From Breitbart TV
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina
I know this a couple of years old, and I've posted it before... But with the current administration we have in the White House, I don't think it would take much of an incident for them to declare Martial Law and try this nationwide.
Listen and learn...
Wake up America!
Listen and learn...
Wake up America!
Friday, February 19, 2010
The Weasel Has Spoken
The big news today was the so-called apology by one Eldric 'Tiger' Woods to his wife, his fans and to the game of golf. He didn't apologize to me or to you!
Well, I listened and I wasn't impressed.
Let me start by saying I have been playing golf since I was 18 years old... and that's a very long time!
The folks that helped me to learn the game and the 'teachers' I had, all had one central theme... Golf is a game of honor and respect, that is to be played with integrity, good manners, and a deep sense of fairness.
I have watched Mr. Woods for a very long time.
He was very fortunate that his father placed a golf club in his hands before he could walk.
I saw him on The Johnny Carson Show... I watched him perform 'tricks' at a very early age... I watched his amature career at Stanford... And I've watched his performance as a touring professional.
Now, golf is an unusual sport(heck, many guys feel that golf is really NOT a sport!), in that it is self governed- (except in tournement play). There are no umpires, no referees, no time keepers, no score keepers. Each golfer is responsible for his own actions on the course.
If you shot 92 and you mark your scorecard as shooting an 86, nobody is going to penalize you for cheating. You are just going to have to live with that fact on your own. If you do it often enough, your playing partners will catch on and disown you - never to invite you into their foursome again.
My father once told me that the only thing I had when I entered this world and began to interact with other folks, was my own personal reputation.
If I damaged that reputation, I not only damaged my family and friends, but I most likely damaged my future. The MOST important thing in MY life is MY REPUTATION, period!
Mr. Woods has severely damaged his reputation. It remains to be seen if it can be repaired or regained.
In his prepared statement to 'his friends', Mr. Woods said he was deeply sorry for his transgressions.
Well good. That's a start.
But his damage to 'the game of golf' may be beyond repair.
His behavior is not new.
I have watched his spitting, his throwing of clubs, his cursing, his gutter behavior on national TV.
Hardly respect, honor or good manners.
He has never made any excuses, and the media has never chastised him for such behavior. I suspect the media is so enamored of his unique skills that they simply excuse his rude and vulgar behavior because he is such a competent golfer.
Frankly, I'm shocked that these so-called 'private' clubs, (where most professional events are played), would tolerate such behavior to be shown in a public forum on their courses. Are we to believe that Mr. Wood's on course behavior represents their values?
Now please understand I have committed some of the same transgressions... Just not in front of other people and certianly not on National TV!
I have no issues with Mr. Wood's off course behavior as an individual, but I have MANY issues with him being a role model and the respect he is granted by the media.
His off-course behavior was obviously influenced by his peers - other pro atheletes - (obviously not his wife!), and we have all seen their life styles on public display. Atheletes like Kobe Bryant come to mind. But that is basketball, a sport now dominated by mostly black individuals that bring a sense of 'gansta' and 'street values' to the court.
If Mr Woods wants to be like his peers, fine. But that is not how golfers behave. His 'double life' must come to an end!
And why is it that every other golfer is listed by their actual names? Fred Couples is known affectionally as "Boob-Boom", but is listed as Fred Couples on the leader board. Greg Norman is affectionately known as 'The Shark", but is listed on the leader board as Greg Norman. Arnold Palmer was known as "The King', but was always listed on the leader board as Arnold Palmer. The list goes on and on... but they ALL used their REAL name!
Why is Eldric Woods ALWAYS listed as "Tiger Woods"?
Because of his reputation?
Well. if that is so, then that practice MUST stop! And NOW!
He has damaged his reputation and no longer deserves ANY nickname at all... Well, maybe one... "LOSER!" or, 'CHEATER!"
Eldric Woods must answer to his wife, his family and his God for what he has done off the course.
For his actions on the course, he must answer to you and I, to history and the ancient game itself. Sure, he's very good.
But he's NOT bigger than the game.
I hope he just goes away.
The game will be better off without a "CHEATER'!
____________________
Well, I listened and I wasn't impressed.
Let me start by saying I have been playing golf since I was 18 years old... and that's a very long time!
The folks that helped me to learn the game and the 'teachers' I had, all had one central theme... Golf is a game of honor and respect, that is to be played with integrity, good manners, and a deep sense of fairness.
I have watched Mr. Woods for a very long time.
He was very fortunate that his father placed a golf club in his hands before he could walk.
I saw him on The Johnny Carson Show... I watched him perform 'tricks' at a very early age... I watched his amature career at Stanford... And I've watched his performance as a touring professional.
Now, golf is an unusual sport(heck, many guys feel that golf is really NOT a sport!), in that it is self governed- (except in tournement play). There are no umpires, no referees, no time keepers, no score keepers. Each golfer is responsible for his own actions on the course.
If you shot 92 and you mark your scorecard as shooting an 86, nobody is going to penalize you for cheating. You are just going to have to live with that fact on your own. If you do it often enough, your playing partners will catch on and disown you - never to invite you into their foursome again.
My father once told me that the only thing I had when I entered this world and began to interact with other folks, was my own personal reputation.
If I damaged that reputation, I not only damaged my family and friends, but I most likely damaged my future. The MOST important thing in MY life is MY REPUTATION, period!
Mr. Woods has severely damaged his reputation. It remains to be seen if it can be repaired or regained.
In his prepared statement to 'his friends', Mr. Woods said he was deeply sorry for his transgressions.
Well good. That's a start.
But his damage to 'the game of golf' may be beyond repair.
His behavior is not new.
I have watched his spitting, his throwing of clubs, his cursing, his gutter behavior on national TV.
Hardly respect, honor or good manners.
He has never made any excuses, and the media has never chastised him for such behavior. I suspect the media is so enamored of his unique skills that they simply excuse his rude and vulgar behavior because he is such a competent golfer.
Frankly, I'm shocked that these so-called 'private' clubs, (where most professional events are played), would tolerate such behavior to be shown in a public forum on their courses. Are we to believe that Mr. Wood's on course behavior represents their values?
Now please understand I have committed some of the same transgressions... Just not in front of other people and certianly not on National TV!
I have no issues with Mr. Wood's off course behavior as an individual, but I have MANY issues with him being a role model and the respect he is granted by the media.
His off-course behavior was obviously influenced by his peers - other pro atheletes - (obviously not his wife!), and we have all seen their life styles on public display. Atheletes like Kobe Bryant come to mind. But that is basketball, a sport now dominated by mostly black individuals that bring a sense of 'gansta' and 'street values' to the court.
If Mr Woods wants to be like his peers, fine. But that is not how golfers behave. His 'double life' must come to an end!
And why is it that every other golfer is listed by their actual names? Fred Couples is known affectionally as "Boob-Boom", but is listed as Fred Couples on the leader board. Greg Norman is affectionately known as 'The Shark", but is listed on the leader board as Greg Norman. Arnold Palmer was known as "The King', but was always listed on the leader board as Arnold Palmer. The list goes on and on... but they ALL used their REAL name!
Why is Eldric Woods ALWAYS listed as "Tiger Woods"?
Because of his reputation?
Well. if that is so, then that practice MUST stop! And NOW!
He has damaged his reputation and no longer deserves ANY nickname at all... Well, maybe one... "LOSER!" or, 'CHEATER!"
Eldric Woods must answer to his wife, his family and his God for what he has done off the course.
For his actions on the course, he must answer to you and I, to history and the ancient game itself. Sure, he's very good.
But he's NOT bigger than the game.
I hope he just goes away.
The game will be better off without a "CHEATER'!
____________________
Thursday, February 18, 2010
The Mount Vernon Statement
From The Heritage Foundation
The Mount Vernon Statement
Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.
Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law.
They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world.
They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics.
The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles.
At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles.
It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.
- It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal.
- It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life.
- It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
- It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.
- It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith.
If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.
February 17, 2010
_________________________
Add your name to the Mount Vernon Statement -
HERE
The Mount Vernon Statement
Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.
Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law.
They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world.
They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics.
The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles.
At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles.
It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.
- It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal.
- It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life.
- It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
- It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.
- It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith.
If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.
February 17, 2010
_________________________
Add your name to the Mount Vernon Statement -
HERE
Monday, February 15, 2010
Obama Declares He Will Rule by Authoritarian Decree
By Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
Obama Declares He Will Rule by Authoritarian Decree
The Obama administration has announced it will now rule by fascist decree and ignore Congress and the American people.
“With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities,” reports The New York Times. “We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff who is fond of cracking his knuckles in Obama’s face.
According to The New York Times, ruling in authoritarian fashion is normal and acceptable. “Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat.”
In fact, Obama’s plan to rule by authoritarian decree is unconstitutional.
Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article II, Section 3 states that the president may call Congress into emergency session during a national crisis.
In other words, rule buy fiat is treason.
Another section of the Constitution covers treason. Article II, Section. 4 states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Rahm Emanuel should be arrested and prosecuted for treason under federal statute, specifically Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. It states: “Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.”
Treason is spelled out in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution. “The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason,” it states.
“White House officials said the increased focus on executive authority reflected a natural evolution from the first year to the second year of any presidency,” The New York Times continues.
Hitler exploited this “natural evolution” to turn Germany into a fascist dictatorship through executive orders. In fact, Reagan, Clinton and Bush the Lesser issued a flurry of executive orders that surpassed anything Hitler or Stalin issued.
Executive orders have been around since the beginning of the republic. George Washington issued a number of proclamations, dispositions and recommendations. For instance, a suggestion that a day of Thanksgiving take place on Thursday, November26, 1789. He was severely criticized for issuing a proclamation suggesting U.S. citizens joining or aiding the war between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Britain and the Netherlands be prosecuted. George Washington’s proclamations, however, did not over rule legislation passed by Congress.
Executive orders did not really pick up steam until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. During the invasion of the South for opposing the federal government, Lincoln issued a large number of executive orders allowing the federal military to steal land and turn prisoners of war into forced labor slaves.
The grand daddy of executive orders was Franklin Roosevelt. He issued 3,723 of them. Here is a sample. Roosevelt’s most notorious executive order was 6102. It permitted the federal government to steal all privately held gold in the United States.
Ronald Reagan — sold to the people as a “conservative” — issued 381 executive orders, more than George W. Bush. Clinton came close to Reagan. He issued 364. Reagan violated the Constitution directly when he issued Executive Order 12611 ordering “Assistance for Central American Democracies and the Nicaraguan Democratic Resistance,” in other words providing assistance to the Contras, a violation of the Boland Amendment.
Clinton used executive orders to defy Congress and conduct a murder campaign against the people of Yugoslavia. Clinton also violated Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution when he bombed the European country. Article 1, Section 8 states that “Congress shall have power to… declare War,” not the president.
During the election, Obama not only said he would not issue executive orders but he would reverse those issued during the Bush era. On his very first day in office, Obama broke this pledge and implemented and signed into law Executive Order 13489 barring the release of presidential records (presumably including his birth certificate).
Obama also signed executive orders allowing Interpol to operate beyond the law in the United States and establishing the Council of Governors.
Obama will continue the process of rule by decree established by his predecessors. He will rule in the tradition of the Roman Second Triumvirate and the Lex Titia decree under Gaius Octavian, general Mark Antony and pontifex maximus Aemilius Lepidus.
It should be noted that the resolution paved the way for the Final War of the Roman Republic and the total collapse of republican government.
__________________________________________
Buckle Up My Friends!
A 2nd American Civil War is just over the horizon!
Infowars.com
Obama Declares He Will Rule by Authoritarian Decree
The Obama administration has announced it will now rule by fascist decree and ignore Congress and the American people.
“With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities,” reports The New York Times. “We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff who is fond of cracking his knuckles in Obama’s face.
According to The New York Times, ruling in authoritarian fashion is normal and acceptable. “Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat.”
In fact, Obama’s plan to rule by authoritarian decree is unconstitutional.
Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article II, Section 3 states that the president may call Congress into emergency session during a national crisis.
In other words, rule buy fiat is treason.
Another section of the Constitution covers treason. Article II, Section. 4 states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Rahm Emanuel should be arrested and prosecuted for treason under federal statute, specifically Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. It states: “Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.”
Treason is spelled out in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution. “The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason,” it states.
“White House officials said the increased focus on executive authority reflected a natural evolution from the first year to the second year of any presidency,” The New York Times continues.
Hitler exploited this “natural evolution” to turn Germany into a fascist dictatorship through executive orders. In fact, Reagan, Clinton and Bush the Lesser issued a flurry of executive orders that surpassed anything Hitler or Stalin issued.
Executive orders have been around since the beginning of the republic. George Washington issued a number of proclamations, dispositions and recommendations. For instance, a suggestion that a day of Thanksgiving take place on Thursday, November26, 1789. He was severely criticized for issuing a proclamation suggesting U.S. citizens joining or aiding the war between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Britain and the Netherlands be prosecuted. George Washington’s proclamations, however, did not over rule legislation passed by Congress.
Executive orders did not really pick up steam until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. During the invasion of the South for opposing the federal government, Lincoln issued a large number of executive orders allowing the federal military to steal land and turn prisoners of war into forced labor slaves.
The grand daddy of executive orders was Franklin Roosevelt. He issued 3,723 of them. Here is a sample. Roosevelt’s most notorious executive order was 6102. It permitted the federal government to steal all privately held gold in the United States.
Ronald Reagan — sold to the people as a “conservative” — issued 381 executive orders, more than George W. Bush. Clinton came close to Reagan. He issued 364. Reagan violated the Constitution directly when he issued Executive Order 12611 ordering “Assistance for Central American Democracies and the Nicaraguan Democratic Resistance,” in other words providing assistance to the Contras, a violation of the Boland Amendment.
Clinton used executive orders to defy Congress and conduct a murder campaign against the people of Yugoslavia. Clinton also violated Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution when he bombed the European country. Article 1, Section 8 states that “Congress shall have power to… declare War,” not the president.
During the election, Obama not only said he would not issue executive orders but he would reverse those issued during the Bush era. On his very first day in office, Obama broke this pledge and implemented and signed into law Executive Order 13489 barring the release of presidential records (presumably including his birth certificate).
Obama also signed executive orders allowing Interpol to operate beyond the law in the United States and establishing the Council of Governors.
Obama will continue the process of rule by decree established by his predecessors. He will rule in the tradition of the Roman Second Triumvirate and the Lex Titia decree under Gaius Octavian, general Mark Antony and pontifex maximus Aemilius Lepidus.
It should be noted that the resolution paved the way for the Final War of the Roman Republic and the total collapse of republican government.
__________________________________________
Buckle Up My Friends!
A 2nd American Civil War is just over the horizon!
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Rep. Deal speaks out on Obama Eligibility Letter
SAYS REQUEST... “DESERVES HIS RESPONSE”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Feb. 8, 2010) — Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA) has gone on camera answering questions regarding a letter he wrote to Obama regarding his eligibility to serve as President of the United States.
On February 6, 2010, Carl Swensson, Republican Precinct Captain for Morrow, GA, interviewed Deal for about five minutes, during which he asked about the letter. Deal, who currently represents the 9th congressional district of Georgia, is running for that state’s governor. The interview took place at the “Faith, Family and Freedom Kickoff” at Riverside High School in Atlanta, GA on Saturday.
As reported by The Post & Email on January 5, 2010, Deal’s letter was sent electronically to the White House on December 1, 2009. The contents of the letter have not been made public, and Deal stated Saturday that he did not have a copy of it with him at the time.
According to a January 8, 2010 report from the Political Insider, “The White House…confirmed receipt of a letter from U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal that formally asks Barack Obama to address questions about his place of birth – and thus, whether he is qualified to be president.”
When Swensson asked Deal if he had received a response, Deal replied that he has not.
Deal states on camera that he is not questioning Obama’s legitimacy for the presidency but is requesting a source of verifiable information for his constituents who have questions about it.
________________
Isn't that what we all want???
It's really pretty simple...
Show us the damn Birth Certificate!
Monday, February 8, 2010
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Man-Made Climate Change A Hoax?
Many of us have known for quite some time that this 'global warming' whining we've been hearing is just that... a bunch of liberal tree huggers complaining about how humans are killing the Earth.
In my view, I have always wondered how a mere bunch of human beings could possible have ANY effect on the 'old red hot rock'?
Just who do these folks think they are to believe that this Earth is susceptable to their smog, their factories, their automobiles and their lifestyles?
I have always thought such people must surely think a lot of themselves, to believe that THEY could actually cause harm to Mother Earth! Call me a skeptic, but man is really an insignificant element compared to the mechanisms that are at work on our planet!
The folks complaining about Man-Made Global Warming are mostly extremists, alarmists, and don't have a clue about the Earth's history.
Here's a report from Investors Business Daily - 2/3/10:
The Ruse Unravels
Climate Change:
Not long ago, we were pestered almost daily with another global warming scare. But the weather has changed.
Now, it seems, each sunrise comes with fresh evidence that the scare is a fraud.
The latest setback for global warm-mongers is a probe conducted by the British Guardian newspaper, which discovered a prominent climate scientist "sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based."
The Guardian, which has a history of pumping the global warming scare, looked over the leaked e-mail exchanges from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and "found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced."
At the center is the familiar Phil Jones, the CRU director who's been temporarily relieved of his duties.
He and the University at Albany's Wei-Chyung Wang, named as a collaborator by the Guardian, are accused of making "apparent attempts to cover up problems with temperature data from the Chinese weather stations."
These data, the Guardian reported Monday, "provide the first link between the e-mail scandal and the U.N.'s embattled climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as a paper based on the measurements was used to bolster IPCC statements about rapid global warming in recent decades."
Researchers apparently failed to provide as a matter of public record the location history of 49 of the 84 Chinese weather stations used to generate the data.
Jones and Wang are also thought to have neglected to consider the movement of Chinese weather stations. They failed as well to adjust for the heat-island effect in stations that had been in rural regions but are now in urban areas.
"The story has a startling postscript," says the Guardian.
"In 2008, Jones prepared a paper for the Journal of Geophysical Research re-examining temperatures in eastern China. It found that, far from being negligible, the urban heat phenomenon was responsible for 40% of the warming seen in eastern China between 1951 and 2004."
A day later, the Guardian continued the serial reporting of its e-mail probe, this time focusing on the researchers' efforts to suppress the work of skeptics and critics.
Again, Jones plays a central role.
Fred Pearce wrote in Tuesday's edition that Jones "was regularly asked to review papers and he sometimes wrote critical reviews that may have had the effect of blackballing papers (criticizing) his work."
Jones also vowed to keep skeptical papers out of "the next IPCC report ... even if we have to redefine what the peer review literature is!"
Another researcher, Tom Wigley, suggested in 2005 that he and his colleagues "could go through official" channels to oust a journal editor they believed to be too willing to allow contrarian opinions to be published.
Two years earlier, Keith Briffa, a scientist at the CRU, told a colleague: "Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting" a paper that was unnamed.
If the speculation that man is warming the planet through his activities were indisputable fact, why did these researchers have to fudge the numbers?
Why did they feel the need to crush dissent?
For those not keeping score at home, the result of the Guardian's e-mail investigation is simply another ugly layer of deception stripped from the carefully constructed global warming con.
In the last two weeks alone the public learned -
(1) that the U.N. claim that man-made climate change would melt Himalayan glaciers by 2035 was fiction, the speculation of one man whose guess was reported in a magazine then played as scientific fact;
(2) that federal researchers left out temperature data from cold regions;
and (3) that the U.N. was wrong in its contention that "the rapidly rising costs" of natural disasters since the 1970s is linked to global warming.
The climate change movement is losing its credibility at a pace much faster than any warming it predicted.
A quick burnout would be an appropriate, and long overdue, ending.
__________________
My..my..
Algore may have to return his Oscar?
Maybe he'll produce another slide show about all the criticism and win another one?
Maybe he'll just go away?
Well, we can only hope...
In my view, I have always wondered how a mere bunch of human beings could possible have ANY effect on the 'old red hot rock'?
Just who do these folks think they are to believe that this Earth is susceptable to their smog, their factories, their automobiles and their lifestyles?
I have always thought such people must surely think a lot of themselves, to believe that THEY could actually cause harm to Mother Earth! Call me a skeptic, but man is really an insignificant element compared to the mechanisms that are at work on our planet!
The folks complaining about Man-Made Global Warming are mostly extremists, alarmists, and don't have a clue about the Earth's history.
Here's a report from Investors Business Daily - 2/3/10:
The Ruse Unravels
Climate Change:
Not long ago, we were pestered almost daily with another global warming scare. But the weather has changed.
Now, it seems, each sunrise comes with fresh evidence that the scare is a fraud.
The latest setback for global warm-mongers is a probe conducted by the British Guardian newspaper, which discovered a prominent climate scientist "sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based."
The Guardian, which has a history of pumping the global warming scare, looked over the leaked e-mail exchanges from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and "found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced."
At the center is the familiar Phil Jones, the CRU director who's been temporarily relieved of his duties.
He and the University at Albany's Wei-Chyung Wang, named as a collaborator by the Guardian, are accused of making "apparent attempts to cover up problems with temperature data from the Chinese weather stations."
These data, the Guardian reported Monday, "provide the first link between the e-mail scandal and the U.N.'s embattled climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as a paper based on the measurements was used to bolster IPCC statements about rapid global warming in recent decades."
Researchers apparently failed to provide as a matter of public record the location history of 49 of the 84 Chinese weather stations used to generate the data.
Jones and Wang are also thought to have neglected to consider the movement of Chinese weather stations. They failed as well to adjust for the heat-island effect in stations that had been in rural regions but are now in urban areas.
"The story has a startling postscript," says the Guardian.
"In 2008, Jones prepared a paper for the Journal of Geophysical Research re-examining temperatures in eastern China. It found that, far from being negligible, the urban heat phenomenon was responsible for 40% of the warming seen in eastern China between 1951 and 2004."
A day later, the Guardian continued the serial reporting of its e-mail probe, this time focusing on the researchers' efforts to suppress the work of skeptics and critics.
Again, Jones plays a central role.
Fred Pearce wrote in Tuesday's edition that Jones "was regularly asked to review papers and he sometimes wrote critical reviews that may have had the effect of blackballing papers (criticizing) his work."
Jones also vowed to keep skeptical papers out of "the next IPCC report ... even if we have to redefine what the peer review literature is!"
Another researcher, Tom Wigley, suggested in 2005 that he and his colleagues "could go through official" channels to oust a journal editor they believed to be too willing to allow contrarian opinions to be published.
Two years earlier, Keith Briffa, a scientist at the CRU, told a colleague: "Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting" a paper that was unnamed.
If the speculation that man is warming the planet through his activities were indisputable fact, why did these researchers have to fudge the numbers?
Why did they feel the need to crush dissent?
For those not keeping score at home, the result of the Guardian's e-mail investigation is simply another ugly layer of deception stripped from the carefully constructed global warming con.
In the last two weeks alone the public learned -
(1) that the U.N. claim that man-made climate change would melt Himalayan glaciers by 2035 was fiction, the speculation of one man whose guess was reported in a magazine then played as scientific fact;
(2) that federal researchers left out temperature data from cold regions;
and (3) that the U.N. was wrong in its contention that "the rapidly rising costs" of natural disasters since the 1970s is linked to global warming.
The climate change movement is losing its credibility at a pace much faster than any warming it predicted.
A quick burnout would be an appropriate, and long overdue, ending.
__________________
My..my..
Algore may have to return his Oscar?
Maybe he'll produce another slide show about all the criticism and win another one?
Maybe he'll just go away?
Well, we can only hope...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
