Environment

Even the Nobelic Messiah of the Environment can't be bothered with symbolic gestures. If he can't take it seriously, why should we? Typical liberal elite "do as I say, not as I do" and typical politician "what applies to the citizenry doesn't apply to me".

SOURCE

It's about friggin' time the enviros are "allowing" us to consider nuclear energy again. How generous of them. How selfish of them would be a more accurate opinion. I must give credit where credit is due. Leftists are very adept at spreading propaganda and scaring the populace and government into submission to their agenda, despite years of countless facts and professional opinion to the contrary. Global Warming, er, "Climate Change", case in point.

Remember that NO emissions were released and ZERO people died or were injured during the incident at Three Mile Island. Of course that is irrelevant to a leftist on a mission to "save the world"...

Bless his heart

SOURCE

So one of my illustrious senators (I actually don't mind this one, the other one - Oy Vey!) wants solar and wind energy production, BUT not in areas where it is most safely and efficiently harvested. But wait, it might be an eyesore. Whahhh!!!! Kinda like Ted Kennedy complaining that wind farms would ruin his view off his compound in Martha's Vineyard. Build it, but not where I have to look at it - how nice and hypocritical of you! You can't have it both ways, but liberals always assume double standards don't apply to them.

SOURCE

I have a general distaste for all of those best/worst retrospectives of the year, but I did like this one. Of course this comes from a source outside of the Al Gore worshiping US media. Hopefully the farce of all of this greenwashing will end soon before our tax, business, and societal structures are irreparably damaged - that IS what all of this is about. "Saving the planet" is just the placebo force fed to the masses, like the magician distracting the audience with smoke and mirrors while he imperceptibly loosens the knot or stuffs the card into his sleeve.

I'm not holding my breath, although it is toxic to the environment. The US Supreme Court said so and they're the experts about such things, not those pesky scientists with their PhD's, and years of research, and other such irrelevant knowledge about science. I'll state it again, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SCIENCE, IT'S ALL ABOUT POLITICS, CONTROL, AND THE LAW. The quicker you understand that, the more all of this comes into focus. Your Prius may make feel better about yourself, but it's only the opiate that numbs you to the reality of the ever growing cocoon of government rapidly forming around you and your freedoms.

Go ahead and voluntarily buy the government approved light bulbs, pay the optional "carbon tax" fees added to your airline tickets to assuage your guilt, and buy that electric car (but don't ask where the electricity comes from or how you dispose of all of those batteries in future years). It won't be optional for much longer. Good, it's better for the planet, you say? So is euthanasia of the old and infirm, the abortion of "imperfect" children, the restrictions of opening new fast food restaurants, and banning smoking in your own home. But these kinds of extremes aren't occurring - yeah right. Remember: they know better than you what's good for you, your health, and your planet - and you have let them do it.

But don't listen to me. I'm just the tin-hat wearing, paranoid, hate monger who irrationally distrusts all of those well-intentioned people in government.

SOURCE

SOURCE

As usual, most contrarian climate change reporting is found outside of US media.

A few quotes/comments: (my emphasis)

"There was much more but essentially Plimer's message is that the idea humans cause climate change has become a fundamentalist religion which is corrupting science. It is embedded with a fear of nature and embraced principally by city people who have lost touch with nature."

Comment: Another general fundamental difference between urbanites and the rest of us. Whatever is good for them is obviously good for the entire country. Urban big government solutions are best. People taking care of themselves is sooo passé. We're just a bunch of uneducated and racist hicks after all...

"Plimer says creationists and climate alarmists are quite similar in that "we're dealing with dogma and people who, when challenged, become quite vicious and irrational"."

Comment: When backed into a corner challenged with reasoned argument, the blind faithful go nuts and attack you personally because they have nothing but their feelings to hold them up.

". But as Clarke proves, you can't stop people thinking. Yet."

Comment: "Yet" unfortunately is right.

Interesting that when the economy gets pushed to the forefront, the hysteria and greenwashing of the environmentalists takes a back seat.

Sad that most of the investigative reporting of climate change dissent (or anything else for that matter) comes from outside of the United States mainstream media. What are they afraid of, or do they blindly drink the green kool-aide without question, kind of like they did with Barack Obama? Oops, did I just say that out loud? Inside voice...

SOURCE

Besides the blasphemous contradictions to his green holiness - the Reverend Al Gore - contained in the article, the comments below it are great and very informative. It's comforting to know that I'm not the only skeptical "denier" out in the world. I'm in good company. Also, take a look at the links to the two bloggers (two actual meteorologists, thank you very much) mentioned early in the article. They've got some great scientific analysis of the data that the GISS and the IPCC use to browbeat the green dogmatic gospel to you, your children, and your government. Read, learn, and decide for yourself, but do it at your own risk of being ostracized by your greenwashed friends. I've given up arguing with mine.

Of the comments after article, one that caught my eye had an observation of liberals that I found quite interesting:

"Please understand that from the viewpoint of an American liberal, there is no absolute truth. Truth is situational in nature, much like morality. Truth, like morality, is what you need it to be."
Posted by raymikeva on November 16, 2008 2:39 PM

More do as I say, not as I do proselytizing from the "I'm-better-than-you" enviros. Seems like those that care the most about the environment often do the most harm to it. But they care. As is typical with these types, they feel good about themselves with their trifle contribution to the betterment of the planet, because they're doing "something" no matter how insignificant compared to the environmental damage caused maintaining their "lifestyle".

SOURCE

But they care and you don't, so their conscience is clean when they fly off to Aspen, The Bahamas, or the beach house in Nantucket.

What do physicists know anyway?

SOURCE

It was only a matter of time before the psycho "experts" fabricate a fictional aliment to a fictional problem.

SOURCE

Let them suffer.  Was that insensitive?

Moodage =