This is for a particular commenter who has made another appearance here once more.

MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data

Boston (MA) - Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man’s contributions.

Oh dear, that nasty old sow, Mother Nature, is screwing with man again. Nothing like a poke in the eye with a sharp bit of manmade hubris, is there now.

Methane - powerful greenhouse gas

The two lead authors of a paper published in this week’s Geophysical Review Letters, Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, state that as a result of the increase, several million tons of new methane is present in the atmosphere. [snip]

Ohmigod! No cow can poot that much, must be Gore running that gianormous houseboat and the Hollyweird swells jetting off to Europe. All those big mouths belching CO2 and farting at those parties did it.

More study
[snip]
…Where does one even begin? And how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date? Looking back over 2007 data as it was captured may prove as ineffective if the data does not support the high resolution details such a study requires.

One thing does seem very clear, however; science is only beginning to get a handle on the big picture of global warming. Findings like these tell us it’s too early to know for sure if man’s impact is affecting things at the political cry of “alarming rates.” We may simply be going through another natural cycle of warmer and colder times - one that’s been observed through a scientific analysis of the Earth to be naturally occurring for hundreds of thousands of years. [snip]

So, that was only an acorn falling from the tree and not the sky.
Global warming BUNGHOLES.

Another cartoon which appeared is the Aussie papers that was banished in the MSM, so to protect the One’s unblemished countenance. Here’s a regular cartoon character dud for Obozo.

The ACORN and Ayers stuff is bubbling up at just the right time.

An October surprise, no, but an October goodie, both are a treat without a trick.

If one takes Obama seriously about cutting carbon emissions, and add the projected population growth, by the year 2020, we’ll have the carbon footprint of colonial America. The man’s a real thinker. What’s next, Lego’s in earthquake zones for rapid rebuilds?

From Robert Heinlein’s collections

Robert Anson Heinlein (7 July 1907 - 8 May 1988)

From the start of recorded time to now this is an absolute, as absolute as an absolute can be. Starting with the Pantheists to the Deists, Romans and Greeks, Christians, Jews, Anglicans and Muslims, next to the fouler of the collection, Liberals, Socialists and Communists and finally to the most corrupt, the Environmentalists, all will have you live their way or be destroyed.

Believe not, listen to their preachings and be warned!

If you wish not to pay attention to the above,

Place your clothes and weapons where you can find them in the dark!

The Carbon Curtain

What we really need from the climate modelers is an accurate 50-year projection of global politics.

[snip]
A number of influential people in Russia, China, India, Indonesia and Vietnam say the planet is now entering a 30-year cooling period, the second half of a normal cycle driven by cyclical changes in the sun’s output and currents in the Pacific Ocean. Their theory leaves true believers in carbon catastrophe livid.

To judge by actions, not words, the carbon-warming view hasn’t come close to persuading a political majority even in nations considered far more environmentally enlightened than China and India. Europe’s coal consumption is rising, not falling, and the Continent won’t come close to meeting the Kyoto targets for carbon reduction. [snip]

Not by coincidence, the carbon curtain tracks a schism between stagnation and growth. The lethargy side includes the American Northeast and upper Midwest, the European Union, Japan and eastern Canada. The high-growth states, provinces and nations are the ones embracing the development of domestic fuels, the construction of power plants and transmission lines, the import of fuels and technologies needed for enterprise and economic growth and the export of fuels and technologies to like-minded partners. They have nothing against energy efficiency and renewables; they just don’t focus on them much.

Uranium is the only carbon-free fuel liked by fast-growing nations. Some 439 nuclear power plants are currently operating in 31 countries. China plans to build another 100 for itself in the next 20 years. By 2020 or so a new reactor will be starting up somewhere in the world every five to six days, compared with one every 17 days in the 1980s. China is building coal and nuclear plants in Pakistan, and Russia in Iran, Bulgaria and India.

No serious student of global politics can accept the notion that the world will soon join ranks behind Brussels, Washington and the gloomy computer and its minders. Dar is surely right when he says, “The U.S. and Japan will not tell Asia and Africa to choose poverty, disease, hunger and illiteracy over electricity.” [snip]

So does the climate computer have a real audience, or is it really just another bag lady muttering away to herself in a lonely corner of the intellectual park? That the computer is heard in Hollywood, Stockholm, Brussels and even some parts of Washington is quite beside the point–they have far less global power and influence than they vainly imagine. Vinod Dar is right: “Contingency planning should entail strategic responses to a warming globe, a cooling globe and a globe whose climate reverberates with laughter at human hubris.” (emphasis added)

This gets the BIG AMEN.

Question: If China has a nuclear meltdown, will they call it “The American Syndrome?” Do you think they care? LMAO

Yes–India still uses coal for locomotives! Here is a DHR Locomotive 791 with the afternoon ’school train’ to Kurseong. The locomotive is taking water at the Darjeeling water tank. 21th February 2005–Photographer - A.M.Hurrell

About a pack or two a day’s worth isn’t it? Why aren’t the green whining weenies over there screeching and sticking forks in their eyes?

What the right wing media didn’t tell you

Perhaps it has slipped past everyone’s perspicacity about the tribulations in the Midwest.
It seems no one perceived that Bushitler moved Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin together so they are subjected to reprisal more easily. This amalgamation of states votes Donkey with regularity. Just how did they get a communal border? Bush had Rove move them last month.

For pure malice, look for Karl Rove’s surreptitious weather manipulation; who else commands these satanic elements. Having Cheney weaken the levees with his stents was brilliant.

What is surprising is Bushitler hasn’t renamed Cedar Rapids to Cedar Lake or Great Cedar Pool. He still has time.

Criticism from the Liberals is forthcoming. If Bush wants to show he truly understands the nature of the problem, they articulate, he’ll demand the UN take over, while we ply them with our national treasure, a sort of a Universal “Food for Less Water” schema under their auspices.
In exchange for the world’s help, a few maidens of select young citizenry are offered to prevent the Blue Beret from pillaging our countryside.
Reid, Dirtbin, and Pelosi surely will be glad to act as disinterested parties. Following the Obamadhi’s lead, this troika will dole out a variety of adjunct jobs at high salaries, to deserving Donks for showing up.

The front-runners for profit in this are Big Corn and Big Oil. Foodstuffs and biofuel prices will spike. Women and children are the first to starve, then the poor die since they use only fossil fueled vehicles. Big Corn has no heart.

Your redemption occurs when you drive your alternatively fuel vehicle to the store to fight for that last bag of flour. At least, you can bake it in your alternative oven, probably fueled by dog dung.

Thanks to the Eco-nazis for their help with this predicament, particularly the Sierra Club, The World Wildlife Fund and Al Gore. Please join us in a light Sudanese brunch of mealy bugs and grass stems.

Jump on your G-V’s; fly down for the festivities.

Blood for Oil

The body of a truck driver lies on the road after he was killed by a van while he manned a picket line at the entrance to a wholesale market during a strike over high fuel prices in Granada, Spain on June 10. Another lorry driver was killed on the same day in Portugal during a separate incident at a picket line near Lisbon. (AFP/Jose Luis Sanudo)

I wonder what these environmental cretins have to say about this blood for oil.

The Prince of Wales has warned that the world faces a series of natural disasters within 18 months unless urgent action is taken to save the rainforests.

In one of his most out-spoken interventions in the climate change debate, he said a £15 billion annual programme was required to halt deforestation or the world would have to live with the dire consequences.

“We will end up seeing more drought and starvation on a grand scale. Weather patterns will become even more terrifying and there will be less and less rainfall,” he said.

“We are asking for something pretty dreadful unless we really understand the issues now and [the] urgency of them.” The Prince said the rainforests, which provide the “air conditioning system for the entire planet”, releasing water vapour and absorbing carbon, were being lost to poor farmers desperate to make a living.

Getting rid of these pesky trees is job one; where else can we plant enough corn for more ethanol. Preventing these peasants from wasting this space growing corn for food needs to be relegated to the UN. £15 billion is sufficient to keep the unwashed in line.

I’ll bet “Ole Bonnie” Prince Charlie paused between chukkers to spout this drivel.

Luddites loose in La-La land

The price of oil is likely to hit 150 dollars (Canadian, US) a barrel by 2010 and soar to 225 dollars a barrel by 2012 as supply becomes increasingly tight, a Canadian bank said Thursday. (April 24^th) [snip]

Electricity and heat production in the Northeast derives from oil for the most part. In Vermont, there are no oil or coal plants; however, we have a clean energy producer in Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. The other energy source, a contract with Hydro Quebec, which proved to be a bad indenture, is defunct in 2009. Whether it is renewed or not, indubitably it will not be at current rates.

This chart comes from a Green Mountain Power bill insert.

Instead of embracing nuclear power as a means of insuring clean energy, the Vermont house:

MONTPELIER — The House voted 81-58 Wednesday for a bill that would require new corporate owners of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant to guarantee more money is available to dismantle the plant when the time comes.

Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin, D-Windham, agitated in the Senate to require Entergy (Vermont Yankee owners) to deposit the money to clean up the site now.

This response came from corporate spokesmen.

Vermont Yankee officials, meanwhile, provided fuel for a possible veto by saying that if the bill passes they would likely sell or shut down the Vernon nuclear power plant because it would no longer make sense financially to include it in the new corporate spinoff. That could make the plant more expensive to run as a lone unit and raise the cost of the electricity it produces, he said.

The Luddite fascists in Vermont want the plant closed yesterday regardless of cost to the ratepayers. Money set aside at interest by Entergy, is sufficient to decommission and clean up the site. If this shutdown occurs, average monthly electric bills will go from $100/mo. to $200, maybe $250/mo.

Welcome to socialist economics, these idiots wish to festoon the mountainsides with wind turbines. The cost of electricity will enforce conservation, the desired goal; no other idea makes any sense. And they cannot tell from where the replacement power will come.

Vermont will be a microcosm of a Democrat controlled country if Yobama is elected. Clinton will be just as bad.

Maybe drinking biofuels tastes fine.

Food Rationing Confronts Breadbasket of the World

Major retailers in New York, in areas of New England, and on the West Coast are limiting purchases of flour, rice, and cooking oil as demand outstrips supply. There are also anecdotal reports that some consumers are hoarding grain stocks. [snip]

In lean times, biotech grains are less taboo

Soaring food prices and global grain shortages are bringing new pressures on governments, food companies and consumers to relax their longstanding resistance to genetically engineered crops. [snip]

There can’t be a food shortage, we have food to burn. Ethanol is the wave of the future. This is what the greenies wanted, this is what results.
First, understand there isn’t a shortage of food, there is a shortage of non-GE food. In Europe, Asia and areas like Vermont, they want non-modified food. This is a self-inflicted predicament for 75% of the corn grown in the US is GE. If they want corn, they get what we sell and pay the price. Or, grow their own. They can have precisely what they want then.
If they don’t, Frankenfoods, the bane of every Luddite, are coming to their plate.

There is one more option:

I could not tell if this was a pickup or a delivery.

In hope of re-election, many RINO’s have signed on to this idiocy.

Projections from the power producers show am increase for residential electricity of between $800.00 and $2200 per annum for each household.

The trading “fees” for all companies that exceed a to be determined level shall go to renewable generation; included are all sources that are unsustainable without massive government largess: Wind, organic waste (excluding incinerated municipal solid waste); biomass and hydroelectric, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic, tidal, wave, or other nonfossil fuel, nonnuclear source.

Most of the aforementioned methods fell to the wayside as either inefficient, unreliable or extremely expensive. The square miles essential to install wind farms or solar panels able to generate the power mandatory for the country is immense. Unless we are returning to the Bronze Age, then power needs radically ebb.

Of course, large corporations such as GE will profit from strong-arming the taxpayers by promising magical inventions for the Gaian believers.

And you thought the era of cottage industries ended.

S.317

Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)

TITLE I–GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

SEC. 101. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.

(a) In General- The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`TITLE VII–GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

`SEC. 701. DEFINITIONS.

`In this title:

`(1) AFFECTED UNIT-
`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `affected unit’ means an electric generating facility that–
`(i) has a nameplate capacity greater than 25 megawatts;
`(ii) combusts greenhouse gas-emitting fuels; and
`(iii) generates electricity for sale.

`(B) INCLUSIONS- The term `affected unit’ includes–
`(i) a cogeneration facility; and
`(ii) a facility owned or operated by any instrumentality of–
`(I) the Federal Government; or
`(II) any State, local, or tribal government.

`SEC. 712. SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF THE SAFE CLIMATE LEVEL.

`(a) Definition and Objective of Maintaining the Safe Climate Level-
`(1) FINDING- Congress finds that ratification by the Senate in 1992 of the UNFCCC, commitments which were affirmed by the President in 2002, established for the United States an objective of `stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system’.
`(2) DEFINITION OF SAFE CLIMATE LEVEL- In this section, the term `safe climate level’ means the climate level referred to in paragraph (1).
[…]
`(3) COMPOSITION-
`(A) IN GENERAL- The Panel shall be composed of 8 climate scientists and 3 former Federal officials, as described in subparagraphs (B) through (D).

`(B) CLIMATE SCIENTISTS- Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this title, the President of the National Academy of Sciences shall appoint to serve on the Panel 8 climate scientists from among individuals who–

No call for a climatologist in this mob.

`(i) have earned doctorate degrees;
`(ii) have performed research in physical, biological, or social sciences, mathematics, economics, or related fields, with a particular focus on or link to 1 or more aspects of climate science;
`(iii) have records of peer-reviewed publications that include–
`(I) publications in main-stream, high-quality scientific journals (such as journals associated with respected scientific societies or those with a high impact factor, as determined by the Institute for Scientific Information);
`(II) recent publications relating to earth systems, and particularly relating to the climate system; and
`(III) a high publication rate, typically at least 2 or 3 papers per year; and
`(iv) have participated in high-level committees, such as those formed by the National Academy of Sciences or by leading scientific societies.

An orgy of feel good activity here in Congress and among the garden variety eco-idiots produced the following:

Food price escalation transversing the globe

[snip]
From subsistence farmers eating rice in Ecuador to gourmets feasting on escargot in France, consumers worldwide face rising food prices in what analysts call a perfect storm of conditions. Freak weather is a factor. But so are dramatic changes in the global economy, including higher oil prices, lower food reserves and growing consumer demand in China and India.[snip]

Among the driving forces are petroleum prices, which increase the cost of everything from fertilizers to transport to food processing. Rising demand for meat and dairy in rapidly developing countries such as China and India is sending up the cost of grain, used for cattle feed, as is the demand for raw materials to make biofuels.[snip]

Meanwhile, record oil prices have boosted the cost of fertilizer and freight for bulk commodities — up 80 percent in 2007 over 2006. The oil spike has also turned up the pressure for countries to switch to biofuels, which the FAO says will drive up the cost of corn, sugar and soybeans “for many more years to come.”

In Japan, the ethanol boom is hitting the country in mayonnaise and miso, two important culinary ingredients, as biofuels production pushes up the price of cooking oil and soybeans. [snip]

In decades past, farm subsidies and support programs allowed major grain exporting countries to hold large surpluses, which could be tapped during food shortages to keep prices down. But new trade policies have made agricultural production much more responsive to market demands — putting global food reserves at their lowest in a quarter century.

Without reserves, bad weather and poor harvests have a bigger impact on prices.

“The market is extremely nervous. With the slightest news about bad weather, the market reacts,” said economist Abbassian. [snip]

But attempts to control prices in one country often have dire effects elsewhere. China’s restrictions on wheat flour exports resulted in a price spike in Indonesia this year, according to the FAO. Ukraine and Russia imposed export restrictions on wheat, causing tight supplies and higher prices for importing countries. Partly because of the cost of imported wheat, Peru’s military has begun eating bread made from potato flour, a native crop.(emphasis added)

“We need a response on a large scale, either the regional or international level,” said Brian Halweil of the environmental research organization Worldwatch Institute. “All countries are tied enough to the world food markets that this is a global crisis.”

Try a couple choruses of Kumbaya, which has more effect than giving the UN any food or money. Unless of course, the idea is to fatten up a collection of UN approved dictators.
Let us see the the idiot greenies undo this problem.

Creating a third world country

Conservation is good isn’t it! We can save the planet while joining hands skipping around a tree singing Kumbaya. Often we hear the enviros tell us how dire life for the “poor” is because we splurge on everything from toilet paper to gasoline. Conserve, conserve and more conservation, we are running out of everything. We are not running out of idiots though, that’s the embarrassment. We’re living in a PBS state.

Examination of how the poor really fare with the dreadfully emotional regulations of the barkheads is absolutely enlightening.

First, we must understand every business has a bottom line cost, for product, maintenance and repairs of infrastructure, salaries and then physical plant if different from infrastructure. Profits must figure into this, otherwise why bother producing anything. This is of course anathema to the Loony Left. For the examples, all numbers presume no increase is operating/repair costs, which really is ridiculous.

Let us start with your electrical provider. Generating power costs x (where x equals the bottom line). Determine billing by y (where y is the total class of purchasers). Individual cost of electricity then is x/y. (For the logic and math deficient I’ll apply figures where x=$100,000.00 and y=10,000, therefore power costs $10/customer)

If everyone conserves by reducing consumption by 10%, the electrical company pays only 90% of the monthly costs. To cover the bottom line, they increase billing to y+10% per billing period. So, 10% of $100,000= $10,000.00 divided by 10,000 customers= $1 each. Power now costs $11 per billing cycle.

This causes all who conserve to cut back again, another 9% leaving the monthly bill $10.01 per customer. The company then collects $100,100 to cover $110,000, a short fall of $9900.00. They raise rates by another 9% to cover the billing to $11.99 / customer/period. Conservation saved you how much? Will you conserve to pay the new cost? The next increase is 8%, which is a 24.65% increase over the entire period.

Prohibiting increases by legislative fiat produces a cutback of maintenance, upgrades and/or layoffs of personnel, which of course has many other ramifications; the maximum is living in the dark.

State mandated conservation on driving to cut down on air pollution, global warming or being the greenest fool enfolds the same stupidity.

Police, road and bridge repair, snow plowing etc. rely on sales taxes from fuel sales, vehicle sales tax, registration, fees, tickets and parking/tolls.

Suffice to say fewer gallons vended, cheaper cars purchased, less driving in general cuts into the tax base very quickly. Vermont is a perfect example of the simplemindedness of the conserve to save mentality.

A short numerical example augments discernment: Give an average of 15,000 driven miles per annum divided by a very generous 30MPG =500 gallons of gas x $0.20/gal sales tax=$100.00 to the state. There are approximately 516,631 cars, light trucks and motorcycles registered in the state. (Year 2000 figures) of which about half are trucks excluding farm vehicles. Gas sales tax revenues are about $51.7M/year. Cutting back driving by 25%, the state takes a $12.9M hit to the treasury. I’m leaving out the tourists, diesel fuel sales for trucks and farm machinery, sales tax on oil changes, and other maintenance.

What new taxes or maintenance diminutions transpire to make up the arrears? Charges go up to fill in the revenue insufficiency or things start breaking. Who is going to patrol the byways, fill potholes or repair bridges? The state could make the Big Dig look good!

Try these examples with water, telephone or public transportation.

Who pays the cost?

The poor downtrodden proles for whom the Left professes to care wind up paying for the increases. When taxes on top of self-induced rising costs become onerous, the middle class and well to do move, leaving the “least fortunate” footing the bill. Moreover, pay they will for the basic infrastructure has to exist or the state goes away. I cannot picture the elected elite taking responsibility for the debacle. It must be the poor not paying their fair share. Who’s left?

Far be it from me to advocate excess consumption, I cannot afford it. However, belief in conservation as the road to Xanadu, has to be the product of a drug addled mind. The Teletubbies make more sense.

Toxic waste in TV transition

Millions of analog TV sets could be discarded before the digital TV transition next year as Americans upgrade to high-definition flat panels. Chances are most of them will end up in ditches in the developing world.

Improving this picture merely requires some CFL’s on top as toxic icing.

As new TVs and other gadgets hit the market, electronic debris has become one of the fastest-growing waste streams in the world. [snip]
“We’re allowing the developing countries to manufacture these products, we get to use them during their least toxic phase, and then we send them back to the developing countries for one of those most toxic phases,” said Sarah Westervelt, of the Seattle-based Basel Action Network.

Why do we have developing countries if not for getting rid of trash? Giving them full employment and materials to build homes should be job one.