Sunday, December 27, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Some "Inconvenient Truths"
....for Al Gore at least.
I have been "man-made" global warming skeptic from the very beginning. The world's climate is simply so huge that it is the height of hubris to pretend that we are directing it. The Earth's climate is variable, but it is a self correcting system, always seeking a point of equilibrium. Then when you look at the wild swings in climate in the Earth's history, it becomes quite clear that our effect on the climate of Earth is negligible.
1) The Earth was in a Little Ice Age until the last half of the 1800's. (this period was anywhere from 600 to 200 years long, depending on what starting date you choose) The Earth has been warming ever since this period. This warming is dangerous and will inevitably lead to disaster we are told. But isn't just as likely that the Earth is returning to a normal temperature from a period of unusual cold? Unmanipulated data from New Zealand shows this warming rate to be about .06 degrees Celsius per century. The manipulated data shows this warming to be just under 1 degree Celsius per century. Prior to the Little Ice Age was a period hundreds of years (perhaps five hundred years) long called the medieval warm period (hereafter MWP). A common name for the MWP is the medieval climate optimum. The use of the term optimum is certainly interesting. The Earth's temperature was at least 1 degree Celsius (C) warmer than today during this period. So according to the manipulated data from New Zealand, in 100 years we will be back to a temperature that has been labeled the optimum. "Man-made global warming" "scientists" (hereafter GW scientists) have necessarily attempted to discredit or minimize the MWP, because not only did civilization and humanity survive the MWP, they thrived. In fact Western Civilization came close to collapsing when the MWP ended and the Little Ice Age began. At one point the GW scientists attempted to argue that the MWP only affected the Northern hemisphere, or Europe, but recent discoveries have disproved this. (here is one example)
So at one point in human history, the Earth was at least 1 degree C warmer than today, man and civilization thrived at this time, it was followed by an ice age that we are now emerging from, and under the worst case scenario 100 years from now we will be back to the temperature the Earth had during a period labeled an optimum.
2) Warm periods such as the MWP have occurred throughout pre-industrial age human history. Industrialization and man made greenhouse gases are a modern phenomena, and obviously could not have contributed to historical and prehistorical warming periods. During these periods the Earth was warmer than today, and sometimes much warmer. What caused these warming periods? I personally believe it was that ball of burning gas we call the sun, but at the very least it was something non-man made. So using Occam's Razor, absent scientific proof, shouldn't we assume that the causes of today's warming and prior warming are the same?
My first theory on global warming: the same things that caused the Earth to warm in the past, are causing the Earth to warm today. I welcome any and all skeptics and believers to test my hypothesis and attempt to disprove it, and I will help you in your efforts any way possible. Which theory is more plausible? Which theory has required their proponents to manipulate the observed data?
3) Other celestial bodies in our solar system are warming at the same time as Earth. Mars has been proven to be getting warmer. One of Neptune's moons, Triton, is getting warmer. Jupiter is getting warmer. Pluto is getting warmer. There is also evidence that Jupiter's and Saturn's rings are getting warmer. Now, I'm not saying that it is proven that the rest of the solar system is heating up for the same reason Earth is, but there is also no reason that it isn't. So I am forced to return to that whole Occam's Razor thing.
4) To the dismay of the GW scientists, the Earth has in fact been getting cooler over the last ten years. This threatens to throw their whole theory into disarray and they know it. The leaked e-mails from the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (hereafter CRU) (which is the main source of global warming data used around the world), show them desperately attempting to account for the fact that their models did not predict this cooling period and instead predicted increased warming.
So why is the Earth getting cooler? The GW scientists will tell you that we don't know, but we are sure it is going to start getting warmer again.
I suggest we look at what was going on in the mini ice age and compare it to today. If you do, you see that throughout the mini ice age we see solar minimums ( little or no sunspots): (Wolf minimum 1280 - 1350, Spörer Minimum 1450 - 1550, Maunder Minimum 1645 - 1715, Dalton Minimum 1790 - 1820) and no solar maximums. At the beginning of the MWP, we see the ending of a solar minimum and the beginning of a solar maximum. There are no solar minimums during the duration of the MWP. Today we are at the end of a solar maximum and are entering another solar minimum. Now for some unexplained reason, during solar minimums we see the Earth's temperature go down, during the solar maximums we see the Earth's temperature go up.
My second global warming theory: The sunspot cycle has an exponentially larger impact on the Earth's climate than man does. I cite the historical record as my first piece of evidence.
5) To my dismay, but not surprise, the GW scientists have been manipulating the data to produce desired outcomes.
A) The most "prestigious", most wildly cited and far and above the most influential group of GW scientists operate out of the CRU. Their work is the basis of the IPCC findings. These finding are driving environmental policy world wide. Even the US EPA cites the IPCC report as the justification for regulating CO2 emissions in the US. We now know that the scientists at the CRU are guilty of scientific fraud in four areas.
i) Manipulating data: The leaked e-mails discuss the manipulation of data by CRU scientists and their collaborators in order to produce the desired results.
ii) Hiding and destroying data: The GW scientists have been stonewalling Freedom of Information (FOI) requests in both the United Kingdom and the United States for years. Independent scientists have been requesting information from the CRU and NASA among others so that they can attempt to reproduce their results. They have been denied, and some of the leaked e-mails from CRU actually discuss strategies to hide and destroy the data. Science does not work this way.
iii) Corrupting the peer review process: We have been repeatedly told that the science is settled and that a scientific consensus has been formed to support man made global warming. First of all science is not based on consensus. In fact, quite a bit, if not most, of science's advances have come about in direct opposition to the consensus of the time. The most damning evidence to come out of the leaked CRU e-mails however is the clear evidence of efforts to mold a consensus by corrupting the peer review process. This was done in several ways. First by preventing man made warming skeptics from publishing their work. So remember the next time a GW scientists says, "Ignore that guy, his work has never been published anywhere that counts", that he hasn't been published because of collusion among the GW scientists. Secondly they sought to control the editorial process of scientific journals by putting pressure on the journals and by removing editors who were too friendly to skeptics. Lastly they compiled lists of "friendly" reviewers and "unreliable" or skeptical reviewers, and made sure their articles were only reviewed by the friendly reviewers.
iv) The CRU models don't work: Perhaps one of the saddest stories to come out of the hacked CRU e-mails details the three year efforts of a GW scientist to get their computer model to work.
B) Some independent scientists asked for some data from the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (hereafter NIWA) to check the results. They were denied. So the skeptics took the raw data from temperature monitoring stations, and compared it to the manipulated data. The raw data showed a warming of .06 degrees C over a century, while the manipulated data showed a rise of .96 degrees C. The NIWA responded that the manipulation was needed to deal with the changing location of monitoring stations. (interestingly, the weather station at the NIWA headquarters is located on a roof, next to some air conditioners. I bet they get some accurate data from that!) They are refusing to release their justifications for the modifications. With one exception all of the data had been revised to show a warming trend.
6) US organizations often used data acquired from the CRU or the IPCC (which is itself based on data from the CRU). Other data used is collected from climate monitoring stations run by the National Weather Service, a department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). A survey of these stations by skeptics has resulted in a report that details the fact that 89% of the stations fail to meet the siting criteria of the National Weather Service. These stations are located next to heat sources, and thus provide corrupt data showing temperatures that are too high. Even sadder, the US temperature monitoring system is considered the best in the world, so how flawed must be the data from everywhere else?
7) Now some scientists attempt to answer arguments like mine with the assertion that there is evidence that proves global warming: rising sea levels, rising co2 levels and shrinking glaciers and icecaps..
A) GW scientists and Al Gore say that the world's sea levels are rising, and will rise catastrophically in the future. Al Gore predicted a rise of twenty feet. Even the IPCC only predicts a rise of 17 inches by 2100. The leading expert on the world's sea levels, Nils-Axel Mörner, disagrees. In fact he details the way in which the IPCC took actual observations that showed no recent rise in the sea levels, and in 2003 manipulated the data in order to show a significant rise based on a single tide gage in Hong Kong. Further more, he points out the fact that out of 22 authors on rising sea levels for the IPCC reports, none of them are actually sea level experts. According to Dr. Mörner, the sea has not risen for the last fifty years, and at most it will rise 10 cm by the end of the century (with a +/- of 10 cm). So the sea could not rise at all, or it could rise 8 inches.
B) Some argue that CO2 levels are rising, man is a significant source of CO2, and CO2 causes global warming, so man-made global warming is occurring.
I have been "man-made" global warming skeptic from the very beginning. The world's climate is simply so huge that it is the height of hubris to pretend that we are directing it. The Earth's climate is variable, but it is a self correcting system, always seeking a point of equilibrium. Then when you look at the wild swings in climate in the Earth's history, it becomes quite clear that our effect on the climate of Earth is negligible.
1) The Earth was in a Little Ice Age until the last half of the 1800's. (this period was anywhere from 600 to 200 years long, depending on what starting date you choose) The Earth has been warming ever since this period. This warming is dangerous and will inevitably lead to disaster we are told. But isn't just as likely that the Earth is returning to a normal temperature from a period of unusual cold? Unmanipulated data from New Zealand shows this warming rate to be about .06 degrees Celsius per century. The manipulated data shows this warming to be just under 1 degree Celsius per century. Prior to the Little Ice Age was a period hundreds of years (perhaps five hundred years) long called the medieval warm period (hereafter MWP). A common name for the MWP is the medieval climate optimum. The use of the term optimum is certainly interesting. The Earth's temperature was at least 1 degree Celsius (C) warmer than today during this period. So according to the manipulated data from New Zealand, in 100 years we will be back to a temperature that has been labeled the optimum. "Man-made global warming" "scientists" (hereafter GW scientists) have necessarily attempted to discredit or minimize the MWP, because not only did civilization and humanity survive the MWP, they thrived. In fact Western Civilization came close to collapsing when the MWP ended and the Little Ice Age began. At one point the GW scientists attempted to argue that the MWP only affected the Northern hemisphere, or Europe, but recent discoveries have disproved this. (here is one example)
So at one point in human history, the Earth was at least 1 degree C warmer than today, man and civilization thrived at this time, it was followed by an ice age that we are now emerging from, and under the worst case scenario 100 years from now we will be back to the temperature the Earth had during a period labeled an optimum.
2) Warm periods such as the MWP have occurred throughout pre-industrial age human history. Industrialization and man made greenhouse gases are a modern phenomena, and obviously could not have contributed to historical and prehistorical warming periods. During these periods the Earth was warmer than today, and sometimes much warmer. What caused these warming periods? I personally believe it was that ball of burning gas we call the sun, but at the very least it was something non-man made. So using Occam's Razor, absent scientific proof, shouldn't we assume that the causes of today's warming and prior warming are the same?
My first theory on global warming: the same things that caused the Earth to warm in the past, are causing the Earth to warm today. I welcome any and all skeptics and believers to test my hypothesis and attempt to disprove it, and I will help you in your efforts any way possible. Which theory is more plausible? Which theory has required their proponents to manipulate the observed data?
3) Other celestial bodies in our solar system are warming at the same time as Earth. Mars has been proven to be getting warmer. One of Neptune's moons, Triton, is getting warmer. Jupiter is getting warmer. Pluto is getting warmer. There is also evidence that Jupiter's and Saturn's rings are getting warmer. Now, I'm not saying that it is proven that the rest of the solar system is heating up for the same reason Earth is, but there is also no reason that it isn't. So I am forced to return to that whole Occam's Razor thing.
4) To the dismay of the GW scientists, the Earth has in fact been getting cooler over the last ten years. This threatens to throw their whole theory into disarray and they know it. The leaked e-mails from the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (hereafter CRU) (which is the main source of global warming data used around the world), show them desperately attempting to account for the fact that their models did not predict this cooling period and instead predicted increased warming.
So why is the Earth getting cooler? The GW scientists will tell you that we don't know, but we are sure it is going to start getting warmer again.
I suggest we look at what was going on in the mini ice age and compare it to today. If you do, you see that throughout the mini ice age we see solar minimums ( little or no sunspots): (Wolf minimum 1280 - 1350, Spörer Minimum 1450 - 1550, Maunder Minimum 1645 - 1715, Dalton Minimum 1790 - 1820) and no solar maximums. At the beginning of the MWP, we see the ending of a solar minimum and the beginning of a solar maximum. There are no solar minimums during the duration of the MWP. Today we are at the end of a solar maximum and are entering another solar minimum. Now for some unexplained reason, during solar minimums we see the Earth's temperature go down, during the solar maximums we see the Earth's temperature go up.
My second global warming theory: The sunspot cycle has an exponentially larger impact on the Earth's climate than man does. I cite the historical record as my first piece of evidence.
5) To my dismay, but not surprise, the GW scientists have been manipulating the data to produce desired outcomes.
A) The most "prestigious", most wildly cited and far and above the most influential group of GW scientists operate out of the CRU. Their work is the basis of the IPCC findings. These finding are driving environmental policy world wide. Even the US EPA cites the IPCC report as the justification for regulating CO2 emissions in the US. We now know that the scientists at the CRU are guilty of scientific fraud in four areas.
i) Manipulating data: The leaked e-mails discuss the manipulation of data by CRU scientists and their collaborators in order to produce the desired results.
ii) Hiding and destroying data: The GW scientists have been stonewalling Freedom of Information (FOI) requests in both the United Kingdom and the United States for years. Independent scientists have been requesting information from the CRU and NASA among others so that they can attempt to reproduce their results. They have been denied, and some of the leaked e-mails from CRU actually discuss strategies to hide and destroy the data. Science does not work this way.
iii) Corrupting the peer review process: We have been repeatedly told that the science is settled and that a scientific consensus has been formed to support man made global warming. First of all science is not based on consensus. In fact, quite a bit, if not most, of science's advances have come about in direct opposition to the consensus of the time. The most damning evidence to come out of the leaked CRU e-mails however is the clear evidence of efforts to mold a consensus by corrupting the peer review process. This was done in several ways. First by preventing man made warming skeptics from publishing their work. So remember the next time a GW scientists says, "Ignore that guy, his work has never been published anywhere that counts", that he hasn't been published because of collusion among the GW scientists. Secondly they sought to control the editorial process of scientific journals by putting pressure on the journals and by removing editors who were too friendly to skeptics. Lastly they compiled lists of "friendly" reviewers and "unreliable" or skeptical reviewers, and made sure their articles were only reviewed by the friendly reviewers.
iv) The CRU models don't work: Perhaps one of the saddest stories to come out of the hacked CRU e-mails details the three year efforts of a GW scientist to get their computer model to work.
B) Some independent scientists asked for some data from the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (hereafter NIWA) to check the results. They were denied. So the skeptics took the raw data from temperature monitoring stations, and compared it to the manipulated data. The raw data showed a warming of .06 degrees C over a century, while the manipulated data showed a rise of .96 degrees C. The NIWA responded that the manipulation was needed to deal with the changing location of monitoring stations. (interestingly, the weather station at the NIWA headquarters is located on a roof, next to some air conditioners. I bet they get some accurate data from that!) They are refusing to release their justifications for the modifications. With one exception all of the data had been revised to show a warming trend.
6) US organizations often used data acquired from the CRU or the IPCC (which is itself based on data from the CRU). Other data used is collected from climate monitoring stations run by the National Weather Service, a department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). A survey of these stations by skeptics has resulted in a report that details the fact that 89% of the stations fail to meet the siting criteria of the National Weather Service. These stations are located next to heat sources, and thus provide corrupt data showing temperatures that are too high. Even sadder, the US temperature monitoring system is considered the best in the world, so how flawed must be the data from everywhere else?
7) Now some scientists attempt to answer arguments like mine with the assertion that there is evidence that proves global warming: rising sea levels, rising co2 levels and shrinking glaciers and icecaps..
A) GW scientists and Al Gore say that the world's sea levels are rising, and will rise catastrophically in the future. Al Gore predicted a rise of twenty feet. Even the IPCC only predicts a rise of 17 inches by 2100. The leading expert on the world's sea levels, Nils-Axel Mörner, disagrees. In fact he details the way in which the IPCC took actual observations that showed no recent rise in the sea levels, and in 2003 manipulated the data in order to show a significant rise based on a single tide gage in Hong Kong. Further more, he points out the fact that out of 22 authors on rising sea levels for the IPCC reports, none of them are actually sea level experts. According to Dr. Mörner, the sea has not risen for the last fifty years, and at most it will rise 10 cm by the end of the century (with a +/- of 10 cm). So the sea could not rise at all, or it could rise 8 inches.
B) Some argue that CO2 levels are rising, man is a significant source of CO2, and CO2 causes global warming, so man-made global warming is occurring.
i) According to the evidence, CO2 levels are still rising. However since CO2 is a lagging indicator it will continue to rise even after warming has stopped.
ii) Man produces approximately 5% of the Earth's CO2. Nature accounts for the other 95%. So even if we magically drop man made CO2 to 0%, the Earth's CO2 levels will continue to rise. 5% can hardly be described as significant.
iii) CO2 is a greenhouse gas and does cause warming. However CO2 is .o4% of the earth's atmosphere. Water vapor contributes three to four times as much to global warming, why aren't we concentrating on reducing water vapor instead?
So, CO2 levels are rising, but most CO2 is produced naturally and CO2 has a much smaller effect on the Earth's temperature than water vapor anyway. If man made CO2 is reduced to 0% (at a HUGE cost to civilization) the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will be reduced by .002%. Man-made CO2 is extremely small potatoes when it comes to global warming.
C) GW scientists argue that the world's glaciers and ice caps are shrinking. Some popular examples.
i) Mount Kilimanjaro: Many people like to cite the shrinking ice cap on Mt. Kilimanjaro as evidence for global warming. However it is now generally acknowledged that the melting is due to decreased precipitation, and this is largely due to the deforestation of the mount's slopes.
ii) Glaciers: The world's glaciers are all melting. This is not true. In fact many glaciers are increasing in size. Update 11/30/09: see also here.
iii) Ice caps: The world's ice caps are shrinking. The Antarctic ice sheet is in fact growing. There is conflicting evidence on the Arctic ice, but there is at least some evidence that the trend is shifting, and the Arctic ice cap is growing again.
Just what is the Earth's normal temperature anyway? Or even more importantly, what is the best temperature for humanity? Any temperature we choose must be an arbitrary decision.
In conclusion, there is some question as to whether global warming is still occurring. If it is occurring there is a question as to how much is caused by man, and how much by other sources. Even if man is having some effect, the changes we can make will come at an enormous cost in wealth and effort, and will likely have little effect. The "science" produced by the GW scientists must now be judged as dubious at best. It is time to take a breath and produce some real global warming science based on actual observations, open sourced data and models that work. Then we can re-evaluate just what the best path truly is.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The Next Iron Chef (10/18/09)
Chef Mullen wins. Chef Frietag comes in a close second.
Chef Farmerie and Chef Crenn were the bottom two. Chef Farmerie was eliminated.
(sorry..wasn't in the mood to live blog..none of them have caught my interest.)
At this point, if I had to bet an an overall winner, I bet on Frietag.
Chef Farmerie and Chef Crenn were the bottom two. Chef Farmerie was eliminated.
(sorry..wasn't in the mood to live blog..none of them have caught my interest.)
At this point, if I had to bet an an overall winner, I bet on Frietag.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
The Next Iron Chef (10/11/09)
The first challenge tonight forces the chefs to grab a unique cooking vessel and make a single pot meal served family style. When the challenge starts there is a rugby scrum at the table as they fight over the different cooking vessels, and then another one at the frig as they fight over ingredients.
Turns out the chefs are going to judge each other again. Some hardcore comments. Two of the women were particularly catty with each other. Chef Mehta was the clear winner and Chef Mullen was the clear loser. So Chef Mehta gets the advantage in the main challenge.
For the main challenge there are three cultures: Italian, French, and Greek. The chefs are each assigned a traditional recipe from one of these cultures, and they have to interpret it to make it seem new. They get an hour. Chef Mehta gets to choose his culture and picks Greek.
Chef Trevino had a dish that depended on grape leaves (dolmas) and Chef Mehta screwed him by taking all of the grape leaves. Chef Mehta gave Chef Trevino some of the leaves with less than fifteen minutes to go. Everyone is rushing around like chickens with their heads cut off.
The same three judges..so looks like it'll be them all the way through. Chef Mehta may have shot his own foot off by using Chef Trevino's grape leaves, because the two female judges made remarks about their unpleasant smell. Judge Steingarten, as usual, does a good job at pissing off the other judges, especially as they are women. It's looking at the commercial like it's coming down to Chef Mehta and Chef Mullen for last place.
This week, they don't announce the winner first, they announce the other survivors first. So they get down to three..one winner, one loser, and someone at risk. Chef Mullen ended up winning.
Chef Farmerie and Chef Smith were the two at risk. Chef Smith ended up losing. So there are only two women left.
Turns out the chefs are going to judge each other again. Some hardcore comments. Two of the women were particularly catty with each other. Chef Mehta was the clear winner and Chef Mullen was the clear loser. So Chef Mehta gets the advantage in the main challenge.
For the main challenge there are three cultures: Italian, French, and Greek. The chefs are each assigned a traditional recipe from one of these cultures, and they have to interpret it to make it seem new. They get an hour. Chef Mehta gets to choose his culture and picks Greek.
Chef Trevino had a dish that depended on grape leaves (dolmas) and Chef Mehta screwed him by taking all of the grape leaves. Chef Mehta gave Chef Trevino some of the leaves with less than fifteen minutes to go. Everyone is rushing around like chickens with their heads cut off.
The same three judges..so looks like it'll be them all the way through. Chef Mehta may have shot his own foot off by using Chef Trevino's grape leaves, because the two female judges made remarks about their unpleasant smell. Judge Steingarten, as usual, does a good job at pissing off the other judges, especially as they are women. It's looking at the commercial like it's coming down to Chef Mehta and Chef Mullen for last place.
This week, they don't announce the winner first, they announce the other survivors first. So they get down to three..one winner, one loser, and someone at risk. Chef Mullen ended up winning.
Chef Farmerie and Chef Smith were the two at risk. Chef Smith ended up losing. So there are only two women left.
Friday, October 09, 2009
You Have Got To Be Kidding Me!!!!
Pres. Barak Obama, after nine months in office, has just won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples and for giving the world "hope for a better future" with his work for peace and calls to reduce the global stockpile of nuclear weapons.
Excuse me?
This confirms for all time just what a joke the Nobel Peace Prize has become. It has been political for decades, awarded to various popular lefties...but up to now there has been at least a fig leaf for the committee to hide behind.
Not a single nuclear weapon has been destroyed.
Not a single conflict has been ended.
Nominations for this prize ended TWO Weeks after he entered office.
Look, even if you believe that Pres. Obama had actually has done something to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize...had he done it by his second week in office?
Update 3:23 AM: 205 people were nominated this year for the peace prize. Not one of them was more deserving of the prize? Not one? Unfortunately we are going to have to wait 50 years to get an official list of the other nominees. Brian Kilmeade, a Fox News host just had the definitive line about this....Pres. Obama has just become the third person to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "Not being George Bush", joining Al Gore and Pres. Carter.
Update 3:52 AM: This award is simply embarassing. It is beyond a joke, it is insulting. It insults all the previous winners over the years, and the thousands of previous nominees. At least Pres. Carter and Al Gore had DONE SOMETHING. All Pres. Obama has done is give a bunch of speeches (many overseas) where he has praised and appeased our enemies, insulted and offeneded our allies and denigrated our country's history. I believe a sound and rational argument can be made that Pres. Obama's actions and speeches have actually lessened the chance for peace in the future and made the world a more dangerous place.
Excuse me?
This confirms for all time just what a joke the Nobel Peace Prize has become. It has been political for decades, awarded to various popular lefties...but up to now there has been at least a fig leaf for the committee to hide behind.
Not a single nuclear weapon has been destroyed.
Not a single conflict has been ended.
Nominations for this prize ended TWO Weeks after he entered office.
Look, even if you believe that Pres. Obama had actually has done something to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize...had he done it by his second week in office?
Update 3:23 AM: 205 people were nominated this year for the peace prize. Not one of them was more deserving of the prize? Not one? Unfortunately we are going to have to wait 50 years to get an official list of the other nominees. Brian Kilmeade, a Fox News host just had the definitive line about this....Pres. Obama has just become the third person to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "Not being George Bush", joining Al Gore and Pres. Carter.
Update 3:52 AM: This award is simply embarassing. It is beyond a joke, it is insulting. It insults all the previous winners over the years, and the thousands of previous nominees. At least Pres. Carter and Al Gore had DONE SOMETHING. All Pres. Obama has done is give a bunch of speeches (many overseas) where he has praised and appeased our enemies, insulted and offeneded our allies and denigrated our country's history. I believe a sound and rational argument can be made that Pres. Obama's actions and speeches have actually lessened the chance for peace in the future and made the world a more dangerous place.
Sunday, October 04, 2009
The Next Iron Chef (live blog 10/4/09)
Tonight was the first episode of the second season of The Next Iron Chef. Iron Chef America is one of my favorite TV shows. However my least favorite Iron Chef is the chef who won the first competition, Michael Symon.
The first challenge was to cook a "memory" recipe that was then judged by the other competitors. The winner gets an advantage in this week's elimination challenge. It was a good challenge with a huge variety of dishes. You could see the chefs already jockeying for position and making political calls. Chef Garces won this challenge handily, getting half the votes.
The second challenge was to get a mystery ingredient and make a dish out of it, while being"fearless". The only ingredient I would have had a chance with was the duck's tongues..I would have made a meat loaf and a pate. To make things worse, they only got an hour and fifteen minutes. I was totally impressed..I wouldn't have known even where to start with some of those ingredients.
The only judge I like is Jeffrey Steingarten, but he is the only one I know really well, so maybe the other two will grow on me. During the judging of the first set of dishes things went pretty mildly. No big confrontations or outright disgust. But the teaser for the commercial seems to hint that things will heat up with the second set of dishes.
A little more heat from the judges during the second set of dishes, but nothing hair raising.
Now the judges deliberate. Most of the heat was the judges attacking each other.
Decision time.
They talked to each chef individually. Chef Appleman won with his unlaid eggs. They started with the winner, then worked their way down the survivors. They made a big point the whole time about fearlessness, much moreso than taste. The final two chefs had grasshoppers and sea cucumbers as their ingredients. I don't know if I could eat either one, let alone cook with them. The first chef eliminated was Chef Greenspan and his grasshoppers.
The first challenge was to cook a "memory" recipe that was then judged by the other competitors. The winner gets an advantage in this week's elimination challenge. It was a good challenge with a huge variety of dishes. You could see the chefs already jockeying for position and making political calls. Chef Garces won this challenge handily, getting half the votes.
The second challenge was to get a mystery ingredient and make a dish out of it, while being"fearless". The only ingredient I would have had a chance with was the duck's tongues..I would have made a meat loaf and a pate. To make things worse, they only got an hour and fifteen minutes. I was totally impressed..I wouldn't have known even where to start with some of those ingredients.
The only judge I like is Jeffrey Steingarten, but he is the only one I know really well, so maybe the other two will grow on me. During the judging of the first set of dishes things went pretty mildly. No big confrontations or outright disgust. But the teaser for the commercial seems to hint that things will heat up with the second set of dishes.
A little more heat from the judges during the second set of dishes, but nothing hair raising.
Now the judges deliberate. Most of the heat was the judges attacking each other.
Decision time.
They talked to each chef individually. Chef Appleman won with his unlaid eggs. They started with the winner, then worked their way down the survivors. They made a big point the whole time about fearlessness, much moreso than taste. The final two chefs had grasshoppers and sea cucumbers as their ingredients. I don't know if I could eat either one, let alone cook with them. The first chef eliminated was Chef Greenspan and his grasshoppers.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Huckabee
OK..I'm NOT a big Mike Huckabee fan....but......watching him play bass with Alabama tonight was definitely way cooler than Pres. Clinton playing the sax on late night TV.
Pres. Obama and the Olympics
OK, first, yes I confess to a good dose of Schadenfreude over the results in Copenhagen this week. Not so much because it was a personal defeat for Pres. Obama, but because it was such an obvious display of incompetence. There is no way that either he or his wife should have gone unless Chicago getting the Olympics was a sure thing. Pres. Obama put political capital and prestige on the line and lost. I would have hated to be one of those responsible for going on that trip on the flight back. I think it is also another example of this administration's complete incompetence in international relations.
However I am disappointed that the USA lost. I never like to see my country lose. On the other hand, the prospect of an Olympics in Chicago is simply frightening. The corruption and graft that would have accompanied the building of the Olympic venues would have been monumental.
Now, some on the left are attacking those on the right who are celebrating Pres. Obama's failure. This is hypocritical to say the least. The left would have done at least as much if it had been Pres. Bush who failed to win the Olympics. Hell some, including Sen. Burriss, are blaming THIS failure on Pres. Bush.
But even worse, some are saying that if Pres. Obama had not gone to Copenhagen, the right would be blaming him for the loss. My response is why? Why would we expect Pres. Obama to interject himself? No president has before. There might have been some comments made about the president's hometown failing, but no one would have laid it at the president's feet.
However I am disappointed that the USA lost. I never like to see my country lose. On the other hand, the prospect of an Olympics in Chicago is simply frightening. The corruption and graft that would have accompanied the building of the Olympic venues would have been monumental.
Now, some on the left are attacking those on the right who are celebrating Pres. Obama's failure. This is hypocritical to say the least. The left would have done at least as much if it had been Pres. Bush who failed to win the Olympics. Hell some, including Sen. Burriss, are blaming THIS failure on Pres. Bush.
But even worse, some are saying that if Pres. Obama had not gone to Copenhagen, the right would be blaming him for the loss. My response is why? Why would we expect Pres. Obama to interject himself? No president has before. There might have been some comments made about the president's hometown failing, but no one would have laid it at the president's feet.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Do We Really Want The Government To Run Anything?
I was laid off as a teacher at the end of the last school year due to budget cuts. (Don't cry for me...I have 39 months of rehire rights and the district not only has to hire me as a sub, they have to pay me my last year's per diem to do it. Because I will work more days this year, I will actually make more money this year.)
I filed for unemployment June 18. I was granted unemployment, and filed my first claim the first week of July. My last day of work was June 17, I had to wait a week, and then I filed for the last two weeks of June. When I hadn't heard from the Employment Development Department (EDD) (that's what California calls their unemployment department) by July 22, I sent them an email inquiry per their instructions. On the July 29, a week later, I got a reply saying they needed to conduct a phone interview, and that I would receive the information in the mail. So I waited, and subbed some summer school at $20 an hour.
I had now gone a month with no income. ( I wouldn't get paid my meager sub earnings {less than $500} until Aug. 9) Thankfully, I had paid off all my debts so I only owed my mortgage and my monthly bills. I had also managed to put about $8,000 away in savings last year. (yes..I saw both the economic downturn and my layoff coming) But what if I hadn't? How was I supposed to survive for a month if I had been the typical irresponsible modern consumer? What if I was leasing a new car every other year, maxed out my credit cards, and back in 2007 I had refinanced my house to take out the $250,000 dollars in paper equity? I'd be screwed that is what, and probably pretty hungry.
Well I kept waiting. In the meantime the middle school school year began on July 28, and I began subbing for $120 a day. After 21 days this became $347.70 a day, and was retro. I have since learned that very few of the laid off teachers are taking advantage of their ability to substitute for their per diem...which I simply don't understand.
When I hadn't received my telephone interview or notice by August 15, I sent a second e-mail to the EDD. They responded on August 24, 9 days later, with the same reply they sent me on July 29.
So, just to review, I was now up to two months with potentially no employment, (I didn't have to sub, and as I have stated, many other laid off teachers didn't) and no income.
Finally in the mail, I receive a notice that I am scheduled to have a phone interview to determine my unemployment eligibility on September 22. Not only is this three months after I first filed for unemployment (and was sent a claim form) but it is a week day, which means that I have to spend a work day waiting for a phone call between the hours of 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM. I take the call. We talk for less than 10 minutes. I am informed that I qualify beginning with the second week I intially claimed, and the check would be in the mail.
Yesterday, Sept. 30, I got a check for $295.
The one thing this experience has done is to reinforce my knowledge that you cannot depend on the government for anything, and if you do, you are screwed.
I am eternally grateful to my parents that I was raised to be an ant rather than a grasshopper....but I am damn tired of carrying all the grasshoppers on my back, and pissed off at the government's attempts to turn me into a grasshopper.
I filed for unemployment June 18. I was granted unemployment, and filed my first claim the first week of July. My last day of work was June 17, I had to wait a week, and then I filed for the last two weeks of June. When I hadn't heard from the Employment Development Department (EDD) (that's what California calls their unemployment department) by July 22, I sent them an email inquiry per their instructions. On the July 29, a week later, I got a reply saying they needed to conduct a phone interview, and that I would receive the information in the mail. So I waited, and subbed some summer school at $20 an hour.
I had now gone a month with no income. ( I wouldn't get paid my meager sub earnings {less than $500} until Aug. 9) Thankfully, I had paid off all my debts so I only owed my mortgage and my monthly bills. I had also managed to put about $8,000 away in savings last year. (yes..I saw both the economic downturn and my layoff coming) But what if I hadn't? How was I supposed to survive for a month if I had been the typical irresponsible modern consumer? What if I was leasing a new car every other year, maxed out my credit cards, and back in 2007 I had refinanced my house to take out the $250,000 dollars in paper equity? I'd be screwed that is what, and probably pretty hungry.
Well I kept waiting. In the meantime the middle school school year began on July 28, and I began subbing for $120 a day. After 21 days this became $347.70 a day, and was retro. I have since learned that very few of the laid off teachers are taking advantage of their ability to substitute for their per diem...which I simply don't understand.
When I hadn't received my telephone interview or notice by August 15, I sent a second e-mail to the EDD. They responded on August 24, 9 days later, with the same reply they sent me on July 29.
So, just to review, I was now up to two months with potentially no employment, (I didn't have to sub, and as I have stated, many other laid off teachers didn't) and no income.
Finally in the mail, I receive a notice that I am scheduled to have a phone interview to determine my unemployment eligibility on September 22. Not only is this three months after I first filed for unemployment (and was sent a claim form) but it is a week day, which means that I have to spend a work day waiting for a phone call between the hours of 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM. I take the call. We talk for less than 10 minutes. I am informed that I qualify beginning with the second week I intially claimed, and the check would be in the mail.
Yesterday, Sept. 30, I got a check for $295.
The one thing this experience has done is to reinforce my knowledge that you cannot depend on the government for anything, and if you do, you are screwed.
I am eternally grateful to my parents that I was raised to be an ant rather than a grasshopper....but I am damn tired of carrying all the grasshoppers on my back, and pissed off at the government's attempts to turn me into a grasshopper.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Why Can't We All Just Get Along?
Right now I am in a state very close to despair. A friend of mine, who happens to be a very intelligent, highly educated, hard working and successful black woman wrote:
Really? The only Black person actually harmed at these townhalls so far was a Black man beaten up by union thugs who support Pres. Obama.
The signs calling Obama a NAZI are being carried by supporters of Lyndon LaRouche, a far LEFT wacko who has run for the Democratic nomination to be president the last seven times.
Can you be opposed to Pres. Obama without being a racist?
If we are going backwards in race relations, let me submit to you that it is NOT due to the actions of White people.
The most egregious case of racially motivated voter intimidation during the last presidential election was committed by three Black men brandishing weapons and making racist statements and threats at a polling place. The cases against them were inexplicably dropped when the Obama administration took over the Dept. of Justice.
There is no channel called White entertainment television. There is no magazine called Ivory. There is no White Miss America pageant. There is no National Association for the Advancement of White People. There is no White Congressional caucus. There are no professional organizations dedicated to the advancement of White people.
On college campuses, yes the dorms are being re-segregated. But not by Whites, but by Blacks. The Greek system has now become almost totally segregated. There are Black student unions, but no White student unions. There are schools of Black studies (or African American studies) but no schools of White studies.
In recent years we have elected a Black president and had two Black Secretaries of State. Since 1984 we have crowned at least 7 Black women Miss America. Our sports heroes are largely Black. (Tiger Woods, Le Bron James, Kobe Bryant, Manny Ramirez, Adrian Peterson) The most influential and wealthy television star is Black (Oprah Winfrey) Black stars dominate the radio airwaves. Of the last 8 Best Actor Oscars, three were won by Black men. Halle Berry has recently won an Oscar for Best Actress.
Everywhere you look, White children are emulating Black culture......many successful Black children are attacked for "acting White".
Is racism dead? Of course not. But I submit to you that it's existence today is at least as much the fault of the Black community as it is the White.
In the last election 94% of Black voters voted for Pres. Obama. If 94% of Whites did ANTHING it would be seen as de facto racist behavior. Yet no one attacks Black voters as racist.
In the last election, a higher percentage of Whites voted for Pres. Obama than for any Democratic nominee since Pres. Carter. So why are White people being attacked as racists?
Now for a little history lesson.
Can anyone tell me which political party wrote, supported and enforced the aforementioned Jim Crow laws? Let me give you a hint...Bull Connor and Orval Faubus were NOT Republicans.
Which political party wrote, passed and enforced the 13th , 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (collectively called the Civil Rights Amendments)?
Which political party led the defence of slavery in the United States?
Which political party was formed primarily in support of abolition?
Which party tells people that the most important thing about them is themselves as individuals not their race, and that anyone can succeed through hard work and determination?
Which party tells people that they are foremost members of an identity group and promotes an ideology of victimology?
Prhofessor Tiffany is thinking we are not too far away from the antics that took
place during the Jim Crow era. Are we going backwards? Stupid bigots, racists,
followers...who are the real extremists?
Really? The only Black person actually harmed at these townhalls so far was a Black man beaten up by union thugs who support Pres. Obama.
The signs calling Obama a NAZI are being carried by supporters of Lyndon LaRouche, a far LEFT wacko who has run for the Democratic nomination to be president the last seven times.
Can you be opposed to Pres. Obama without being a racist?
If we are going backwards in race relations, let me submit to you that it is NOT due to the actions of White people.
The most egregious case of racially motivated voter intimidation during the last presidential election was committed by three Black men brandishing weapons and making racist statements and threats at a polling place. The cases against them were inexplicably dropped when the Obama administration took over the Dept. of Justice.
There is no channel called White entertainment television. There is no magazine called Ivory. There is no White Miss America pageant. There is no National Association for the Advancement of White People. There is no White Congressional caucus. There are no professional organizations dedicated to the advancement of White people.
On college campuses, yes the dorms are being re-segregated. But not by Whites, but by Blacks. The Greek system has now become almost totally segregated. There are Black student unions, but no White student unions. There are schools of Black studies (or African American studies) but no schools of White studies.
In recent years we have elected a Black president and had two Black Secretaries of State. Since 1984 we have crowned at least 7 Black women Miss America. Our sports heroes are largely Black. (Tiger Woods, Le Bron James, Kobe Bryant, Manny Ramirez, Adrian Peterson) The most influential and wealthy television star is Black (Oprah Winfrey) Black stars dominate the radio airwaves. Of the last 8 Best Actor Oscars, three were won by Black men. Halle Berry has recently won an Oscar for Best Actress.
Everywhere you look, White children are emulating Black culture......many successful Black children are attacked for "acting White".
Is racism dead? Of course not. But I submit to you that it's existence today is at least as much the fault of the Black community as it is the White.
In the last election 94% of Black voters voted for Pres. Obama. If 94% of Whites did ANTHING it would be seen as de facto racist behavior. Yet no one attacks Black voters as racist.
In the last election, a higher percentage of Whites voted for Pres. Obama than for any Democratic nominee since Pres. Carter. So why are White people being attacked as racists?
Now for a little history lesson.
Can anyone tell me which political party wrote, supported and enforced the aforementioned Jim Crow laws? Let me give you a hint...Bull Connor and Orval Faubus were NOT Republicans.
Which political party wrote, passed and enforced the 13th , 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (collectively called the Civil Rights Amendments)?
Which political party led the defence of slavery in the United States?
Which political party was formed primarily in support of abolition?
Which party tells people that the most important thing about them is themselves as individuals not their race, and that anyone can succeed through hard work and determination?
Which party tells people that they are foremost members of an identity group and promotes an ideology of victimology?
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Happy Birthday Coca-Cola!
On this day in 1886, the first batch of Coca-Cola was brewed up. Now Coke is one of the great American success stories, sold all over the world. I'll hoist a Cuba Libre tonight in your honor. Here in honor of rule 5 Sunday are some Coca-Cola models to help celebrate this day.
Surely This Must Be A Sign....
of the Apocalypse!
First we are given the horrific specter of Paul Krugman being in demand on the talk show circuit. It seems to me that Krugman has been studying at the feet of David Brooks and has decided to adopt a similar tactic, only from the Left. And as to Krugman's ideas, all that needs to be said is that he thinks the government has not intruded enough into our economy. Not only is he a crapweasel, he's a socialist crapweasel!
But the true horror comes when we learn that someone has created a music video asking why Krugman is not a member of the Obama administration! Seriously, someone created a music video praising Krugman!
If that is not a sign of the end times, I don't know what is.....
First we are given the horrific specter of Paul Krugman being in demand on the talk show circuit. It seems to me that Krugman has been studying at the feet of David Brooks and has decided to adopt a similar tactic, only from the Left. And as to Krugman's ideas, all that needs to be said is that he thinks the government has not intruded enough into our economy. Not only is he a crapweasel, he's a socialist crapweasel!
But the true horror comes when we learn that someone has created a music video asking why Krugman is not a member of the Obama administration! Seriously, someone created a music video praising Krugman!
If that is not a sign of the end times, I don't know what is.....
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Tons O' Titanium!
In the bottom right hand corner is one of the bags from my bank with 40 Titanium bars, forty Titansteel bars and 296 Titanium ores. If you don't know anything about WoW..that's a lot.
The Good And The Bad
Well, the good news is CNN is going to finish in third place this month in prime time for the first time ever. The funniest lines in the article are the attempts to brand CNN as a neutral news source. The problem with CNN is that they are just more of the same leftwing MSM as the network shows. There is no incentive to switch away from CBS, ABC or NBC. Another problem is their hosts. They've come along way from the days of Bernie Shaw, and not in the right direction. C'mon admit it, the only CNN personality you can name is Anderson Cooper, and then that's only because he is the gay son of Gloria Vanderbilt.
The bad news is that MSNBC has taken second place, largely due to the pyschotic rantings of Keith Olbermann and the only success story to come out of Air America, Rachel Maddow. I remember Keith from the old days when he was a local sportscaster in LA, who basically stole Fred Roggin's routine. Give Olbermann his due..he saw a void and filled it. Too bad he lacks the talent of either O'Reilly or Hannity.
Of course Fox News is far and above the winner of cable prime time. They draw more than CNN and MSNBC combined. Besides providing an alternative to the leftwing media, Fox is smart enough to give us eye candy. Gentlemen, I give you the women of Fox News.
P.S. Submitted for Rule 5 Sunday.
The bad news is that MSNBC has taken second place, largely due to the pyschotic rantings of Keith Olbermann and the only success story to come out of Air America, Rachel Maddow. I remember Keith from the old days when he was a local sportscaster in LA, who basically stole Fred Roggin's routine. Give Olbermann his due..he saw a void and filled it. Too bad he lacks the talent of either O'Reilly or Hannity.
Of course Fox News is far and above the winner of cable prime time. They draw more than CNN and MSNBC combined. Besides providing an alternative to the leftwing media, Fox is smart enough to give us eye candy. Gentlemen, I give you the women of Fox News.
P.S. Submitted for Rule 5 Sunday.
Health Care
I just saw a Business show on Fox (Cashing In) and there was a debate on Pres. Obama's health care plan. Everyone (including me) is pretty sure that his plan will be for a nationalized plan run by the government. During the debate the point was made that Pres. Obama believes that there is a right to health care provided by the government, as does some of the guests on the show.
This is repetitive, but important:
Where does this "right" to health care come from?
If we get a "right" to health care, what will the Left demand next? Because you know they will move on to a new "right" that the government must supply. I've already predicted that it will be Internet access. Hell, we're already giving out government coupons so people can buy digital decoder boxes, I assume there is a "right" to watch TV.
This is repetitive, but important:
Where does this "right" to health care come from?
If we get a "right" to health care, what will the Left demand next? Because you know they will move on to a new "right" that the government must supply. I've already predicted that it will be Internet access. Hell, we're already giving out government coupons so people can buy digital decoder boxes, I assume there is a "right" to watch TV.
Friday, March 27, 2009
WoW update 3/27/09
We've actually managed to raid more than 1 day this week! In fact we have gone into OS/Naxx with a full raid, or close to it, on Tues, Wed. and Thur.! As a result we have managed to down five new bosses this week...Gothik, The Four Horsemen, Patchwerk, Grobbulus, and Gluth. Hopefully tonight we will be able to go in and finish off 25 man Naxx.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Basketball Pools
Well, I was eliminated from Brendan Loy's NIT pool on Wenesday. No three-peat for me, I can't even finish in the top five. shucks. The best I can do in the NCAA Men's is finish second, and in the Women's NCAA I can finish no better than fourth.
In the ESPN Men's pool, I am in two groups. I'm leading one and have a good chance to win it, and I am in third in the other and have a pretty decent chance to win it.
In the ESPN Men's pool, I am in two groups. I'm leading one and have a good chance to win it, and I am in third in the other and have a pretty decent chance to win it.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Responsibility
You know what two terms you hear the most out of Pres. Obama's mouth, including tonight's press conference?
"before I got here" and "that I inherited"
Pres. Truman famously said: "The buck stops here".
Pres. Obama says: "the buck stops with that other guy".
"before I got here" and "that I inherited"
Pres. Truman famously said: "The buck stops here".
Pres. Obama says: "the buck stops with that other guy".
Monday, March 23, 2009
NCAA Update 3/23/09
OK, a this point the news is mixed.
In my three ESPN brackets, I'm in first in one group and tied for third (the first two entries are the same person) in another. Not so bad.
In Brendan's pools the news is not so good. In his NCAA Men's pool I am already elminated as a winner, although I have a very slim chance of finishing as high as second still. In his Women's NCAA pool I am in the middle of the pack, although Tennesse's loss hurt. (should have hurt almost everyone though) In his Men's NIT pool I am currently in second place and I have a great chance to win it for the third year in a row.
In my three ESPN brackets, I'm in first in one group and tied for third (the first two entries are the same person) in another. Not so bad.
In Brendan's pools the news is not so good. In his NCAA Men's pool I am already elminated as a winner, although I have a very slim chance of finishing as high as second still. In his Women's NCAA pool I am in the middle of the pack, although Tennesse's loss hurt. (should have hurt almost everyone though) In his Men's NIT pool I am currently in second place and I have a great chance to win it for the third year in a row.
Too Many People!
There is a twit in the United Kingdom named Jonathan Porritt, who unfortunately appears to be an advisor to the British Prime Minister, that is apparently channeling Sir Paul McCartney:
He wants to cut the population of the United Kingdom in half, down to 30 million people. This would drag the population back to that of the Victorian times. (And we all know how pleasant that period was for the majority of the British people) He's going to make the case this week at a conference held by an organization called the Optimum Population Trust. Imagine the hubris involved merely to imagine that you could even figure out what an "optimum population" is. Why merely roll back to 30 million? Surely 15 million would be even better? Twice as better?
Our own population crazies, Zero Population Growth (ZPG) have apparently changed their name to Population Connection. (They've apparently changed their name but their URL is still ZPG.org) Even they are only crazy enough to want to stabilize current populations. I wonder how long it will take them to pick up the banner that Mr. Porritt is raising?
At this time, solely due to immigration the population of the United Kingdom is due to rise to 71 million by 2031. The actual birth rate in the United Kingdom is below replacement rate at 1.91 per woman. (replacement rate is set at 2.1 by most demographers) with the birth rate of foreign born women higher than UK born women. Millions of people are moving to the UK (mostly non-European), while at the same time millions of British are moving out. Right now there are over 5 million British born living abroad. Anyone want to be me that this conference and organization is almost (if not totally) exclusively White and European?
What Mr. Porritt and his ilk are unwilling to face (or at least admit) is that the United Kingdom is in the process of changing from a first world European nation to a third world, non-European (and largely Muslim) nation. This new population of the United Kingdom has explicitly proclaimed their intention of replacing the European population and culture. Just how does Mr. Porritt expect to convince these people to reduce their population?
He wants to cut the population of the United Kingdom in half, down to 30 million people. This would drag the population back to that of the Victorian times. (And we all know how pleasant that period was for the majority of the British people) He's going to make the case this week at a conference held by an organization called the Optimum Population Trust. Imagine the hubris involved merely to imagine that you could even figure out what an "optimum population" is. Why merely roll back to 30 million? Surely 15 million would be even better? Twice as better?
Our own population crazies, Zero Population Growth (ZPG) have apparently changed their name to Population Connection. (They've apparently changed their name but their URL is still ZPG.org) Even they are only crazy enough to want to stabilize current populations. I wonder how long it will take them to pick up the banner that Mr. Porritt is raising?
At this time, solely due to immigration the population of the United Kingdom is due to rise to 71 million by 2031. The actual birth rate in the United Kingdom is below replacement rate at 1.91 per woman. (replacement rate is set at 2.1 by most demographers) with the birth rate of foreign born women higher than UK born women. Millions of people are moving to the UK (mostly non-European), while at the same time millions of British are moving out. Right now there are over 5 million British born living abroad. Anyone want to be me that this conference and organization is almost (if not totally) exclusively White and European?
What Mr. Porritt and his ilk are unwilling to face (or at least admit) is that the United Kingdom is in the process of changing from a first world European nation to a third world, non-European (and largely Muslim) nation. This new population of the United Kingdom has explicitly proclaimed their intention of replacing the European population and culture. Just how does Mr. Porritt expect to convince these people to reduce their population?
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Congratulations!
One of my regular (daily) reads, Althouse has just hosted an announcement that the author and host has become engaged to get married to one of her regular readers/commenters.
It's a funny world sometimes. Given the fact that she lives in Madison Wisconsin and he lives in Cinncinati, Ohio they would have never met except for her blog.
Best wishes to both of them, and now we'll see what effect this has on her blog.
It's a funny world sometimes. Given the fact that she lives in Madison Wisconsin and he lives in Cinncinati, Ohio they would have never met except for her blog.
Best wishes to both of them, and now we'll see what effect this has on her blog.
Do We Really Want National Health Care?
Today a young woman named Jade Goody died of cervical cancer at the age of 27. Certainly a personal tragedy to her family, and because of her fame, a national one for the United Kingdom. Her story shines a light on one corner of the darkness of nationalized health care.
Here in the United States, it is recommended that young women get tested for cervical cancer by the age of 21 or within three years of their first sexual intercourse if younger. The test is commonly known as a pap smear. This is because cervical cancer happens to be one of those that can be detected very early, and if treated is very survivable. It is quite common for teenage girls to get pap smears.
Things are quite different under the National Health Care systems in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe.. In most of the United Kingdom, women CANNOT get a pap smear until the age of 20, and since 2003, in England until the age of 25. When confronted about it, British NHS officials bragged that in other parts of Europe women have to wait until the age of 30 to get a pap smear.
Next factor in the fact that here in the United States it is recommended that women receive a pap smear every year until at least the age of 30 and three consecutive clear smears, at which point they recommend every three years until the age of 70.
In the UK they only provide pap smears every three years between the age of 25 and 49, and then every five years until the age of 64.
Early detection is vital in curing cervical cancer. In fact in countries without access to pap smears, cervical cancer is a leading cause of death among women.
When do you want your daughters, sisters, mothers and wives to have their first pap smears? How often do you want to get them? Do you want some government bureaucrat telling you that you cannot get tested? This is just one small fragment of the tragedy of nationalized health care. Imagine this spread across the whole medical realm.
Remember this when the Left starts extolling the benefits of nationalized health care and just say no.
Here in the United States, it is recommended that young women get tested for cervical cancer by the age of 21 or within three years of their first sexual intercourse if younger. The test is commonly known as a pap smear. This is because cervical cancer happens to be one of those that can be detected very early, and if treated is very survivable. It is quite common for teenage girls to get pap smears.
Things are quite different under the National Health Care systems in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe.. In most of the United Kingdom, women CANNOT get a pap smear until the age of 20, and since 2003, in England until the age of 25. When confronted about it, British NHS officials bragged that in other parts of Europe women have to wait until the age of 30 to get a pap smear.
Next factor in the fact that here in the United States it is recommended that women receive a pap smear every year until at least the age of 30 and three consecutive clear smears, at which point they recommend every three years until the age of 70.
In the UK they only provide pap smears every three years between the age of 25 and 49, and then every five years until the age of 64.
Early detection is vital in curing cervical cancer. In fact in countries without access to pap smears, cervical cancer is a leading cause of death among women.
When do you want your daughters, sisters, mothers and wives to have their first pap smears? How often do you want to get them? Do you want some government bureaucrat telling you that you cannot get tested? This is just one small fragment of the tragedy of nationalized health care. Imagine this spread across the whole medical realm.
Remember this when the Left starts extolling the benefits of nationalized health care and just say no.
The Nolan Sisters
My heavy metal cred took some serious hits when I was growing up. First there was the fact that I actually admitted to dancing to disco. But the hardest thing to explain away was my love for the Nolan Sisters. What can I say, I was a horny young man.......
Now before the attacks rain down...
1) These videos are from 1979 and 1981..long before MTV...spare me the comments about the production values.
2) They use the word "shant" in the lyrics..how great is that!
Update 03/22/09 6:51: I've been linked! Now my fiendish plans to try and take over the world can begin...
And for those of you who don't remember the Nolans, they were an Irish band who made it big in the UK and Japan, but never really caught on here in the States.
Now before the attacks rain down...
1) These videos are from 1979 and 1981..long before MTV...spare me the comments about the production values.
2) They use the word "shant" in the lyrics..how great is that!
Update 03/22/09 6:51: I've been linked! Now my fiendish plans to try and take over the world can begin...
And for those of you who don't remember the Nolans, they were an Irish band who made it big in the UK and Japan, but never really caught on here in the States.
Tax RevoltTea Parties
Just about one month ago Rick Santelli gave his famous speech from the floor of the Chicago Stock exchange:
Future generations may know this man as "The Sam Adams of the 21st Century" All over the country people have been spontaneously organizing Tea Party protests over the actions of Pres. Obama and the Democratic Congress.
The only thing more amazing than the rapid spread of this grassroots movement across the country is the complete lack of coverage of it from the MSM. Literally dozens of articles and reports have been made about 40 people protesting outside the homes of AIG executives yesterday. By most accounts the protesters were heavily outnumbered by the reporters. This protest was all over cable and network news. Where is the coverage of the tea parties?
I am starting to hear suggestions that a big nationwide event is going to happen on April 15. I certainly hope so. If we don't see any improvement soon, I have two suggestions for next year.
First, if possible, change your withholding to "0" as soon as possible. This reduces the amount of interest free loans we give the government, and if enough of us do it, will probably affect the government's cash flow. Simply take the amount you used to send to the IRS each month, and put it in a savings account. Thus you get the interest payments on your money the government isn't giving you, and when your taxes are due in 2010, you have the money on hand.
Second, don't file your taxes until April 14 or April 15 next year. You will have to wait longer for your refund, but if you follow my suggestion above, the government won't owe you a refund. The impact this would have on the IRS is immense. They depend upon the fact that people start filing their returns on January 1.
Protests are good. But it is time to go to the next step. If we can convince millions of Americans upset with Pres. Obama and the Democrats to follow my two suggestions we could really shake things up in Sodom on the Potomac.
Future generations may know this man as "The Sam Adams of the 21st Century" All over the country people have been spontaneously organizing Tea Party protests over the actions of Pres. Obama and the Democratic Congress.
The only thing more amazing than the rapid spread of this grassroots movement across the country is the complete lack of coverage of it from the MSM. Literally dozens of articles and reports have been made about 40 people protesting outside the homes of AIG executives yesterday. By most accounts the protesters were heavily outnumbered by the reporters. This protest was all over cable and network news. Where is the coverage of the tea parties?
I am starting to hear suggestions that a big nationwide event is going to happen on April 15. I certainly hope so. If we don't see any improvement soon, I have two suggestions for next year.
First, if possible, change your withholding to "0" as soon as possible. This reduces the amount of interest free loans we give the government, and if enough of us do it, will probably affect the government's cash flow. Simply take the amount you used to send to the IRS each month, and put it in a savings account. Thus you get the interest payments on your money the government isn't giving you, and when your taxes are due in 2010, you have the money on hand.
Second, don't file your taxes until April 14 or April 15 next year. You will have to wait longer for your refund, but if you follow my suggestion above, the government won't owe you a refund. The impact this would have on the IRS is immense. They depend upon the fact that people start filing their returns on January 1.
Protests are good. But it is time to go to the next step. If we can convince millions of Americans upset with Pres. Obama and the Democrats to follow my two suggestions we could really shake things up in Sodom on the Potomac.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Whether the Future?
One of my current daily reads (The Other McCain) has posted a set of rules and guidelines designed to garner your blog a million hits. They aren't actually that hard to follow. The question is, do I go for it? It will require a little more attention and dedication to this blog than I've been able to muster at times. Maybe I will just ease my way into it.
WoW Update
Yep, still playing World of Warcraft. Gahrie is pretty well equipped, and I know all of the fights except Malygos. It appears I have been demoted back to the position of third tank once Olina and Kannonskep got geared up, but I still make the 25 man raids, so I can deal with it. I still consider myself the best offtank in the guild, and I know I have prevented many wipes by taking over when the main tank dies, or picking up random adds.
NCAA
I'm in three ESPN pools. So far none of my second round winners have lost in the first round, so I haven't been hurt that bad.
I'm in Brendan Loy's NCAA Men's pool, Women's pool and the NIT pool. For some reason I do really well in the NIT pool. I've won it the last two years, and came in second three years ago. I'm currently tied for 6th place, and well positioned to win it all again.
I'm in Brendan Loy's NCAA Men's pool, Women's pool and the NIT pool. For some reason I do really well in the NIT pool. I've won it the last two years, and came in second three years ago. I'm currently tied for 6th place, and well positioned to win it all again.
Fort Knox
A stray thought hit me this afternoon. What is going on with all of the gold in Fort Knox?
There have been rumors for years that all of the gold is gone. Maybe now we will find out. Because if there is any gold there, it won't be there much longer when Pres. Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid remember it is there.
Remember you read it here first when it happens, probably within the next six months. The Democrats have already looted our wallets, our children's future and surely Fort Knox is next.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Pres. Obama
OK, set aside for the moment his inability to staff the executive branch, his inept handling of the economy and his inability to speak without a teleprompter.
First he snubs Prime Minister Gordon by refusing to hold a traditional press conference, then he embarrasses the United States by giving him a collection of DVDs...that don't even work in England! What the hell? Could you imagine the hue and cry if Pres. Bush had done something so incompetent? Where are the cute segments on SNL or The Daily Show? Where is Olbermann's self-righteous rant?
Now my first thought was it was just one more example of Democratic incompetence. But someone on another blog brought up a good point: What happened to the White House protocol office? There is supposed to be a group of non-political professionals in the White House that stops this type of Mickey Mouse nonsense from happening. The way I see it, one of three things happened:
1) Obama staffers ignored the White House protocol professionals and/or left them out of the loop.
2) The White House protocol office allowed the gaffe to occur for whatever reason.
3) The Obama administration took a page out of the Clinton administration playbook and replaced the non-partisan professionals with incompetent political appointees.
Whatever happened, it says something interesting about the Obama administration, something much more serious than just a gaffe.
Next we turn to Pres. Obama's appearance on The Tonight Show. (Note to Pres. Obama: the campaign is over...you won) Can you imagine the howls of outrage if Pres. Bush had made that Special Olympics comment? Instead the MSM is rallying around Pres. Obama to defend him.
Every one of you who voted for Obama has some 'splaining to do.
First he snubs Prime Minister Gordon by refusing to hold a traditional press conference, then he embarrasses the United States by giving him a collection of DVDs...that don't even work in England! What the hell? Could you imagine the hue and cry if Pres. Bush had done something so incompetent? Where are the cute segments on SNL or The Daily Show? Where is Olbermann's self-righteous rant?
Now my first thought was it was just one more example of Democratic incompetence. But someone on another blog brought up a good point: What happened to the White House protocol office? There is supposed to be a group of non-political professionals in the White House that stops this type of Mickey Mouse nonsense from happening. The way I see it, one of three things happened:
1) Obama staffers ignored the White House protocol professionals and/or left them out of the loop.
2) The White House protocol office allowed the gaffe to occur for whatever reason.
3) The Obama administration took a page out of the Clinton administration playbook and replaced the non-partisan professionals with incompetent political appointees.
Whatever happened, it says something interesting about the Obama administration, something much more serious than just a gaffe.
Next we turn to Pres. Obama's appearance on The Tonight Show. (Note to Pres. Obama: the campaign is over...you won) Can you imagine the howls of outrage if Pres. Bush had made that Special Olympics comment? Instead the MSM is rallying around Pres. Obama to defend him.
Every one of you who voted for Obama has some 'splaining to do.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Oh Stop It Barry!
I just saw President Obama's press conference about the budget. There was a lot there to get angry about, but the part that pissed me off the most was his "born with a silver spoon " remarks and the implication that he raised himself up from the depths of poverty. Bullshit. Everywhere he lived he was in the upper middle class. He seems to want people to believe he was from the 'hood. Hell, read here about his high school in Hawaii. he went to IVY league schools in college.
I really don't know why Pres. Obama hates the rich (except for the fact that he has surrounded himself with Marxists his whole life) but it is quite clear he does. Fine, but at least spare us the poor boy act.
I really don't know why Pres. Obama hates the rich (except for the fact that he has surrounded himself with Marxists his whole life) but it is quite clear he does. Fine, but at least spare us the poor boy act.
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
Happy St. Patrick's Day everyone! Luck of the Irish to ya!No, you aren't imagining things, I'm actually writing on my blog. Did you ever get a craving for a chili cheese and onion omelet at 5:30 A.M.? I did. Ummm ummmm good.
There are two reasons I haven't been writing on my blog. The first is my addiction to World of Warcraft. ( I think 4 hours plus a night is an addiction) The second is the fact that I read lots of other people's blogs, and comment on them. By venting on other perople's sites, I really deplete my need to write here. I'm going to try and be better, but we all know how that went last time.
One of the things that has been bugging me lately is ambulance chasing lawyers and their commercials. I am currently off track (on vacation) and usually have the TV on in the background when I am at home. I can't tell you the number of commercials I have had to endure that feature some law firm trying to gin up business for a class action suit against a drug, or surgical procedure or some environmental factor.
Look I know we need lawyers to redress wrongs. But the system has broken down. No instead of lawsuits to correct wrongs, we have lawsuits to enrich law firms. Folks if they can afford to put on the number of commercials I'm seeing, they are making upwards of tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars on these things. For all I know, they're billing the cost of these commercials and they aren't even coming out of the law firm's profits.
These law firms make huge profits from these class actions suits, and the plantiffs get a pittance. It is not unusual for a law firm to make millions and the average plantiff to get less than $1000. Much of the time the lawyers create a huge class of plantiffs, harass the target and end settling in such a way that the lawyers make millions andthe plantiffs practically nothing. I know, i've been a plantiff in a couple of lawsuits by default, and gotten a coupon while the lawyers got a new house, car and office, plus the resources to go find another plantiff class.
One of the major reasons health care is so expensive today is these lawsuits. First the insurance for doctors goes up to pay for defending and settling these lawsuits, so doctors have to charge more for their services. Secondly, doctors end up ordering unnecessary tests in order to cover their ass. Of course, now that's not even safe, since I just saw a commercial trying to create a class action about MRI tests.
We need to close about half of the law schools in this country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)