But it can do so much more.

Popular Science sometimes means not having to say you really thought it through.

Ok, so that was a bit harsh.  I like Pop. Sci.

What Could Possibly Go Wrong:  Blotting Out the Sun

Filling the stratosphere with sulfur aerosols could cool the globe, but it could also cause widespread drought and destruction – Jamie Sneddon

Well, I’ll tell you what could go wrong.  According to the logic of Al Gore, by cooling the Earth we could make it warmer. Why the hell not?  By warming it we’re making it colder, he has as much as said so.

But in my heart of hearts, I agree with Sneddon, that actively seeking to change the albedo of the Earth isn’t something one f***s around with lightly.

And LiveScience where sometimes there’s cool neat stuff and sometimes there’s pure idiocy, they actually uttered this about forest fire severity and the correlation to global warming:

While it’s melting glaciers and creating more intense hurricanes, global warming also seems to be heating up forest fires in the United States. In western states over the past few decades, more wildfires have blazed across the countryside, burning more area for longer periods of time. Scientists have correlated the rampant blazes with warmer temperatures and earlier snowmelt. When spring arrives early and triggers an earlier snow-melt, forest areas become drier and stay so for longer, increasing the chance that they might ignite.

It misses the most glaringly evident root cause of what is making wildfires worse, burning more areas for longer has been correlated with not letting regular fires clear out the undergrowth, so when there IS a fire it’s hot enough that the largest trees don’t survive – they die.  You can’t hardly wade through the stuff.  And when it dries it dries completely and it burns extremely hot.

There’s absolutely no doubt that hot weather increases the risk of fire – that’s a no-brainer – but to try to pin fire duration on “global warming” without mention of the other man-made problem, which is caused by the fact that we can’t leave well enough alone, is misleading at best and deceptive at worst.

Read Full Post »

Bias? We don’ need no steenkin’ bias.

I mean, once you see it you think “Oh, drunken lemurs… of course, why wasn’t that obvious?  It’s hilarious.”

But it took a geniusioso with great masterfulness to put it into words.  Beautiful.

I’ve been reviewed like this before.  It’s like being nuked.

♦♦♦♦

A wee bit worked up.  Model Plane and Jet Near-Miss.  Whaddya mean, near miss?  They missed it.  No “near miss” about it.

♦♦♦♦

Romney and I agree on this.

At last week’s Summit of the Americas, President Obama acquiesced to a 50-minute attack on America as terroristic, expansionist, and interventionist from Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega. His response to Ortega’s denunciation of our effort to free Cuba from Castro’s dictatorship was that he shouldn’t be blamed “for things that happened when I was three months old.” Blamed? Hundreds of men, including Americans, bravely fought and died for Cuba’s freedom, heeding the call from newly elected president John F. Kennedy. But last week, even as American soldiers sacrificed blood in Afghanistan and Iraq to defend liberty, President Obama shrank from defending liberty here in the Americas.

Hey, Mitt… where I come from, that’s called “being a pussy”.  This is Jimmy Carter for the New Millenium.  A guy who is so concerned with being everyone’s friend that he stands for nothing.

♦♦♦♦

I’m biased, naturally, but many deep and profound brain things go on inside my head when I read:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama on Monday proposed a $100 billion U.S. loan to the International Monetary Fund to boost the IMF’s resources and urged a bigger stake in the IMF for emerging powers.

Yeah, this is pretty important, all right.  At a time when all is so dire that we need to plunge headlong into socialism fascism our Obamessiah finds compelling reasons to give the IMF $100B.

But he’s a frugal man, the Big O.  He’s saving $100M by iron-willed restraint, trimming the budget.  Hardly worth talking about given our $3T budget.

♦♦♦♦

The title of the Sun’s article is Fatties Cause Global Warmin[g]

Provind that Pravda isn’t the only publication that will print anything:

Dr Phil Edwards, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: “Moving about in a heavy body is like driving in a gas guzzler.”

Each fat person is said to be responsible for emitting a tonne more of climate-warming carbon dioxide per year than a thin one.

It means an extra BILLION TONNES of CO2 a year is created, according to World Health Organisation estimates of overweight people.

They’ll just spit anything out.  These are somebody’s ESTIMATES, and are BASED ON MANY MANY ASSUMPTIONS.

The hysteria goes on and on, but I found this to be an interesting bias and painfully obvious.  A British rag publishes American obesity stats, not British ones.  First they vilify anyone who is considered (by who?) to be overweight, and then they cite only – only – lard-butt stats for the U.S.  Wonder why?

A staggering 40 per cent of Americans are obese, among 300 million worldwide.

Sounds like someone has an issue with the U.S.

Bitez moi.

Frighteningly, a starkly terrible correlation is dead-on nailed at the end of their article…

Australian Professor Paul Zimmet predicted a disastrous obesity pandemic back in 2006.

And Oxfam warned yesterday that the number of people hit by climate-related disasters will soar by more than half in the next six years to 375million.

The impact of more storms, floods and droughts could overwhelm aid organisations.

Proof positive that we’re all gonna die.

Read Full Post »