaginary anyway– based on tax receipts during the Nasdaq bubble that burst in the last few months of Clinton’s term— look it up!) and according to Dems ‘squandered’ it, leading to ‘huge’ deficits of 480 billion dollars… Where are they, now that Obama has a first-year deficit of over 3 trillion dollars?  Obama himself said a year ago that Bush was handing our children an immoral debt– the deficit was 440 billion that year.  Now Obama boasts that he will halve the deficit– to only a couple TRILLION by the end of his term!  Wow.   It is like letting a guy build a house for ten grand and complaining that it runs a thousand bucks over budget, and then giving the contract to a guy who promises a ten grand home and hands you a bill for over 100 K!  Those numbers, and that comparison, are to actual scale.

But this is Global Warming site– now that I’ve scared the Dems away (they don’t watch, read, or hear what they don’t want to agree with) it is just us.  1998 was an important year– that was the last year that the earth warmed.  Did you know that?  Since 1998 the earth has been cooling.  For the first few years, the global warming alarmists said ‘nevermind– it’s a statistical aberration.’  Then after about 6 years they started looking for new ways to measure the temperature of the earth, but to their horror found that it really isn’t warming anywhere!  This is  big problem for the Dems, because they all were talking pretty confidently for a long time.  Now it has been over ten years and even the latest National Geographic has pointed out that the earth is cooling… perhaps because the sun’s activity is returning to the mean as it has done every 20-30 years for centuries.  National Geographic tries to minimize the story– it’s own story– by saying that the sun’s effect is minor… but they can’t have it both ways!  They can’t say the sun doesn’t matter in a small sentence intended to avoid irritating the pseudo-scientists of the Left, just after several pages documenting a cooling earth and a less-hot sun!

Obama went abroad to ask Europe to dump a trillion dollars into the economy to ‘create jobs’;  he was told ‘sorry– we’ve been there and done that, and it doesn’t work’.  Obama came back and did it anyway, with only OUR tax money– and promised that because of his massive spending our unemployment would peak at bout 8%.  Now it is 10% and climbing and Obama is saying ‘nobody told HIM that it was a bad idea!!’   He is SO lucky that only 20% of Americans read beyond their local newspaper, and only a tenth of those people remember what they read for more than ten minutes.

Yesterday, Congress passed ‘cap and trade’.  Watch the stock market fall in the next few months as companies calculate the losses this bill will create, and the job cuts that will be needed to balance their books.  And once again, this happens (with Obama making calls all night threatening members of Congress to vote yes– or ELSE) just as the rest of the world has the sense to point to the facts– THE EARTH IS NOT WARMING!

Haven’t you noticed– no scientists talk about Global Warming anymore!! Now it is only the Dems.  And to be honest, the cap and trade bill isn’t about carbon, anyway– it is all about control.  With this bill, Obama controls ALL of the manufacturing in the country– not just the automakers.  As Ben Stein said this morning (I paraphrase), Obama is the most genial man in the White House for decades… and the most power-hungry, controlling, lying leader, perhaps ever.  I am afraid.  And you all should be afraid.

The earth is not warming. Do some reading– it is amazing how fast that ice grew back– the pieces that fell off over years, growing back ten-fold faster than it melted.  The scientists have sheepishly walked away, saying ‘nevermind’.  Only the Dems and Obama keep pounding away, using what is left of the pathetic issue to gain more control, more tax dollars, more ‘moral high ground’ (that last one just for laughs).

Don’t be an idiot… read the science, and be the first in your neighborhood to talk about the obvious and get it right.  The earth is cooling.  Give back your little trophy, Al– and take a sailboat this time so you at least are consistent to your own delusions.