Weird science and broken borders

Obama goes way out on a limb to declare global warming is real because “science is science”. Well, except when it’s not. But Barry can believe in anything that might benefit his political agenda. Weasel Zippers has the story.

“The good news is that the public may get out ahead of some of their politicians,” Obama said, suggesting that as people see the effects of weather disasters like hurricanes and droughts, they might begin to change their minds.

“Those start multiplying, then people start thinking, ‘You know what? We’re going to reward politicians who talk to us honestly and seriously about this problem,’” he said.

News flash for Obama, science and facts are in: the border is being flooded. But I don’t see him concerned about that. O and his pen put out a big “open house” sign and strange how science and math confirms the results. He calls for no emergency actions to combat that.

And unlike Global Warming, that responsibility is in the Constitution. As much as the modern Left sees human beings and population as a huge threat, and cause of every problem we face, it’s amazing how they could not care less about the border.

You’d think anyone would be worried about those numbers and what it portends for our future. Where’s the sustainability plan for that? Where is the strategy to reverse the harmful affects of faulty borders? Meanwhile, Obama also has the largest carbon footprint of any president in history.

Now here’s a real hockey stick

In early 2011, 14 percent of all unauthorized immigrants were from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

In 2011, nearly 3.1 million Central American immigrants resided in the United States, representing close to 8 percent of all immigrants. The Central American born accounted for nearly 8 percent (3.1 million) of the country’s 40.4 million immigrants in 2011. This population has grown more than 60 times its size since 1960, when about 48,900 Central American immigrants resided in the country.

From 1960 to 2011, the number of Central American immigrants and their share of the U.S. immigrant population increased rapidly (see Table 1). At less than 50,000 in 1960, the population more than doubled in the 1960s, tripled in both the 1970s and 1980s, and again nearly doubled in the 1990s, reaching a 2-million mark by 2000 and then a 3-million mark by 2010. The Central-American born share of the U.S. immigrant population also increased – from less than 1 percent in 1960 to nearly 8 percent in 2010. Between 2010 and 2011, the number of immigrants from Central America remained largely unchanged.

As of 2011, approximately 39 percent of the 3.1 million Central American immigrants in the United States had entered since 2000;

The science is settled on how they’ve made the problem worse while talking up amnesty.

Total illegal population
Take Texas, for example: it had 1 million-ninety thousand illegals in 2000, increasing to 1.79 million in 2011. (and add 3 more years to that, plus this most recent uptick over the last months) No doubt Texas’s number has doubled from 2000. Reports are running at a thousand a day.

Yet all they talk about is global warming, ice, polar bears, rising sea levels, hurricanes, and UN reports. But the statistics are loud and clear on their denial about the illegal immigration problem. Sustainability anyone?

While he uses his pen to try to regulate the environment and lower rising sea levels, he uses his pen to increase the levels, and problems, of illegal immigration. The same pen.

You wanted a crisis, Obama? You got one. It’s time people “get out ahead” of Obama and politicians who incubated the problem. I’ll dub him ‘the doctor of weird science’.

I have a “dream”, too. It’s called Constitutional government.

Ref: http://weaselzippers.us/189065-obama-global-warming-is-real-because-science-is-science/
http://migrationpolicy.org/article/central-american-immigrants-united-states
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/06/05/Leaked-Images-Reveal-Children-Warehoused-in-Crowded-US-Cells-Border-Patrol-Overwhelmed

RightRing | Bullright

Oil boom to global warming bust

Obama’s Energy Secretary: Oil boom boosted economy — but we’re focused on ‘global warming

By Valerie Richardson | The Washington Times | Saturday, May 31, 2014

GOLDEN — The booming oil industry has been one of the few bright spots in an otherwise sluggish economy, but Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz says that the days of fossil fuel are numbered as the administration focuses on climate change.

Mr. Moniz, who spoke during Democratic Sen. Mark Udall’s energy forum at the Colorado School of Mines on Friday, said the increase in oil production “has had enormous economic benefit” by boosting the economy and helping correct a lopsided trade imbalance.

“I want to emphasize: The increase in oil has been again a great boom economically, lowering our imports, but we are focused on lowering our oil dependence,” said Mr. Moniz.

Oil imports have been declining as domestic production surges and fell to below 7 million barrels of crude per day in January for only the second time in 14 years. Meanwhile, the Commerce Department reported Thursday that the economy contracted for the first time since 2011.

“Why we are committed in the first place to this reduction in greenhouse gas emissions goes to what probably many in this room understand very, very well: the mitigation of the risk that we have from global warming and climate change,” said Mr. Moniz.

The secretary appeared in Colorado two days after he toured Louisiana Gulf Coast oil and gas operations with Sen. Mary Landrieu, another Democrat locked in a tough reelection battle. The visits also come with the Obama administration poised to announce Monday strict new standards on power-plant carbon dioxide emissions.

 

They never talk about the “risk” or affects of that so-called “mitigation” effort, like on the economy. The radical “greenhouse gases” are emanating from Washington, specifically the White House. The repercussions and affects of regulation are not a risk or worry to them. What about the risk their war on energy, including the XL Pipeline, poses? Destroying the economy under the guise of “Saving the planet” is job one.

Zero Hedge

As if the official news that the US economy is just one quarter away from an official recession (and with just one month left in the second quarter that inventory restocking better be progressing at an epic pace) but don’t worry – supposedly harsh weather somehow managed to wipe out $100 billion in economic growth from the initial forecast for Q1 GDP – here is some even worse news: if one excludes the artificial stimulus to the US economy generated from the Obamacare Q1 taxpayer-subsidized scramble, which resulted in a record surge in Healthcare services spending of $40 billion in the quarter, Q1 GDP would have contracted not by 1% but by 2%!

Unsettled Liberal Hysteria

Charles Krauthammer attacked the “Myth of Settled-Science” and labeled Obama the “propagandist in chief”. Talk about hitting the nail on the head. No wonder Libs try to shut him up, so bad.

But even having their own radical crew in the White House and controlling the Senate, you would think that would pacify liberals. No, it only exacerbates them if they don’t get everything they want. They repeat the term the science is settled and that (any)debate is over. Challenge any of their conclusions and that is what you’ll hear.

In his article, The myth of ‘settled science’, Krauthammer says:

None of this is dispositive. It doesn’t settle the issue. But that’s the point. It mocks the very notion of settled science, which is nothing but a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate. As does the term “denier” — an echo of Holocaust denial, contemptibly suggesting the malevolent rejection of an established historical truth.

But welcome to the alternative reality of the progressive left. As my friend likes to say, they think they can repeal reality. (that’s their stand and their sticking to it.) The funny part is to call their self-labeled political enemies “deniers”. As science teaches it always wants certifiable proof. That should make scientists “deniers” by their nature. And it could make science an institution of denial.

But better than that, think of all the things the Left denies. For a crowd that accepts the “hockey stick” of global warming as a threat, they have an awful lot of denial. Denying Islamists’ agenda, denying effects of Obamacare. They deny the threat of fiscal crisis. They argue against the severity of the fiscal problem, as something that more spending will solve. It is akin to believing carbon is the biggest problem in the world, then calling to double the amount of carbon in ten years. That’s the equivalent. Their answer is always spend more money, it should be no surprise.

Their hysteria is far from settled; it’s fluid and flows in ebbs, but can always escalate at the swat of a fly. It has to outdo the last hysterical outrage. It’s on a collision course with reality. When faced with reality, it snorts and reverts to name-calling and the Alinsky tactics it is known for. It reflexively calls for the power of federal government to oppose their foes and opponents and silence them. It has an incessant dependency on big-government.

What is not settled is Liberal hysteria, its always looking for the next opportunity to be offended. Progressives reactions match or exceed the hysteria.

According to Progressives: “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”

As Krauthammer says, we want a cleaner environment, and improve efficiency and resources. But the left would gladly prevent our use of resources and anything related, including the XL Pipeline.

Climate-change proponents have made their cause a matter of fealty and faith. For folks who pretend to be brave carriers of the scientific ethic, there’s more than a tinge of religion in their jeremiads. If you whore after other gods, the Bible tells us, “the Lord’s wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit” (Deuteronomy 11).

Obama came out to rail against Republicans in a press conference, and lectured us on strengthening the infrastructure. The next day, the administration announces Kerry and the State Dep. needs more time to study comments on the Keystone XL Pipeline, putting off the decision until after the elections.(5 1/2 years is not enough) All convenient to raising money from outrage, and whooping up Liberal hysteria.

RightRing | Bullright

Redwood pouchers

Thieves robbing burl from giant redwoods.

Redwood park closes road to deter burl pouchers

Photo: AP Wildlife biologist Terry Hines standing next to a massive scar on an old growth redwood tree in the Redwood National and State Parks near Klamath, Calif., where poachers have cut off a burl to sell for decorative wood. The park recently took the unusual step of closing at night a 10-mile road through a section of the park to deter thieves

Authorities say unemployment and drug addiction have spurred an increase in the destructive practice of cutting off the knobby growths at the base of ancient redwood trees to make decorative pieces like lacey-grained coffee tables and wall clocks.

The practice — known as burl poaching — has become so prevalent along the Northern California coast that Redwood National and State Parks on Saturday started closing the popular Newton B. Drury Scenic Parkway at night in a desperate attempt to deter thieves.

More http://www.mail.com/scitech/news/2694202-redwood-park-closes-road-to-deter-burl-poachers.html#.23140-stage-hero1-2

——————————————————————————————————–

Update 3/31/14: If you want an in-depth resource on the subject of redwoods in the North region and Tallest tree particulars with great photography, checkout this site. (Oregon area) You will not be disappointed and likely inspired.
http://www.mdvaden.com/grove_of_titans.shtml
Big tip of the hat to Mario.

Greenpirates! Russia charges Greenpeace with piracy

October 2, 2013 by CFACT Ed,

Russian authorities have charged five Greenpeace campaigners with piracy in Murmansk and are continuing to detain and investigate as many as 25 more. If convicted they face 10-15 years in prison.

Greenpeace’s diesel powered ship Arctic Sunrise was seized and 30 campaigners arrested after attempting to board the Prirazlomnaya oil platform in the Pechora Sea.  Details here.

The five are Roman Kieron Bryan, Dolgov, Dmitri Litvinov, Alminhana Maciel,  Ana Paula, Sini Saarela; Russian Roman Dolgov.  Bryan claims to be a “freelance” videographer, rather than a campaigner.

The 30 people aboard Arctic Sunrise hail from a variety of nations including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, the United States, Britain, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Ukraine, Russia, France, Italy, Turkey, Finland, Switzerland, Poland and Sweden.

The piracy charges surprised many after Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his opinion that the Greenpeace campaigners are not pirates, although he held open the likelihood of other charges.

See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/10/02/greenpirates-russia-charges-greenpeace/#sthash.kjANZ3L7.dpuf

Hot Potatoes and the Keystone Pipeline

 

Don’t think those two have anything in common?

Obama has flirted with his movement for years on his position to kick the Keystone pipeline to the curb. I think he’d like to destroy even the idea.

In what Republicans hoped would be positive news, Obama handed off of the XL decision to the State Department, tying the approval to his emissions criteria. Well, enter John Kerry. He’s been blowing hot air about global warming and climate change for years, rivaling Al Gore. Now Obama hands off the hot potato to State. But State had suggested the pipeline would not add a net increase to global carbon missions. So Kerry to the rescue.

President Barack Obama announced Tuesday that he would approve the Keystone XL pipeline if the State Department certified it would not lead to a net increase in global carbon emissions. Congressional Republicans were quick to presume victory, noting that a previous State Department analysis had said just that.
But that analysis, which has been heavily criticized, was done before Kerry was named secretary of state. And what Obama has effectively done is hand the Keystone decision to one of Washington’s fiercest backers of strong climate change action.
Michael Brune, Sierra Club, said: “With Obama laying down the standard that a pipeline that exacerbates climate change is not in our national interest, it’s pretty clear KXL is not long for this world.” See

Related article:

Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would be in our nation’s interest,” the president said in a Tuesday speech on climate change. “And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline’s impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward.
The president has avoided weighing in on the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline for several years now, citing an executive order asking the State Department to make a determination on the project’s viability first. Environmentalists have called on him to spike the project entirely because of risks that it will contribute irrevocably to global warming and potentially contaminate drinking water if it leaks. Conservatives and even some labor groups have encouraged Obama to approve of the project because of its potential to create jobs. See

Kerry had so few accomplishments over the years that he will foam at the mouth to kill the pipeline, taking the hot issue off Obama’s hands. It is a political benefit with their base, which is all they care about. Poking conservatives in the eye is a bonus.

Obama already opened up the “War on Coal” front in his war on energy.

Obama, in a speech Tuesday at Georgetown University, was to announce he’s issuing a presidential memorandum to launch the first-ever federal regulations on carbon dioxide emitted by existing power plants, moving to curb the gases blamed for global warming despite adamant opposition from Republicans and some energy producers.
The far-reaching plan marks Obama’s most prominent effort yet to deliver on a major priority he laid out in his first presidential campaign and recommitted to at the start of his second term: to fight climate change in the U.S. and abroad and prepare American communities for its effects. Environmental activists have been irked that Obama’s high-minded goals never materialized into a comprehensive plan.
/…
The linchpin of Obama’s plan involves new and existing power plants. Forty percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions, and one-third of greenhouse gases overall, come from electric power plants, according to the federal Energy Information Administration. The Obama administration already has proposed controls on new plants, but those controls have been delayed and not yet finalized.
Tuesday’s announcement would be the first public confirmation that Obama plans to extend carbon controls to existing plants. See

I haven’t thought of a good analogy for putting Kerry in charge of Keystone, but I’m working on it. Well, in his Presidential run he said he was “changing the dynamics”, now he has a shot at changing the dynamics of our energy.

As Secretary of State, Kerry said, “”Here, we can do the best of things that you can do in government. That’s what excites me.” Yea, no doubt about the excited part.

Climategate meets Brandenburg Gate – changing of the guards

Obama promises an end to cheap energy

The Left has shifted from being champions of the poor to being developed-world Progressives, comfortably ensconced in their own modernity

June 24, 2013 -by Marita Noon
A few months ago, in his State of the Union address, President Obama proudly pledged to tackle climate change—despite opposition from Republicans. To date, precious little action to combat climate change has been seen from the White House—which pleases most Republicans and angers the Left.
Environmental activists are some of Obama’s most ardent supporters, but they are frustrated and losing patience with the president. He hasn’t been definitive on killing the Keystone pipeline; as the Washington Post reports, he’s “fallen back from the broad clean energy agenda he envisioned when he first took office”—even to the point of supporting natural gas exploration and recently approving Liquefied Natural Gas export terminals that will increase demand by shipping U.S. natural gas to foreign markets; and he seems to have acquiesced to a fossil fuel future by proposing adaptations to make “coastal communities more resistant to increasingly severe storms and floods.” The environmental community wants to see bold steps toward a fossil-fuel free future ….
[excerpt]
Frank Ackerman, an economist at Tufts University who published a book about the economics of global warming, calls the social cost of carbon “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek, he said: “This is a very strange way to make policy about something this important.” And added, “The Obama Administration ‘hasn’t always leveled with us about what is happening behind closed doors.’”
Why bury “something this important” in an afternoon announcement about something that is virtually insignificant? The answer, I believe, is found in a small piece of the Washington Post story cited previously. Apparently, the White House’s own research found that when Obama, in his State of the Union speech, “vowed to act on climate change if Congress refused to do so,” a focus group’s “favorability” rating “plummeted.” White House transcripts reveal that Obama knows that “the politics of this are tough.”
At an April fundraising event at the San Francisco home of billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer, Obama defended his lack of action on climate change: “If you haven’t seen a raise in a decade, if your house is still $25,000, $30,000 underwater … you may be concerned about the temperature of the planet, but it’s probably not rising to your number one concern.”
As a result, his Organizing for America team—“formed to advance the president’s second term agenda”—has been laying the “groundwork with the American public before unveiling a formal climate strategy.” Teasing out the increase in the social cost of carbon was likely part of the strategy, intended to test the waters ahead of the planned climate announcements from the White House.
Likewise, his comments in Berlin, where he reintroduced the subject, calling climate change “the global threat of our time.” The next day, headlines read: “Obama to renew emissions push.” It is believed that the new “measures to tackle climate change” will “effectively ban new coal-fired power plants”—to which I add, will effectively ban “cheap electricity.”
– See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/06/24/obama-promises-an-end-to-cheap-energy/#sthash.OHGMnFWP.dpuf

Good article on the politics of Obama’s weathered climate policy. And what do microwave ovens have to do with climategate? Who knew? This is the kind of politics and policies — no difference between them to Obama — we’ve grown to expect and detest. Ah yes, reintroducing the subject in Berlin, with the sun in his eyes and teleprompter issues.

In a related article, Paul Driessen fleshes out the big questions:

23) Shouldn’t Congress pass a cap-and-trade bill or carbon tax to help heal the climate? 
The climate bill that died in the Democrat Senate was a scientifically meaningless bill that Obama’s own EPA admitted would not impact global CO2 levels – let alone global temperatures.
The climate bill would only have raised the cost of energy for American families and businesses, and killed jobs, while doing nothing for the climate. A major Bloomberg News report revealed that U.S. oil companies would likely cope with the climate legislation by “closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.” Bloomberg also reported that “one in six U.S. refineries probably would close by 2020,” and this could “add 77 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline.”
EPA’s unilateral “carbon dioxide endangerment” regulations would have much the same effect.
20) Don’t graphs show that current temperatures are the highest in 1,000 years?
Penn State professor and UN IPCC modeler Michael Mann did publish a hockey stick-shaped graph that purportedly showed an unprecedented sudden increase in average global temperatures, following ten centuries of supposedly stable climate. However, Dr. Mann was at the center of the Climategate scandal. His graph and the data and methodology behind it have been scrutinized and debunked in peer-reviewed studies by numerous climate scientists, statisticians and other experts.
The latest research clearly reveals that the Medieval Warm Period (also called the Medieval Climate Optimum) has been verified and was in fact global, not just confined to the Northern Hemisphere. The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change reported in 2009 that “the Medieval Warm Period was: (1) global in extent, (2) at least as warm as, but likely even warmer than, the Current Warm Period, and (3) of a duration significantly longer than that of the Current Warm Period to date.”
The Science and Public Policy Institute reported in May 2009: “More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was real, global, and warmer than the present. And the numbers grow larger daily.”

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent to (green), or cooler than (blue), peak Current Warm Period temperatures.

Read more: http://papundits.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/climate-change-issues-for-2012/
And Read more excellent articles at CFACT http://www.cfact.org/
H/T PA Pundits-International

Obama: EPA is the gate to the climate

From NRO :

If only President Obama simply had cried wolf. Instead, the president announced that, on behalf of “all of humankind,” he is in effect directing the EPA to take over the American economy. New power plants will be subject to emissions controls, and existing plants will have to be retrofitted to comply with new standards. New restrictions on heavy trucks will affect the movement of freight and goods across the country.

New subsidies will be handed down for politically connected energy firms, and federal lands will be set aside for their use. New federal impositions will affect the construction of factories, commercial buildings, and private homes.

The president says that this is all enabled by the “overwhelming judgment of science.” It certainly has not been enabled by something so mundane as the law. We rather suspect that the overwhelming judgment of Congress would be against the president’s program of regimenting the entire American economy under the management of a newly empowered EPA. But the president has made it clear that he intends to act largely through administrative fiat, subverting the democratic process and the people’s elected representatives. Unhappily, the Supreme Court has abetted this ambition by misconstruing the Clean Air Act as a warrant of action on global warming.

Every economic activity involving energy or transportation — which is to say, every economic activity — will be affected by the president’s global-warming program.

More: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/352025/obamas-radical-climate-agenda-editors

Barry-‘Ozone’-Obama lays out his second term “climate” strategy:

(it reads something like this, no matter what he says or promises — a little satire)

“I will continue laying out scandals. The air in DC will become extremely inhospitable, putting air conditioning and filtration at a premium. You all will continue to try to make me look bad. I will continue to lie… I mean you all are so gullible.

The political pollution in DC will reach a historical high. Clouds of chaos and confusion will slow even traffic to a crawl. Never let a storm go to waste. I will continue to demonize my opponents or anyone in my way.

I will use any… and I mean any, extraordinary and unconstitutional means to achieve my ends to extort the climate for every political and geo-political opportunity I possibly can. And there won’t be a damn thing you can do about me using executive power and regulation to accomplish it. Oh, like what are you going to impeach me or something? Like I said, you people are so gullible.”

Yet during Barry’s glorious Georgetown address, another controversy erupted because all the networks cut away – even MSNBC. That prompted a tweet from NYT reporter that you could turn to one network covering the entirety, the Weather Channel. (good thing he wasn’t upstaged by a storm..) Wolfy Blitzer just talked over it. No loss there.

un-Peace through ignorance and injustice

“What I’m saying is, that if you haven’t been in the Situation Room… Unless you’ve been involved in those conversations, then it’s kind of hard for you to understand the complexity of the situation and how we have to not rush into one more war in the Middle East.”

— President Obama in an interview with the Public Broadcasting Service.

We don’t know what is going on in the Situation Room, and we just don’t “understand the complexity”? And where was this mastermind president during the Benghazi terrorist attack? Seems like he didn’t understand the complexities, or just didn’t care — if he found his way to the Situation Room.
On NSA-gate, Obama recently declared, “I’m not Dick Cheney”. So he’s not, but apparently he is not Barack Obama either, the one who campaigned and ran for president. Now he feels the urge to disassociate himself with Cheney, while dragging him in to defend his own dragnet?
Then he went to the Brandenburg Gate and said:

“Obama Berlin Speech Renews Calls For Nuclear Reductions”

Peace with justice means pursuing the security of a world without nuclear weapons, no matter how distant that dream may be,” Obama said.
So the idiot with severe credibility problems now talks about nuclear weapons. Talk about an arrogant double-talking elitist. Who really believes anything he says, even Russia? Its a joke.
“Complacency is not the character of great nations,” Obama insisted.
What about when you are governed by complacent ideologues who only care about politics of the next election?(and demographics — let the pandering continue.
“Today,” he said, “people often come together in places like this to remember history, not to make it. Today we face no concrete walls or barbed wire.”
No. Today’s barbed wire and concrete is demanding we follow the media’s White House-written narrative, and forcing us to accept government run medicine, by hook or crook.
That nuclear talk prompted a Russian voice:
Alexei Pushkov, head of the Duma’s foreign affairs committee, told the Interfax news agency the president’s proposals need “serious revision so that they can be seen by the Russian side as serious and not as propaganda proposals.”
Ah they know a propaganda artist when they see one. Credibility strikes again. Even when he’s trying to give away the store, some are not sure whether to believe him. And expect them to remind him of his promises.
Then he swung on his heels to talk about climate change, pandering to environmentalists:
“Peace with justice means refusing to condemn our children to a harsher, less hospitable planet,” he said.
Here at home, Obama’s peace through justice mantra rings hollow. We have no justice for all his scandals. We don’t know where he was on 9/11 last year during the Benghazi attack. Peace he wants? And justice for Obama is no where to be found. “Just words?” as his campaign 08 speech said?
He’s so wrapped up in denial that true justice is the last thing on his mind. And with most of us not believing his words anyway, it probably doesn’t matter. Remember it was Peace through strength of Reagan that brought down the wall. Obama should have said what he really advocates: peace through complacency and injustice.
Reference article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/obama-berlin-speech_n_3466264.html?icid=maing-grid7|aim|dl1|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D332055

“But So long as nuclear weapons exist, we are not truly safe. “ – Obama said

Hawking trolling the universe

I’ll say right up front I don’t expect this to make too much sense. It’s only a few thoughts from….well, somewhere.

All week I was thinking of something I read in a talk Stephen Hawking gave. So the subject was the need to explore space because we can probably only survive another thousand years on earth. Not the thing that stood out, but this was his basic stance:

“We must continue to go into space for humanity,” Hawking said. “We won’t survive another 1,000 years without escaping our fragile planet.”

Then came what stuck in my craw, or wherever. A week later it is still stuck.

If you understand how the universe operates, you control it in a way.

Okay, no one likes to disagree with Hawking. Nobody likes to embarrass themselves. But come on…really, “we can control it”? I must have missed the theory that explains why X is Z or something.

I don’t know which part of his statement bothers me more. The first claims if we know how it operates, assuming we can, and the second is control it “in a way”. What way was he referring to? If we can understand it, would not mean we’ll make the right decisions. Should that be our objective, to control it?

There are so many variables there that I should just leave it alone. His statement stands for itself. I had lots of fun thinking it over for a week. It doesn’t sound any better now.

‘To understand the universe at the deepest level, we have to understand why is there something rather than nothing,’ Hawking said.

How many years have we been busy understanding how the earth operates and can we control that yet? As Dr Phil says…”and how’s that working out for you?”

And they like to call us conspiracy theorists.

Just a few years ago he declared philosophy dead because it has not kept up with modern science, particularly physics. So moving right along, aren’t we?

Off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of Obamaland

Barry started his term out on a rocky road. That is if you call playing golf with a couple of big-oil guys in Palm Springs while his minions are screaming for ending the Keystone pipeline outside the White House, “rocky”.

So his sycophant, low information voters weren’t too happy with that news. Oh well, welcome to the land of disenchantment with the rest of us. Do they want to compare outrage? I don’t think so. His magical mystery agenda will not solve our country’s problems, nor will the Kool Aid.

Everyone who uses oil or its byproducts has seen the price tag double since he came to office. But that matters not to the anti-energy tyrant or his little green friends with their war on energy. They scream for more inaction. “Can we have LESS, please?”

It is entirely contrary to the needs of the nation, but that’s okay to the Left. They’ll run their cars on mushrooms and algae or nothing. Meanwhile, everyone on the Left is quite content to pay double for their fuel, triple if they could have their way. And they would praise the results, as people go to the poorhouse for their agenda.

If people cannot afford to heat their homes or neglect their other necessities to pay for their fuel, it bothers the Left about as much as a flea on a grizzly bear. Whoops, sorry to bring those poor bears into a matter of politics. Well, it is politics. Does anyone in Obama’s land of make-believe really think this is about the environment, climate, or being stewards of our resources? Of course it isn’t. It’s politics, pure and simple.

That’s why, in my opinion, it was good to see all the green hypocrites and all their friends out demonstrating for what they believe in. Remember they “believed” in Obama too. It must make any used car salesman drool with envy that there are still that many suckers. Why worry about a sucker being born a minute when there are already that many of them out there, probably multiplying too…even if it’s by accident. It only shows how out of step they really are.

Isn’t it convenient for the left that the mantra “drill baby drill” has been replaced with pay baby pay? They are ecstatic about what that does to consumers forcing cuts in use and choices. That’s what they wanted and they got it. The next time Obama tries to twist the oil issue into an illogical pretzel, remember who is getting what they want.

The who by the way applies to Iran too. While they talk about the tough sanctions, Iran knows the one thing that hurts their economy drastically is low oil prices. They need or want the price of Brent around 117 /barrel. And they are near enough to their optimal price it doesn’t hurt them much. We, however, are hurting. The economy is still sputtering. Do you think the high cost of oil and energy has anything to do with it? Not if you are in their land of make-believe. (it might be a nice place to visit, but you sure wouldn’t want to live there.)

Bloomberg.com

The rally in crude prices earlier this month was driven by renewed optimism in economic growth rather than “hard demand data,” according to a report by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Brent prices reached a 2013 high of $118.90 on Feb. 8.

“The current sell-off in oil is bringing prices more in line with the underlying fundamentals,” said the bank’s New York-based head of commodities research, Jeffrey Currie, in a report e-mailed today.

Price Outlook
WTI may fall next week after weak consumption boosted crude inventories, a separate Bloomberg News survey showed.

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Pollution-Laws-Threaten-to-Drop-Britain-into-an-Energy-Crisis.html

It sort of makes you curious what other solutions may lurk along their yellow brick road in Obamaland?

Climate Climax

I think the word CimateGate fits their drumbeat agenda, and it continues.

Buzz words they use are almost comical. Sometimes one has to remember that they are the left’s words and not ones the right has strapped around their alarmist necks.

Climate financing

Climate Change

Climate aid (love that one)

Shifting climate

Climate aid activists

Green Cimate Fund

“fast start” climate financing

And now, drumroll, for their latest creation:
Climate “fiscal cliff” — We are are heading for a Climate fiscal cliff — look out eagles and cliff dwellers! Now they are adapting the language from the debt crisis to globul warming, and hijacking them to point toward their undebatable issue. More to follow. So they’ll say that you cannot address the fiscal problems without addressing Climate Change.

One quote here is not too much:

“A recent projection by the World Bank showed temperatures are on track to increase by up to 4 degrees C (7.2 F) this century, compared with pre-industrial times, overshooting the 2-degree target on which the U.N. talks are based.”

Its bad enough with education the way it is with its problems, but I’m convinced now more than ever that we have to start teaching kids how to read “green”. I mean how to read through the language the left uses by applying critical thinking skills and logic. In the future they will have to know the techniques of propaganda and spot the fallacies in the language of ‘big-gov green’ (a dialect all its own) or enviro-mentalists, just to protect themselves from it.

The Bible warned of worshipping creation over the Creator. They turned the words nature’s God into Nature is god.

Romans 1:25

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

 

If the rhetoric is not enough, Obama has EPA’s gun loaded and aimed at us with a regulation apocolypse. The Examiner reported before the election Obama had EPA hastily prepariing to roll out the regs at the end of November, and if he won they would continue their agenda. That’s now a given. And this is only the tip of the iceberg:

“More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700

What does it say when the administration put so much effort and resources into it? All that new regulation on business and of course GE will be exempt. (surprise!)

Obama has made sure that the EPA will institute mandates even if he has to overreach the executive branch’s power, since, after all, “we can’t wait” for the dictator to do things legally.

2012 UN Climate Talks In Doha, Qatar Face Multiple Challenges

EPA planning new anti-coal regulations for after election

If the rhetoric doesn’t get you, the regulations will.

Dividends piling up for Obama’s green agenda

Abound Solar Finances Under Investigation

DOE-loan recipient filed for bankruptcy in June

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
October 8, 2012 3:22 pm

The finances of a solar company that received $68 million in federal stimulus money are now under investigation in Colorado, reports ABC Denver:

http://freebeacon.com/abound-solar-finances-under-investigation/

———————————————————————————————–
 


I’ll just add some of my comments.
After all the rage about solar companies, where Obama succumbed to one of his worst losses — or “bets”– the industry is on the move once again. But not in an upward “can’t fail” way.

Months back, large solar companies in Europe were forced to lay off workers or just went under. The market flooded with cheaper goods from China was to blame, as it also cornered the market on raw materials. Sales for Solar companies outside China plummeted. China appeared to be capitalizing on all the losses elsewhere.

Then, stories came about huge layoffs in Germany as companies went belly up. The business and future it held for employees even in Germany sank for an industry which seemed to hold such promise for its economy.

This is a warning about the dangers of government manipulated industries. China is the prime example. The solar industry once heralded as the new wave enjoyed growth and expansion everywhere, especially in China. The same government that subsidized it is picking winners and losers. Sound familiar? The state-controlled banks are the government’s cops on the beat. Of course, the banks decide who will survive by who gets loans and who doesn’t. And banks are not granting loans only for expansion, another blow to the sector.

Now the government decided it is time for industry consolidation after it endorsed expansion for years. So they must force consolidation. Banks already limited expansion and now encourage mergers and acquisitions within the sector, large companies buying smaller operations.

There are growing cries for tarrifs on China. Let’s see what that brings; or if they materialize with the same hyper-addiction the industry enjoyed? US has stepped up tariffs and the EU is on the verge of adopting tougher measures. Other countries are considering that formula. So a monopolized market is finally getting squeezeed as others seek relief to China’s “dumping” around the world. And that reaction appears to be creating a problem for China.

More reference: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-06/china-price-war-draining-jobs-in-germany-s-solar-valley-energy.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-05/chinese-solar-panel-exporters-face-threat-of-eu-tariffs.html

High Gas Prices: an investigation

In-depth: The truth behind high pump prices

By Douglas J. Hagmann & Joe Hagmann

10 August 2012:
We’re seasoned investigators, so we have an inherent desire to dig for the truth. Experience and common sense has shown us that we should never rely on the “accepted” explanation for something when that explanation involves money or politics, and is repeated without challenge by the media. We don’t like liars and thieves, and will expose them whenever possible.

We wanted to get to the bottom of why we’re paying nearly $4.00 per gallon for gasoline at the pump. We wanted to know who or what is responsible for the current high price of gasoline? In addition to being a major economic burden for American families, it is also a national security issue, especially when our petrodollars are subsidizing Islamic terrorist activities.

The task to determine the truth was indeed a daunting one, not only because of the complexity of the issue but due to the facts being tightly wrapped inside various political and globalist agendas, “cooking the books” by using different reporting standards, and various other tangential issues. During our investigation, we even found two energy “analysts” using the same graph to arrive at opposite conclusions.

Nonetheless, we’ve conducted an extensive investigation in an effort to provide our readers with a concise and unbiased report that explains why we are suffering at the gasoline pumps. In the process, we’ve identified several significant lies that we are told to accept as the truth. [/…]

Read the whole report: http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/archives/6552


Its chilling that the explanations we keep hearing, repeatedly, do not touch the surface of it. And the sophistry in the blanket explanations do not cut it for many of us, they do not connect the dots. I thought it interesting how important the debasing of our currency has been, under the watchful eye of the fed, on oil and goods in general. But while many of us have been focusing our criticism domestically, isn’t it strange how no one wants to hear that? Yet we should just accept their specious reasons for high prices? This is only another part of the agenda of the powerful. But the powerful doesn’t mean the big evil oil companies. We had big oil companies when the prices were lower, by any comparison, so it is not unreasonable to look elsewhere.

And there are a lot of other explanations.

What should bother anyone is the way our tax dollars subsidize bio-fuels and alternatives while also paying the higher prices at the pump. Every time I see Obama or one of his cronies talking up their “energy policies” I want to scream, “would he ever want to tell us the truth about anything?” Only if it were aligned with his perpetual political agenda — which is basically one big lie anyway.

Another Solyndra shoe drops

Solyndra email: ‘POTUS involvement was Rahm’s idea’


BY: CJ Ciaramella — The Washington Free Beacon
August 2, 2012 5:07 pm

Chicago mayor and former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel repeatedly claimed he had no memory of the Obama administration’s controversial $535 million loan to failed solar company Solyndra, but White House emails released Thursday say it was Emanuel’s idea for the administration to tout the doomed firm.

http://freebeacon.com/solyndra-email-potus-involvement-was-rahms-idea/

*http://www.wlsam.com/article.asp?id=2307704


________________________________________________________
Now he’s busy attacking and banning a profitable company from Chicago. Something fishy on his menu?

Obama’s Outsourcing Problem

Obama’s Outsourcing Far Worse Than Romney’s

Who’s the worst outsourcer in today’s presidential race? It isn’t Mitt Romney – it’s Barack Obama.

Obama’s second largest fundraiser is John Rogers, the CEO of investment giant Ariel Capital Management. He has raised more than $1.5 million for Obama’s reelection campaign. Bully for him, except for one thing: Ariel Capital Management owns a $48.6 million stake in Accenture, which just happens to be, according to the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals, the nation’s “best” outsourcer.

 And that’s not all for Rogers; he stated that he wants to intensify the trend that started with moving call centers and factories overseas to outsourcing “day-to-day activities” including pest control, landscaping, and secretarial functions. And Rogers isn’t ashamed one bit:

 

“We’re making a very big bet right now on outsourcing. People have generally soured on the idea, and many companies are trading at discounts to their private-market values. But we don’t think that view accurately reflects the powerful secular growth we’re going to see as companies and individuals outsource more of their day-to-day activities.”

[…/]

See: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/08/Obama-outsourcing-far-worse-than-Romney

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And what about that 529 million Fisker money? Or all Obama’s failed “investments” ala Solyndra et al? But that was not his own money, it was ours. Government funds going to “invest” in jobs overseas. He’s been spending too much time with his buddy, jobs czar Jeffrey Immelt -jobs exporter expert. Immelt has a better record than Obama.