It looks like the Brits are finally catching on. When people realize the costs of reducing CO2 will come out of their own pocket and see that actual global warming is mostly hype they will throw the Algoreites bums out of office. Of course that will initiate a whole new set of problems with the elitists that are peddling this snake oil to establish global governance.

Green tax revolt: Britons ‘will not foot bill to save planet’ - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

More than seven in 10 voters insist that they would not be willing to pay higher taxes in order to fund projects to combat climate change, according to a new poll.

The survey also reveals that most Britons believe “green” taxes on 4×4s, plastic bags and other consumer goods have been imposed to raise cash rather than change our behaviour, while two-thirds of Britons think the entire green agenda has been hijacked as a ploy to increase taxes.

The findings make depressing reading for green campaigners, who have spent recent months urging the Government to take far more radical action to reduce Britain’s carbon footprint. The UK is committed to reducing carbon emissions by 60 per cent by 2050, a target that most experts believe will be difficult to reach. The results of the poll by Opinium, a leading research company, indicate that maintaining popular support for green policies may be a difficult act to pull off, and attempts in the future to curb car use and publicly fund investment in renewable resources will prove deeply unpopular.

I have been saying that Al Gore is the most dangerous man alive. Read the article and you will find out the deadly kool-aid that this Gaia guru dispenses all over the world. While I am on the subject, I do not know why world leaders let Al Gore get away with the irresponsible lies that he continually makes. With only the last lie being that the storm in Myanmar was a result of man caused global warming. Al Gore continually lies and twists facts for his own end and people just drink the arsenic laced Kool_aid and help spread his dangerous concoctions.

If you are promoting what Al Gore has been saying you might want to check your own thought processes and the cult leader resister that should have been hardwired into your brain. If it is missing find help.

Arthur Robinson — Nobel Prize for Death

This current food shortage is only the beginning.

We have been down this road before. Unprincipled opportunists — falsely claiming that DDT is dangerous to the environment — managed to engineer a world-wide ban of DDT. DDT had eradicated malaria from the developed world and was well on its way to eradicating it from the less developed countries at the time this ban of DDT was instituted. The initiation of DDT use against malaria was rewarded by a Nobel Prize, and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences estimated that DDT had saved hundreds of millions of lives.

One of the principal political figures who worked to ban DDT was none other than Al Gore.

As a result of the DDT ban, more than 30 million children in Africa and Asia have died from DDT-preventable malaria, and an estimated 500 million adults are today chronically ill from this disease. The ban of DDT was the worst act of technological genocide in human history.

Now, Mr. Gore is the recognized leader of an effort to ban at least 90% of world use of hydrocarbon fuels. Once again, his claims are based upon bogus science and are motivated by personal financial and political self interest.

What our government allows some countries to get away with in the name of free trade is demented, it is criminal.
Do we have traders or traitors running our foreign trade policy?

Time to get tough with China on trade

The Bush administration has abysmally mismanaged U.S. trade policy. We hope that the next administration learns from its mistakes. President Bush’s solution to the worsening U.S. trade deficit with China was (drum roll please) talk. That’s right. His strategy was talk, talk, talk; journalists call it “jawboning.” In December 2006, President Bush sent our government’s top five financial leaders to China to convince the Chinese to mend their ways and allow the yuan to
appreciate against the dollar. But, in 2007 our trade deficit with China worsened yet again to $252 billion from $229 billion the previous year. Talking loudly while carrying no stick doesn’t work.

The case is made that their is plenty of oil in the earth. At even half of the price we see today there would be no oil shortage if it were not for the government regulations preventing the exploration and extraction and OPEC nation government’s creating intentional shortages to rob importers. The free enterprise system could solve our energy problems in a few years if government would just get out of the way. Not to even mention that oil may not be a fossil fuel at all and that new deposits may be being created.

FrontPage Magazine

All this should make one thing amply clear – there is enough oil to go around for a very long time. Even on conservative assumptions – accelerating consumption and few new discoveries – earth’s oil supplies should last for at least a century.

This, however, is the worst case scenario. We can be reasonably certain that new exploration and advancing technologies will in coming years greatly add to the quantities of available oil. So much so that Morris Adelman, Professor Emeritus in Economics at Harvard, has argued that the ‘amount of oil available to the market over the next 25 to 50 years is for all intents and purposes infinite.’

The notion that this planet is running out of oil is one of the great misnomers of our age. There is more oil available today than there was a hundred, fifty or ten years ago. And there is every indication that this trend will continue into the future. Instead of lamenting that we are running out of it, it would be far more accurate to say that we are constantly bumping into new oil. This is why two years ago the Economist headlined an article on the topic The Bottomless Beer Mug.
The general public, however, is largely ignorant of these facts. The divergence between the conventional wisdom and reality could hardly be any wider. Profoundly misinformed and alarmed, people place false hopes in misguided alternatives. Rather than implementing harmful, inefficient and expensive substitutes, we should insist that our government lift the obstacles which prevent us from availing ourselves of this superabundant resource.

All I can say is good luck. The decleration of Interdependence was already ratified by the leftward shift of Americans. The only way interdependence will not impact independent freedom loving people is if we all get together somewhere and build Fort Defiance.

The meaning of ‘interdependence’

What does interdependence mean in the real world? What does it mean to Brown and its proponents in the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderbergers and the Davos gang?

It means bleeding U.S. taxpayers for welfare-like programs not just for Americans – but for the whole world. It means throwing billions, probably trillions, at the poorest nations run by some of the worst tyrants.

It means making the reduction of “greenhouse gases” the No. 1 environmental agenda item for the developed world – even though the planet is not really warming up as a result of anything mankind is doing.

It means tying the hands of countries like the United States when it comes to defense – mandating only “multilateral” military actions with the consensus of those who hate America.

I don’t know about you, but if the choice is between busybody internationalism or isolationism, I think I will choose isolationism every time.

I don’t want to live in an interdependent world. I want to live in freedom. I want to live in a nation that protects its sovereignty. I want to live in a nation that reveres its independence.

When people are brainwashed all of their lives they become quite insane. Jimmy Carter needs to lead a new mission to Hamas called Shrinks Without Borders. Perhaps they can first do some field training on him. All who made this film and all who believe it richly deserve my Demented Delusional or Dumb Club of the week award. I guess everyone in Hamas will qualify.

American Thinker: Hamas Needs Shrinks Without Borders

To mark Holocaust Remembrance Day this month, the homicidal maniacs of Hamas outdid even their most deranged Islamic brethren by putting out a film claiming that the Jews secretly planned and carried out 6 million deaths of their own people.

And what is the bizarre reason Hamas television gives for the Jews committing this heinous deception?

Why, the Jews did it, of course, to be rid of their own sick, handicapped and special-needs folks. Everyone knows how brutal the Jews are to their own kin and countrymen.

And, wouldn’t you just know it? Hamas says it has verifiable proof.

In some other-worldly dimension, in whatever kind of perverted reality these people share, this insanity must make some sort of sense.

I haven’t checked, but I think we can be fairly certain that the Israelis will gladly put up the funds and manpower to construct a gigantic asylum, complete with soundproof rubber rooms and as many shock therapy devices as will be necessary to house and properly treat the entire herd of Hamas lunatics, along with their new peace keepers. Just to be on the safe side for the next 100 or so years, we’ll make sure they add a 50-foot wall, with tons of barbed wire and electronic alert devices around the entire asylum.

And if all goes off well, the entire world, not to mention the beleaguered Israelis, will be deeply in the debt of Jimmy Carter and the Shrinks Without Borders.

This is a key argument. Why all of a sudden are all governments taking action on the predictions of wacky environmentalists when they have never done it before? The answer of course is that this is not about global warming at all, it is just a means to an end for global governance. Now you know why all globalists are hyping this bogus threat and why they continue to hype it in spite of all the scientific facts to the contrary.

Environmentalists’ wacky predictions

Here are my questions: In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions of manmade global cooling and the threat of an ice age and millions of Americans starving to death, what kind of government policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity? When Ehrlich predicted that England would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should the British Parliament have taken in 1970 to prevent such a dire outcome? In 1939, when the U.S. Department of the Interior warned that we only had oil supplies for another 13 years, what actions should President Roosevelt have taken? Finally, what makes us think that environmental alarmism is any more correct now that they have switched their tune to manmade global warming?

Here are a few facts: Over 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is the result of water vapor in Earth’s atmosphere. Without the greenhouse effect, Earth’s average temperature would be zero degrees Fahrenheit. Most climate change is a result of the orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the sun’s output. On top of that, natural wetlands produce more greenhouse gas contributions annually than all human sources combined.

Minneapolis schools start sexual indoctrination of children while most parents are apathetic to it all or they would do something about it.

Gay’ indoctrination starts in Minneapolis

A special interest program assembled by the Human Rights Campaign to promote homosexuality has been launched in the 91-school Minneapolis district, even as opponents are urging school officials to keep sexuality out of the social culture.

the Alliance Defense Fund said the proposal will make problems.

“The ‘Welcoming Schools’ project incorporates within itself two incorrect and dangerous assumptions – (a) that one’s sex is a mental decision and not a biological fact, and (b) that individuals are born with an immutable ’sexual orientation,’ including children as young as five-years-old having normal same-sex attractions.”

“It is clear that the goal of HRC is to implement an educational program to indoctrinate young children with social viewpoints that are extremely controversial, out of the mainstream, and rely on unproven scientific theory that runs counter to American cultural and scholastic interests,” the ADF advisory said.

“The indoctrination of children with HRC’s anti-religion political agenda will present serious practical and legal problems, especially [as] adults are charged with the safety and security of other people’s children.”

Among other issues, the ADF said, presenting such indoctrination in class would violate the district’s own policy addressing teaching controversial material.

Further complicating the issue would be the program’s targeting children ages 5-7 with a lesson “that sex is an irrelevant biological inconvenience.”

“In fact … HRC embraces the notion that a person can identify as neither male nor female, but instead ‘intersexual,’” the ADF said.

The promotional material’s use of “gender identity” is just an attempt to “socially normalize behavior flowing from a known and recognized mental illness (Gender Identity Disorder),” the ADF said.

In the name of education hard core porn is now allowed by Wikipedia for anyone including your children to observe. I do not even want to mention what this article says that Wikipedia is displaying. In the name of free speech we are allowing criminally insane predators to run free. I say it is time for the remaining sane people on earth to send out the dog catchers.

Is Wikipedia wicked porn?

A photo of two nude men having anal sex on a bed, and a “fluffer” handing them a towel, is shown to the right of the entry.

Matt Barber, a constitutional law attorney who serves as Concerned Women for America’s policy director for cultural issues, expressed outrage at Wikipedia’s decision to allow sexually explicit images.

“Children use Wikipedia all of the time for reports for school, and this stuff is not just pornography, this is hard-core pornography,” he said. “Much of it may even be in violation of our nation’s obscenity laws.”

Barber said many of the filtering devices people have in their homes and schools are not geared to protect against Wikipedia’s material.

Mark Pelligrini, regional representative for Wikipedia, told WND, “Wikipedia’s goal is to provide an encyclopedia that contains the sum of all human knowledge. To that end, Wikipedia does not censor objectionable material.

“The Deniers” is a book about all the renown scientists that have not joined Al Gore’s Consensus club. The real consensus is with the deniers of Al Gore’s nonsense. However, since they do not belong to the Al Gore club Gore does not acknowledge their expertise. Instead anyone outside his Consenus Club are called “flat earthers” No matter there impeccable credentials.

Meanwhile, the Consensus Club is mostly made up of those who receive funding to support the junk science hypothesis and people who have a political or monetary agenda. Meanwhile, the Consensus club has the money and power to threaten the livelihood of scientists that would like to come out and expose this fraud. But ain’t democracy wonderful today when most government representatives and media are controlled by a few power elite that have their own global governance agenda?

The scientific tipping point has been reached. Either science will now break free from these control freaks or they will just be their pawns for a disinformation campaigns to bring in total government control and regulation over everything that we do.

So my advise to scientists is that you now have the only chance you will have to break free of this power grap and to get back toward unbiased science. You might think you need to watch what you say and stay within what is allowed by the politically correct controllers but if you do that, why was it that you become a scientist in the first place? Did you really want to learn and teach truth or is it just your stairway to becoming a member of the politically correct Consensus Club. If the scientific giants of history took the route that many of our scientists are taking today we would still be in the dark ages.

Continue in the direction of kowtowing to politically controlled elitists who use you for a means to their end and you can best describe yourself as a shill of control freaks but not a scientist.

We are now at the tipping point. You have the opportunity to tip this debate back toward sanity. Or you can just go along to go along and then be responsible for tipping the earth into untold suffering and the inevitable backlash that will come against all scientists when you are exposed. Then watch the Al Gore’s blame you for the bad science. You don’t really think these people will take responsibility for their irresponsibility, do you? They will just spin it and blame it on everyone else. That is what they do. By the way, all this talk of consensus is Al Gore speak. It is team rule right out of the communist play book. The consensus of the team is all important, not truth, and no opposing voice will be heard after the consensus is agreed upon.

Now you know why they will never give it up. People bound in group think, become like a cult. They have blind faith in group consensus and circle the wagons when confronted.

The climate change deniers - - Breaking News, Political News & National Security News - The Washington Times

The debate over anthropogenic — that is, human induced — climate change, is, in other words, just a bit more complicated than Al Gore suggested on “Oprah.” Few books have captured this cognitive dissonance as well as “The Deniers,” Mr. Solomon’s essential, engrossing travelogue through the world of climate-change dissent.

In “The Deniers”‘ deniers are not the usual suspects paraded out by a media eager for Scopes Monkey Trial II: Flat Earthers’ Revenge. They aren’t blustery, ill-informed television pundits or slash-and-burn polemicists.

Rather, Mr. Solomon introduces us to legendary scientists with impeccable resumes and prestigious appointments at major universities and mainstream research institutes; thoughtful, serious professionals who, at their own professional peril, looked at one or another of the shibboleths of global warming alarmism — from the debunked “hockey stick” graphic and misread ice core samples to the amateurish or incorrect computer models and fear-mongering — and bravely refused to join the herd, profitable as that may be these days.

Likewise, Mr. Solomon’s own position as founder and executive director of the well-regarded international environmental group Energy Probe makes it considerably more difficult for opponents to shellac him as a right-wing reactionary moonlighting as an oil company stooge

This is a very long article but if you want to know what kind of change that Hillary and Obama are planning to bring to America this article will clarify that.

FrontPage Magazine

iven the huge intellectual debt that both Democrat presidential candidates owe to Saul Alinsky, it is vital for all American voters to understand precisely who he was and what he taught. As you read this, you will hear in his words the echo of many familiar, outspoken leftist agitators for “change.”

Though Alinsky is generally viewed as a member of the political Left, and rightfully so, his legacy is more methodological than ideological. He identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics that ordinary citizens could employ, as a means of gaining public power.

Though Alinsky died in 1972, his legacy has lived on as a staple of leftist method, a veritable blueprint for revolution — to which both Democratic presidential candidates, who are his disciples and protégés, refer euphemistically as “change.”

The high cost of energy can be solved by lifting government restrictions and giving incentives for oil companies to drill and refine. All the energy we need can be found at less than half the energy equivalent of the cost of a barrel of oil today. Free enterprise will remedy shortages and price spikes but when free enterprise is stymied by government economic and energy disasters like we see today are certain. Affordable energy is not a pipe dream unless we continue to let a minority with bazaar views strangle everyone else.

An Alaskan pipe dream?

My “Black Gold Stranglehold” co-author, Jerome Corsi, and I have been begging our leaders to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, or ANWR, which could be producing an additional million barrels of oil per day which, when refined, equals 27 million gallons of gasoline or diesel. Think of the impact that would have on current market conditions. And while it should have been done years ago, it is not too late.

Nothing would send a stronger signal to the energy markets that America is serious about exploration of future reserves than if we initiated a “Manhattan project”-style effort in obtaining domestic sources of oil. For far too long our country has been held in the grip of radical environmentalists who have been unable to grasp the idea that modern technological advances allow us to safely harvest oil in the most extreme locations.

Congress, especially a Democratically controlled Congress, tends to believe every solution is found in higher taxes. Those in Democratic leadership, including Hillary Clinton, are renewing their call for a “windfall profits tax” on big oil. Nothing will do more harm than higher taxes or government regulation on the current market conditions. If government wants to help than they should fast track legislation to open up our domestic sources of oil … now!

This will allow the breathing room necessary to pursue all other alternatives such as wind, solar, nuclear, bio-mass, ethanol, etc. And as technology increases and economies of scale kick in, prices will become competitive and in time supplement oil, coal and natural gas. We believe the future for reducing usage of traditional hydrocarbon sources of energy is very promising. But for now, let’s use what we have in abundance to meet the needs of millions of Americans.

Government will keep trying to fix the problems they created until they end up killing us all.

The windfall profiteers

the story that really delves into the devious mind of the politician, and reveals why politicians will never be interested in “saving” any money, came courtesy of New York Rep. Charles Rangel.

Get this – Rangel actually told a reporter, with a spin worthy of the top criminal defense lawyers in the land, that he spends $777 of taxpayer money a month for his Cadillac DeVille because driving a cheaper car would be a sign of disrespect to his constituents. Wow. That takes cojones the size of … well, Charles Rangel’s cojones.

These are the kind of people who are charged with “fixing” all our problems, including high gas prices and how to stimulate the economy.

Democrats represent the majority of Americans so what does that say about national sanity? It is obvious to me that the leadership of neither party have sane answers on many issues but who elects them?

The Democrats are insane

The popular definition of insanity is making the same mistake over and over again expecting a different result.

By this definition, the Democratic Party leadership is insane.

Three examples:

High gas prices: The Democrats’ answer? A back-to-the-glorious-70s Jimmy Carter freeze in the dark replay with a global warming twist.

Health insurance availability and cost: The Democrats’ answer? A back-to-the-90s Hillary Clinton government seizure of the whole health care system.

War in Iraq: The Democrats’ plan? Declare defeat on the brink of success to relive the glory days of Vietnam.

Read on and weep for the great Democratic Party

NASA is now manipulating the data so that it complies with radical global warming theories. With James Hansen running the show I would not believe the revisions that NASA is now reporting. When their temperature data conflicts with the scientific data of others I certainly would not believe NASA. Frankly, when you consider the accuracy of the instruments, the recordings and the measuring station differences from 1889 until now a one degree change is about meaningless. The only reason these people are freaking is because of melting ice, rising CO2 levels and believing bad computer models. These models cannot even model past climate yet future. Higher CO2 levels historically did not mean lower earth temperatures and the ice melt may have nothing to do with overall warming of the earth. It may have more to do with natural cycles and changes in micro climates.

Does ‘climate change’ mean ‘changing data’?

NASA is not the only source of long-term temperature data used to evaluate climate change. Like NASA, the UK Meteorological Office’s Hadley Center for Climate Studies depends on a network of ground-based weather stations using thermometers. Both are limited by their number of stations, the heat-island effects on many of the sites located in urban areas, changes in thermometer types over time and the loss of station sites over the historical periods being measured. Data gathered from these systems often has to be adjusted to remove “noise” caused by the local environment so it can be standardized for analysis.

The University of Alabama at Huntsville and Remote Sensing Systems provide data gathered by Earth-observation satellites. Satellite temperature data has the advantage of being gathered across the entire surface of the Earth, except for regions near the two poles, but it is unavailable for the period prior to 1978.

How do these other data sources compare to NASA?

According to Hadley’s data, worldwide temperatures have declined since 1998 and the Earth is not much warmer now than it was than it was in 1878 or 1941.

Both the UAH and RSS satellite data agree with Hadley and show temperatures declining over the past decade with only a slight increase above the 30-year average between 1978 and 2008.

More recently, NASA temperatures indicated March 2008 was the third-warmest March in history. RSS and UAH showed the same month as only slightly above average globally and the second-coldest ever in the southern hemisphere.

As WND has previously reported James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, warned in 2006 “we have a very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change … no longer than a decade, at the most” – the same week the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued a report saying the U.S.’s hottest year was in the past, 1936.

Liberals love to blame the oil companies for the high gas prices but this article tells you the demented people you should really blame and the mindset that inspires them.

Put The Blame Where It Belongs - HUMAN EVENTS

If you are really sick and tired of $4.00 gasoline, really sick of being dependent on foreign oil, and equally as sick of seeing your food bills go up, the conventional wisdom would lead you to blame the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. But that’s a waste of time, as is blaming George Bush or the oil companies.

None of them make environmental policy. That policy is set by three individuals two who are located in New York City. If you want to drill in Alaska or the Gulf of Mexico or in the continental U.S. — where billions of gallons of petroleum are just waiting to be tapped — or build refineries, these three people stand in your way.

One more thing. I wrote earlier that the environmental extremists hate humanity, they think there are too many of us, and they won’t be happy until an awful lot of us are gone.

Most won’t say it, but here’s what two of them are quoted as saying in Johah Goldberg’s book “Liberal Fascism.” “When Charles Wurster, chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund was told that banning DDT would probably result in millions of deaths he replied ‘This is as good a way to get rid of them as any.” And a million did die.

Finnish environmental guru Pentti Linkola “argues that the earth is a sinking ship, and a chosen remnant must head for the lifeboats. Said Linkola, ‘Those who hate life try to pull more people on board and drown everybody. Those who love and respect life use axes to chops off extra hands hanging on the gunwale.’”

Beware of environmentalists bearing axes.

Those who rant about the war in Iraq might consider the domestic war in the U.S. It is far more destructive.

War on 2 fronts: Abroad … and at home

Eminent historians Will and Ariel Durant said, “The family is the nucleus of civilization.” As bad as the Iraq war and its costs are, the battles here on our own soil are worse. And costlier.

We’d better call for an all-out “surge” in this domestic war, while we still have the resources, courage – and liberty – to do it.

This is a good article. He makes the case that liberal presidents (or vice Presidents) continually try to redeem themselves and in doing so continually show us their flaws.

American Thinker: The Democrats’ Ex-Presidents

Why is it that so many Democratic leaders find it necessary to continue making spectacles of themselves after they leave office?

It’s an exclusively Democratic trait — you don’t find Republicans acting this way.

the liberal pol demands another turn at the plate, another opportunity to prove himself, to demonstrate to the world that he was right all along. And since he’s not alone on stage, since he’s competing with somebody else who actually is president at the moment (and may in fact be accomplishing things), he picks the most outlandish, fantastic, comic-book tasks imaginable. Tasks beyond the reach of any single human individual, perhaps any nation. Carter wants to be the universal peacemaker and guarantor of democracy. Gore would like to save the planet. And Bill… in attempting to convince the nation that Hillary is presidential material, he has the most thankless task of all.

Grown men, trying to convince the world that they’re supermen - it’s sad, and pointless, and more than a little ridiculous.

We’ll be seeing more of it. Having accomplished little or nothing, liberal presidents are going to be left unsatisfied and restless, and will hit the streets in an effort to do something about it. In extreme cases, like that of Jimmy Carter, they are going to blame everyone else in the world but themselves, and make the world pay for it.

Henry Lamb talks here about a Federal water bill that will transform America to socialism. I agree, but I have news. There will be scores of bills passed in the next administration that will transform America to total socialism. If American’s willingly vote in socialists to government what other system of government should we expect to have? It is not Congress that is transforming America to socialism. It is the incredibly naive or amoral dumbed down brainwashed American people that are voting in the Obama’s Clinton’s McCain’s Pelosi’s and Reid’s.

Congress to transform America to socialism?

The classic definition of socialism is: government control of the sources of production. A bill now before Congress, H.R. 2421, will give the federal government absolute control over all sources of production. This bill, if enacted, will instantly convert the United States into a socialist nation.

The debate, however, is not about the merits of socialism over capitalism and free markets; the debate is about water. The bill will give to the federal government control over all water in the United States, and control over all “… activities affecting these waters.”

More proof that the earth has entered a significant cooling period comes from the new Jason Satellite. With this in mind along with other proof that the earth is about to get significantly colder and seeing that the earth has not warmed at all in the last ten years and it cooled last year. It would just be prudent for world politicians to hold off on any carbon legislation until scientific data can actually support man cause global warming theories. Will they do that. Not likely! There is too much money and power at stake. Not to mention that they all love being sent to five star resorts to attended climate change conferences.

New Jason Satellite Indicates 23-Year Global Cooling - Guest - May 02, 08

Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year - but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.

For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We don’t know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length.

How many years of declining world temperature would it take now - in the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998 - to break up Al Gore’s “climate change consensus”?

We need more people like Lord Christopher Monckton and James Inhofe? The global warming swindle is so obvious once you hear the facts. These gentlemen are of the few in politics doing anything about getting those facts out.

As soon as the carbon control freaks use disinformation to pass costs or taxes unto the population they should be sued. If Al Gore’s propaganda film is required viewing in schools or anywhere else those requiring it should be sued. The evidence is clear that they have no proof that man is causing global warming and it will stand up in court. In contrast, Gore’s Inconvenient truth film already got shot down in court as a pack of lies.

Al Gore will not debate anyone. He knows the information he presents is Junk Science. Lets face it, certain people are in this for power and money or they just insist on having blind environmental religious faith that man has to be harming the planet. Most other people of the world have been brainwashed by the media these people control. If the people of the world ever grasped the truth about how world power brokers are going to use this to fleece and control them they would be furious.

President Bush Betrays His Friend, The Facts, and Free Enterprise, - CWN

Blankley rightly concludes, “The liberal world order will not let go of their global warming assault on free economics until hell freezes over—by which point, obviously, the global warming theory will be visibly disproven.”

President Bush needs to invite Lord Christopher Monckton to the White House for a chat. Glenn Beck interviewed Lord Monckton (a former Margaret Thatcher policy advisor from 1982-1986 and a graduate of Churchill College, Cambridge) on March 4, 2008, and allowed him to state the following: “What happened is that I looked at Al Gore’s movie with mounting horror and identified three dozen scientific errors in it. So I had a weather mate of mine who takes an interest in these matters and also had the money to pay for a court case and I said I thought this film was rubbish. Two weeks later he rang up and said he wanted to do something to fight back against this tide of unscientific freedom-destroying nonsense, which is what global warming is really all about.”

To make a long story short Lord Monckton took the case to court because Al Gore’s unscientific movie was being required in all British public schools. Monckton won his court case. The court decreed that if Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth is shown, then “The Great Global Swindle” must also be shown.

Not a timid soul, Lord Monckton is also going after NASA’s James Hansen for being in bed with Al Gore both “politically and financially.” Both stand to cash in on their alarmist gospel (someone called it “garbage in and gospel out”), and the present-day Braveheart has written to the administrator of NASA, asking for a full investigation. If he gets the brush-off, he plans to appeal to the Office of the U.S. Attorney General!

Al Gore might think “the debate in the scientific community is over,” but he hasn’t seen anyone like Lord Monckton on this side of the Atlantic. Lord Monckton is presently placing catchy ads in American newspapers, asking Gore to debate him in public. As of this writing, Gore hasn’t responded. If and when he does, he needs to have W in his corner with a towel and a bucket of water. Senator James M. Inhofe will be in Lord Monckton’s corner with crumpets and tea. Stay tuned—this could be a rematch of a Joe Louis—Max Schmeling fight.

Contrary to the views of the environmental hysterics, increased carbon dioxide would actually be beneficial to life on the earth. As would global warming but there is no significant warming going on anyway due to CO2 or anything else. If you really want a green planet pump up the CO2. It is essential for plant life. If man tries to limit carbon dioxide there will be no natural benefits but the economic and social consequences will be terrible.

Roy Spencer on Carbon Dioxide on National Review Online

As a climate researcher, I am increasingly convinced that most of our recent global warming has been natural, not manmade. If true, this would mean that global temperatures can be expected to peak in the coming years (if they haven’t already), and global cooling will eventually ensue.

Just for the sake of argument, let us assume that manmade global warming really is a false alarm. In that case, we would still need to ask: What are the other negative effects of pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere?

Well, plant physiologists have known for a long time that most vegetation loves more carbon dioxide. It grows faster, is more drought-tolerant, and is more efficient in its water use. While the pre-industrial CO2 concentration of the atmosphere was only about 280 parts per million (ppm) by volume, and now it is around 380 ppm, some greenhouses pump it all the way up to around 1,000 ppm. How can environmentalists claim that helping vegetation to grow is a bad thing?

The bigger concern has been the possible effect of the extra CO2 on the world’s oceans, because more CO2 lowers the pH of seawater. While it is claimed that this makes the water more acidic, this is misleading. Since seawater has a pH around 8.1, it will take an awful lot of CO2 it to even make the water neutral (pH=7), let alone acidic (pH less than 7).

Still, the main worry has been that the extra CO2 could hurt the growth of plankton, which represents the start of the oceanic food chain. But recent research (published on April 18 in Science Express) has now shown, contrary to expectations, that one of the most common forms of plankton actually grows faster and bigger when more CO2 is pumped into the water. Like vegetation on land, it loves the extra CO2, too

Dave says enemies of truth substituted lies throughout our society. Now that is the truth.

Dave Daubenmire — The Separation of Truth and State

he separation between the TRUTH AND THE STATE is what they were after. It wasn’t religion they had to remove. It was the Truth that stood in the way.

“Truth has fallen in the streets.” They told us truth was relative, and that ethics were “situational.” They chided our children, “don’t judge,” and chastised those who did. They removed from the school house wall the scales by which all morality was weighed and soon everyone was doing “what was right in their own eyes.”

“If it feels good do it. Tune-in, turn-on, drop-out. Go for the gusto. You only pass this way once. Live and let live. Go for it. You deserve it. Did God really say that? Everyone lies about sex…”

We are a nation of liars. We expect lying from our leaders. They don’t even blush.

We hire teachers to teach us lies and elected politicians to tell us lies. We pay them to teach lies, tell lies, so we can believe lies. Lies make us feel better.

How else can you explain what is being taught to our children in our schools with our permission and dollars?

But it didn’t start there. It started in the ivory towers of academia first. Communism, masquerading as liberalism, snuck into positions of authority. Communism is a God-less system of government where absolute Truth does not exist. Right and wrong was no longer defined by the God of the Bible, but by public opinion, or worse yet, the university-trained terrorists in black robes.

I love the way scientists cover their butt. They finally acknowledge that the earth is no longer getting warmer but they hedge it by saying it will start warming again someday so we need to keep passing laws to screw up the economy of the world on their sheer speculation. These same scientists could not even tells us a year ago that the seas would cool now they want us to believe that they know the seas will start warming again a decade down the road. Believe me they haven’t got a clue. Meanwhile Al Gore is still running around the world lying to people telling everyone how fast the warming is exhilarating.

Global warming may ’stop’, scientists predict - Telegraph

Researchers studying long-term changes in sea temperatures said they now expect a “lull” for up to a decade while natural variations in climate cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

Wright on, Ann Coulter!


Obama campaign gives up on finding ‘Mr. Wright’

Rev. Wright also put into context his church giving an award to fellow Obama supporter Louis Farrakhan by saying: “He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century. That’s what I think about him. … I am not going to put down Louis Farrakhan.”

Why did Rev. Wright’s supporters think it would be helpful to hear longer versions of the “snippets”?

Curiously, Rev. Wright complained that “everybody wants to paint me as if I’m anti-Semitic because of what Louis Farrakhan said 20 years ago” – especially those damn East Coast, money-grubbing Jews, he carelessly added. This from a man whose entire oeuvre is based on reveling in what happened in this country 250 years ago.