Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Say it ain’t so. Harry Reid is abandoning cap and trade? Or was this simply one of those times the House passed a bill knowing all the while the Senate would kill it? Dems like to claim cap and trade, aka the national energy tax, was proposed over concern about global warming. The GOP claims it is a tax on energy and job killer. Truth is that many including Al Gore and many in the federal government stand to profit through carbon credit exchanges.

It is easy to doom a legislative proposal by adding additional language making the bill a multi-purpose scam. Loose references to bipartisan negotiations were reported to break down over offshore drilling disputes and the immigration reform issue. But all that could have been intentional poison pills inserted to guarantee failure.

The strategy being those supporting it really oppose cap and trade but look good to eco voters and other liberals in an election year. The other side gets their pick of items in the bill to mask their true intentions. All in Congress get political cover in an election year with such tactics and then wonder what causes voter outrage.

It is interesting that some state the reason the bill would fail is the need for 60 votes. That did not seem to stop passage of Obama’s financial fiasco commonly and mistakenly referred to as Wall Street reform.

Bribes for votes were offered to three RINOs named Collins, Snowe and Brown. Just like the 60 vote hurdle was overcome in a similar fashion for Obamacare by offering Cornhusker Cash and the Louisiana Purchase for Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu.

The titles of ‘Senator’ were intentionally omitted for these elected officials as their actions do not warrant the respect. If what they did is not a violation of their oath or affirmation, nothing is.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Read the complete article here. (click)

BTW, by the time this post is published all this could change.

The de Rothschild’s fortune may be a publicly unknown quantity but theories abound on its size. It has been estimated by some as in the trillions and some accounts place it in the hundreds of millions when at first the dynasty was born.

David de Rothschild may not be your typical or average limousine liberal. With the size of the family fortune a whole new label may be required. But what de Rothschild shares in common with the long car lefties is an affection for anthropogenic global warming.

Why is it that well-heeled individuals take a Hollywood approach when telling the rest of us how to live? Is it possible that those who shoulder the burden of living with massive fortunes the rest of us can only dream about have no clue? It would make more sense if those short on targets for their fortunes invested in practical solutions to the issues they embrace.

But that would illuminate the real story. It is not about AGW or any real issue. It’s about them and their personal interests.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from VOA News….

A British adventurer is spreading his own message in a bottle by crossing the Pacific Ocean aboard an 18-meter catamaran made of thousands of plastic soda bottles.

David de Rothschild’s unusual boat is his way of drawing attention to the plastic polluting the world’s oceans while also showcasing a solution. The 31 year old hopes to inspire followers with the boat he calls the “Plastiki.”

Global mission

“We’re on a mission to beat waste,” says de Rothschild. “The Plastiki project is really trying to showcase that waste is inefficient design and that we can reuse everyday materials and rather than them ending up in landfill, or in our oceans, or being incinerated and ending up in our atmosphere, we can repurpose and build items that can be reused so we can close the loop.”

After reading a United Nations report about the huge swirls of plastic trash in the oceans, the British banking heir thought up the expedition to draw attention to the problem.

The name Plastiki echoes the Kon-Tiki, the raft that Norwegian anthropologist and adventurer Thor Heyerdahl built to cross the Pacific in 1947.

His grandson, Olaf Heyerdahl, was one of six crew members on the first leg of the Plastiki voyage, from San Francisco to Christmas Island.

If you are the most liberal president the United States has ever seen and you give a speech that is panned by the mainstream media what does that tell you? If you cannot win the praises of the liberal media who fawned all over you since you declared your intention to run for the White House in 2008 it’s time to consider a career change.

For those who are interested and haven’t had a chance to review the commentary on Obama’s Tuesday night Oval Office speech two links are provided below:

Media on Obama’s speech: Did we mention it was short on specifics?

Reaction to President Obama’s Speech

Then there is the review from this blog. The handy White House transcript of the speech provides the targets. In just the third paragraph Mr President raised a question or two.

Because there has never been a leak this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. That’s why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation’s best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge — a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation’s Secretary of Energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice.

Not having any evidence to the contrary the size and depth of this gusher is not contested. But Mr President, if you ‘assembled a team’ of the best and the brightest to ‘tackle this challenge’ almost immediately what does that say about two months passing with little to show for it? And stating the event has ‘tested the limits of human technology’ is hard to believe. If reports are correct it appears you have declined assistance from those who have offered to help. A good example would be the Dutch offering to perform skimming operations.

The very next paragraph Mr President you claim the brain trust results had you tell BP to bring out more stuff. Hardly a testament to the limits of human technology if you simply ordered more stuff. And if, as you say, up to 90% of the gushing oil can be captured in weeks why wasn’t it possible before now? Or is ‘up to 90%’ a set of weasel words allowing for nothing more than has been done to date?

And it just gets better in paragraph number six.

But make no mistake: We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And we will do whatever’s necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy.

That pretty much leaves everything open to interpretation. That may why the MSM said the speech was short on specifics. Think of the words in paragraph six as you would when discussing work to be performed by a potential contractor for your home repairs after some disaster. ‘For as long as it takes’ and ‘whatever’s necessary’ are not phrases you want to hear. Making someone pay for damage they caused is subject to legal challenge and in any event can take years longer than anyone can wait. So there you are, nowhere.

Obama says the federal government has been in charge of the cleanup since the beginning. But carefully says ‘we now have nearly 30,000 personnel’ cleaning up. Meaning ‘now’ and not since the beginning. Mr Obama also urges governors in the region to activate the National Guard yet carefully mentions he authorized it but when…. just before the speech?

It gets worse from this point. There is no reason to continue but feel free to review the video or transcript which is widely available and of course the White House website has it.

This is just pathetic. And yes, President Obama does not warrant all the blame for the spill. But his performance as President of the United States regarding this matter falls miserably below any minimum standard acceptable. If the person sitting in the Oval Office cannot muster the resources public or private to address the issue in a timely manner this country is in real trouble.

Gee, what will he do when a real disaster occurs? By his actions this apparently was not considered a disaster of the magnitude he describes in the speech. Or at least not until public opinion changed his mind.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There are simply too many troubling stories in recent weeks. And this post simply selects a few that demonstrate the contrast of issues needing attention. From the never ending failure to enforce immigration law in the US to years of ignoring an issue of equal importance to national security, Iranian nukes, President Obama adds his ‘Katrina’ to the list of issues railed on by liberals during the Bush years but now silent with the Messiah in the White House. And let’s not forget about financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts and the announcement of a merger between United and Continental airlines.

An estimated 10 to 12 million people are thought to have entered the United States illegally, and most come from Latin America. Hispanics are the largest minority group in the American southwest, and immigration reform has become a potent political issue in the Hispanic community, where calls for crackdowns on illegal immigration have been viewed as anti-Hispanic.

There was a time when the number of illegals was estimated near 30 million. Over time it has been greatly reduced. The excerpt above points to the problem. ‘People thought’ to be here illegally. More important is stating ‘most come from Latin America.’ That the largest minority group in the southwest is ‘hispanic’ and the ‘hispanic community’ protests enforcement of immigration laws speaks to the larger problem. Being here illegally, making the most noise about amnesty, expressing no intention of becoming American while invoking the race card explains the fallacy. Illegal immigration is an entirely self-serving proposition. It denounces the very principles it claims to represent.

President Barack Obama says an expanding oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico is a massive and unprecedented environmental disaster that will require a relentless, coordinated effort to overcome.

That ‘relentless, coordinated effort’ is taking a long time to begin. Compare this to reaction over the response to Katrina during the Bush administration. NOAA has had an oil spill response program for 15 or 20 years. So why the long delays here? Now it is suggested the oil slick will travel around Florida and up the east coast of the US. Another example of how ineffective big government is.

And then there is the small matter of a merger in the airline industry.

The merger between United and Continental Airlines will be worth some $3 billion.

The combined company will have nearly 700 planes, 80,000 employees, and fly to 370 destinations in 59 countries.

Airline industry expert Joseph Schwieterman of DePaul University in Chicago says the announcement is a positive sign for an industry that has struggled since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

The airline industry struggled long before 2001. In many ways the troubles of the airlines is quite similar to that of automobile manufacturers. So two airlines merge as the answer to solve their problems. It does nothing to confront the underlying problems of the industry. But it does present a possible example of what the current push for financial reform in Congress, too big to fail and more bailouts in the future will bring. More problems for the American taxpayer, consumers in general and evidence politicians have no idea what they’re doing or are lying to you about their intentions.

This post concludes with a brief mention of Iranian nukes. This issue is the most troubling in this list. Continued failure to properly address and resolve it may result in a mushroom cloud. The only positive outcome thus far illuminates ineffective leadership around the planet, not just the United States. And that is little consolation.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad kicked off the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference with a lengthy diatribe against the United States and other Western powers who seek to sanction his country for its controversial nuclear program.

Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke for more than half an hour, giving what has become something of his trademark - a speech criticizing the United States, Israel and invoking God - and sending the U.S., British and French delegations walking out of the hall in protest.

There is nothing new about this issue. The UN is as impotent as ever. The Obama administration has done nothing. China, Russia and Iran have used this issue to their collective advantage and no one else presents an answer. As another terrorist demonstrates how vulnerable to attack everyone is weak minds obsess on how to be fair to those who do not understand the concept. When will we treat terror threats like terror threats? Stop coddling those who support and produce terrorism and other acts of war.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

One report attributed to Reuters at the NYT fish wrap and a similar one at Reuters report the IPCC will be investigated by an independent board of review. Each report is slightly different yet share some text and the titles are not the same. Given the scam proportions of AGW and the IPCC this raises suspicion this blog will deal with right now as no time is available for further investigation. But it can make you wonder. Was the NYT taking a little creative license with the report?

Moving to the real problem, how do you convince the public everything is above board when you make a claim that irregularities related to scientists will be investigated by other scientists? Who cares if you claim they are independent? The ones under investigation were described that way too!

This blogger, for one, would like to report on at least one example where confidence is high that so-called scientific evidence on AGW is correct. As much as this issue smells of scam any skeptic worth their criticism would expect at least one example of scientific truth regarding global warming. Everything being false or fabricated is no more believable than everything being correct.

Okay, let’s go back to the report…..

“It will be [made up of] senior scientific figures. I can’t name who they are right now. It should do a review of the IPCC, produce a report by, say, August and there is a plenary of the IPCC in South Korea in October.

“The report will go there for adoption,” he told reporters on the sidelines of a UNEP conference in Nusa Dua, on the Indonesian island of Bali, where environment ministers have been meeting this week.

It would appear that the powers-that-be within the United Nations are simply seeking vindication by any means in advance of the next scam meeting. It is not difficult to believe those in lesser industrialized nations and the third world view the AGW issue as a great strategy for sabotaging their more successful counterparts. Launch initiatives like those suggested by Al Gore and his crew to destroy the economies of ‘rich’ nations to even the playing field.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Nothing like singleness of purpose to inspire others by demonstrating that hard work and determination lay the foundation for success. Who better to display those attributes than the King of Altruism, the man who invented the internet and is deeply devoted currently to saving our planet, Al Gore.

Last weekend with continued support from the NYT fish wrap former US Vice-President Al Gore presented an op-ed once again extolling the virtues of his own personal crusade. To express his concern for those who reject his money making venture this political doormat and newly minted snake oil salesman offered the following sentiment:

I, for one, genuinely wish that the climate crisis were an illusion.

But just as Mr Gore’s incompetence derailed his bid for President of the United States in 2000 it once again exposes his worldwide scam to profit from a crisis of his own making. Not an unusual strategy for a liberal. Attempt to create panic, fool the willing and laugh all the way to the bank in your corporate jet while criticizing others for destroying the planet.

Some more of Mr Gore’s ‘phrases’ will be supplied here demonstrating his folly. Of course libs will object to out of context use but then they are free to follow the link, search for the phrase and read the whole laughable thing for themselves. Why make everyone else suffer through Gore’s feeble pitch for his own wealth building scheme.

From Mr Gore:

-It is true that the climate panel published a flawed overestimate… (read the rest for yourself)

-But the scientific enterprise will never be completely free of mistakes.

-Because these and other effects of global warming are distributed globally, they are difficult to identify and interpret in any particular location.

In each of the examples above Mr Gore admits his case for AGW is flawed. He has drawn an absolute conclusion from vague, ambiguous or simply flawed data. And on that thin or non-existent evidence he expects the world to act on his recommendations. His position for personal gain from investments and partnerships points to the hypocrisy of his quest.

Hey Al, if you want to make a boatload of money on eco=business knock yourself out. But don’t expect the rest of us to buy what you’re selling, literally. The financial turmoil of the last few years and what may last for some time is nothing compared to the economic destruction your holy war would cause if we let it. Your money connection to your environmental crusade betrays your claim of genuine concern. As does your personal choices for producing the carbon mess you describe. You’re simply not believable. Nor are your cronies in the pseudo-science game. They’re in it for the money too.

Are there problems to solve with regard to ecology and the environment? Certainly there are. And good folks have been quietly working on them for a long time without the help from Al Gore’s personal search for the Holy Grail. Gore’s personal agenda will do more to harm those efforts than any other source. When you lose the public trust through selfish motivation support for otherwise noble endeavors declines.

Thanks for nothing, Al Gore.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

BTW, it is interesting that Gore chose the word ‘enterprise’ to describe science.

Since Obama pledged a zero tolerance policy toward invasive species in the Great Lakes, Cox said the president has left the door to the lakes wide open, potentially hurting Michigan jobs and the economy. “His indifference is stunning,” Cox said.

A crisis the Obama administration is letting go to waste much to the chagrin of other liberals like Governor Granholm in the third world state of Michigan.  Maybe Rahmbo ‘deadfish’ Emanuel should be the point man on the carp crisis. Invasive species are a problem but they may also be an example of larger problems in the US.  POLS and public officials appear to be clueless on how to handle problem solving.  The recurring theme is the nanny state mantra demanding someone else make the problem go away.

Yo, Governor Granholm, besides destroying your state’s economy was there no way you could solve your fish problem before this?  What did you do to address the problem before this news item put it out there for all to read?

Gee, maybe anthropogenic global warming is not the biggest eco problem for liberals.  Perhaps it comes in the form of a big fish that eats a lot.  The growth of government, spending and deficits does not appear to have been the great problem solving tool liberals suggest.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Some in the ’science’ community are honest and some created Climategate.

Disclosure of e-mails and documents from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Britain — a collaborator with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — reveals some scientists’ willingness to suppress or massage data and rig the peer-review process and the publication of scholarly work. The CRU materials also reveal paranoia on the part of scientists who believe that in trying to engineer “consensus” and alarm about warming, they are a brave and embattled minority. Actually, never in peacetime history has the government-media-academic complex been in such sustained propagandistic lockstep about any subject.

Some ‘deny’ Climategate while others have known about the fraud for a long time.

“My presentation will be the unique one,” said Inhofe, a climate change skeptic who is investigating allegations that some scientists manipulated data to provide proof of global warming. “They’re not even close on votes in the United States Senate.”

“They’re cooking the science,” Inhofe said. “The same things that came out on these e-mails is what I said four years ago.”

You need a flawless scheme and ‘perps’ who can carry it out in order to commit the perfect crime.

Obama’s Top Climate Advisers Can’t Get Doomsday Story Straight While Testifying Before Same Committee on Same Day
Thursday, December 10, 2009

Last week, White House science czar John Holdren told members of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of 6 feet or more in a century.

But Joan Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told the same committee on the same day that changes in global temperatures could mean a rise in sea levels of up to 3.5 feet in this century.

As with all investigations the best strategy is to follow the money.

As for Al Gore, the former Vice President brings emotional fervor to his carbon crusade. He travels the country displaying charts and graphs, quoting scientific experts and appealing to philosophers and religious leaders to save the planet from global warming. But he says nothing about his business partners who yearn to trade on the emerging carbon market. And the media pay no attention to the companies offering “carbon advisory services” that will profit from federal carbon emission controls.

Al Gore’s scam is not especially creative. His strategy is well known in the life insurance market. An old technique is to create fear in the mind of your prospect that their spouse and other dependents will be left penniless if they expire prematurely. The claim is the life insurance they buy will protect them from that fate. While the salesman may actually believe he is helping you he knows his income depends on a successful outcome to the presentation. Then there are the scam artists whose only interest is getting rich off your fear, real or imagined.

The faster someone wants you to act on their suggestion the more likely it is a scam.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Soros scheming at Copenhagen: Eco-redistribution of wealth (Michelle Malkin) 

The following is part of Michael Mann’s attempt to convince you the evidence of the greatest scandal in recent science history does not exist.  Just like he tries to tell you the evidence against AGW does not exist.  In his world the truth is what you want it to be.

“There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation.”

They’ve turned “something innocent into something nefarious,” Mann added.

Now there’s some arrogance.  Not only does Michael Mann suggest the public is stupid but they cannot read.  But if you lie to the public about a political agenda using fake science how much of a leap is it to simply lie when you get caught?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Not that all environmentally related efforts on the planet should cease given Climategate but you gotta laugh at the timing. Unless the hacker(s) who exposed the AGW freaks for what they are eludes authorities successfully and forever (he/she/they) will not be laughing at things related to timing or time. Maybe the powers that be will at some point realize what a gift this hack was and give the perp a pass. Right.

As a sidenote, guess the WH had to feature this event since President Obama’s Asia trip is being ‘touted’ as a major bust. At least he’s consistent.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

PM-Obama: The next step

India, US Agree on Climate Change

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have launched what the White House is calling a “green partnership.”

Vidushi Sinha | Washington, DC
25 November 2009

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have launched what the White House is calling a green partnership, affirming the countries’ commitment to combating climate change and ensuring energy security and clean energy.

India and the United States have agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding to increase cooperation on energy security, clean energy, and climate change.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on a state visit to Washington, said both countries will work together to make the environment cleaner.

“We welcome the president’s commitment to a major program for promotion of renewable energy, and I drew his attention to India’s own ambitious national action plan on climate change which has eight national missions covering both mitigation and adaptation,” Mr. Singh said.

The two leaders said their countries are committed to building a clean energy economy that will drive investment, job creation, and economic growth.

Ron Somers is president of the US-India Business Council. He says India and the United States will soon be close partners in promoting green technology.

“We will be focusing on new collaborations that are going to become platform not only for India to fight global warming or United States to fight global warming but a platform that we together develop to provide technologies for the world. So I see tremendous opportunities coming,” Somers said. “It’s all about low carbon emitting technology.”

But India and China have rejected mandated cuts in carbon emissions. Both countries say rich, developed nations should lead the way in cutting greenhouse gases.

They argue that their economic growth would be stunted if there were mandated cuts.

The US and India have agreed that the Copenhagen climate conference, in early December, should involve targets for emission cuts for developed countries but only mitigation actions — such as improving energy efficiency — for developing countries.

Recently, India announced it would produce 20 Gigawatts of solar power by 2022.

Bo Kong, directs the Global Energy and Climate Initiative at Johns Hopkins University. He says that target is impossible for India.

“Within such a short time frame - we are talking about building about 20 - 20 gigawatts of power plants which translates into at least over 10,000 solar power plants between 2009 to 2020 - in less than 10 years - so I am very suspicious,” Kong said.

Experts say India can only make inroads into green technology if it has financial and technological support from rich countries.

Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to support public and private intiatives that will invest in clean energy projects in India.

On the topic of what has been referred to as climategate, a word. Scandal is a word. But more words than that are presented by the following source which sums up the situation rather well. Don’t be fooled by the excerpt presented here. The account is balanced and may be completely on point.

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet

And another group of words from WSJ demonstrate the single item that many seem to ignore.

The documents, hacked from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K., show that some climate researchers declined to share their data with fellow scientists, and sought to keep researchers with dissenting views from publishing in leading scientific journals.

If ’spin’ can be defined as emphasizing your argument and diminishing that of your opposition rather than simply lying about a situation for damage control then the following from the MSM demonstrates the strategy.

Skeptics have also pounced on an e-mail from Jones to colleagues that reads: “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

It’s not so much that AGW ’skeptics’ have ‘pounced’ on anything but anticipate those embarrassed by climategate will do their best to dismiss this event just as they do to others who do not agree with their arguments about something they named AGW.

Providing these hacked docs are genuine, which seems to be the case and is mentioned in the link for the first excerpt above, less than honorable actions were taken by AGW scientists that may include fudging the numbers and sabotaging opposing conclusions from fellow scientists. What that demonstrates is a breech of trust without which science is not science. How do you expect people to accept your findings if you engaged in dishonest tactics to support an agenda that has nothing to do with science?

That’s the word, science. If it is not honest, it is not science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The hacked emails and other docs that were published on the internet from a ‘leading’ global warming proponent source has raised some discussion. There is the expected shock and dismay that anyone would do such a thing. And there is some commentary on the real point of all this. As an interesting side note, of the 100 entries on the first page of a Google search, about five mainstream news sources cover the story. The NYT, WaPo, LAT, AP and the WSJ are there. But the vast majority of hits comes from lesser known sources. But then who cares what the MSM has to say about it?

The source of the hacked docs had this to say. “The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way,” the university said. A completely laughable response from a source who has engaged in dissemination of fake science and other unscrupulous tactics to promote an agenda that to date was suspected but largely hidden. BTW, these were ‘good’ hackers regardless of their intentions as they have exposed a sinister plot.

So what kind of material is in the hacked docs. The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with. Imagine that, the United Nations is involved. There efforts and those of others involved in this sham have conspired to present only what supports their agenda. So who will now step forward to attempt a whitewash of this latest revelation in fake science?

It will come from people like this. …the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics’ research was unwelcome: We “will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday. Opposing viewpoints in a discussion of science will be kept out somehow. That’s reassuring. So much for the validity of any information from the AGW crowd.

The people that will speak out for truth in science are more closely exemplified by this example. “This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

That would be putting it mildly. If there was any question about the honesty of those supporting AGW on this blog before it is certainly gone now. AGW has been exposed for what it is…. fake science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As a post-script, the MSM was mentioned as well as a comment of who cares. Of the five listed specifically, this blog views the WSJ as credible and at one time held that view of WaPo. The others listed rarely get it right.

ClimateGate: Both sides of the pond demand probes into data manipulation scandal 

The climate change and global warming debate may be continuing in the real world but those employed by your tax dollars have jumped ahead to spending more of your money courtesy of Steven Chu.

Nothing like a good stimulus program to find more ways to spend tax dollars. God knows paying down the national debt or reducing trillion dollar plus deficits is a waste of money, right?

Here’s what one of Steven Chu’s bright ideas has paid for with your money.

New program will certify professionals in carbon capture and storage

RICHLAND, Wash. – Scientists and engineers will soon be able to receive advanced training and certification in burying and permanently storing underground the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide as part of a recent stimulus award from the Department of Energy. The DOE awarded nearly $1 million to the Seattle-based Environmental Outreach and Stewardship Alliance (EOS) to develop a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) curriculum that will be used to build a skilled workforce through regional training.

Imagine that! $1 million to develop climate change curriculum. And there’s at least $7 million more of your money to spend after that. That’ll recover America and create more jobs, right?

Funding for the EOS training project is part of more than $8.4 million recently awarded by DOE Secretary Steven Chu for regional sequestration technology training programs.

And we wouldn’t want to unnecessarily increase our carbon footprint with this project, right?

The project organizers also plan to make lectures and other relevant course material available on the Web for students who cannot attend in person, which will reduce the program’s overall carbon footprint.

Gee, do you suppose this planet-saving method is a proven winner? You know, is it a good idea and will it be effective, reasonable, beneficial and not break the bank?

PNNL is conducting laboratory and field research in the Pacific Northwest to assess the feasibility of permanently storing carbon dioxide in basalt, a type of igneous rock common in eastern Washington, Oregon and parts of Idaho.

Hmmm, seems as though someone is putting the horse before the cart…… again. There’s a pejorative remark about educators that states those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach. Have you ever wondered about public sector science? It may have been considered a noble endeavor for the public to fund scientific research. But these days one has to wonder if geeks and techies who work for the government were unable to get a job in the real world. Add to that the notion they may spend much of their time seeking funding to provide themselves with an income. Not much incentive to be good at science.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

NOAA: Summer Temperature Below Average for U.S.

September 10, 2009

The average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average – the 34th coolest on record, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. August was also below the long-term average. The analysis is based on records dating back to 1895.

U.S. Temperature Highlights – Summer

* For the 2009 summer, the average temperature of 71.7 degrees F was 0.4 degree F below the 20th Century average. The 2008 average summer temperature was 72.7 degrees F.

* A recurring upper level trough held the June-August temperatures down in the central states, where Michigan experienced its fifth, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and South Dakota their seventh, Nebraska its eighth, and Iowa its ninth coolest summer. By contrast, Florida had its fourth warmest summer, while Washington and Texas experienced their eighth and ninth warmest, respectively.

* The Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota region experienced its sixth coolest summer on record. Only the Northwest averaged above normal temperatures.