Grasping at Straws

aMINO aCIDS iN mETEORITES (11:18:32) :
LarryOldtimer (10:56:25) :
Here is Roy Spencer talking about negative feedback:
part 1
my reply;
One of the natural variability features of the global circulation is pointed out in this selection by Roy Spencer, as the peaks of moisture production then the decrease post peak is actually the effects of outer planetary Synod conjunctions on the atmosphere.
Where by the electro-magnetic fields coupling through the solar wind, from the sun through the outer planets causes this influence he speaks of as the homopolar generator field effects of the earth shift ion charges into the atmosphere. Building up the moisture to the point of closest alignment, then as the fields drop the resurgence of negative charges build the “ice” cirrus clouds post peak. what Roy Has found here is the proof of the mechanism I have been talking about for 20 years.

aMINO aCIDS iN mETEORITES (11:19:40)
Why the IPCC Models are wrong?
Try page 111 of the IPCC WG3 report. 30 Gt/CO2emissions now, 60 Gt/C02 emissions by 2030, 100 Gt/CO2 emissions by 2100.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-chapter1.pdf
All the coal in the world amounts to 800 Billion Tonnes which we burn currently at a rate of 7 billion tonnes a year. If we doubled our coal burn to 14 million tonnes a year by 2030 we would completely run out of coal by 2075.

rbateman (07:50:34) :
Is the “OMG, it’s Global Warming” novelty wearing off for you?
How often do you mentally flog yourself for your participation in the usage of fossil fuels in your daily life routines?

I figure one very effective way to force the young to consider the results of fraudulent global warming “solutions” is to tell them, “very well, you must sacrifice your computer, IPOD and cell phone to stop global warming.”
Does anyone really think teens and 20-somethings are going to hand over their energy-intensive toys so easily?

harrywr2 (13:56:38) :
And we should try to do that!

R. Gates (10:41:00) :
Smokey,
‘AGW represents a hypothesis, and as such, you look for data to support it. Most climate scientists say this level has been reached, (Hockey Stick, OOPS, “Hide the decline”, OOPS, “China’s UHI Effect”, OOPS, PEER REVIEWED “NEW and IMPROVED HOCKEY STICK”, OOPS)…………. but for some AGW skeptics, no matter what the data say, the uncertainty will always outweigh the certainty.
Data Does not support “CO2 Drives the Climate” thing. Computer models do the not the Data. Then again, I don’t live in a computer model but I have worked out in “this” Climate/Weather for almost 40 years.
By the way. Do you want to buy one of those “Space Blankets”? No refunds.

Roger Knights Thank you for the link and information.
It substantiates my thirty years of experience as an industrial chemist. I found dishonesty to be the norm not the exception. I even consulted a lawyer about my rights and obligations because of my concerns on the dishonesty issue.

toyotawhizguy (04:45:15) :
“….While establishing correlation is important, it is NOT proof of causation. In order to establish causation based on observations, all other variables must be eliminated, or at least accurately accounted for. Then the observations must be repeated ad nauseum to establish statistical significance (i.e., to demonstrate that the observations are not due to random variability). For the climate, collecting data over just a few decades is inadequate. Establishing causation is virtually impossible to do in the laboratory for something as complex and macro as the earth climate system. (As far as the computer models go, well… garbage in, garbage out.) Since the variables cannot be eliminated, the best that can be done is too attempt to measure and quantify them. This quantification is a rather precarious endeavor for the climate, due to the high complexity, the large number of variables, and the immense quantity of data required to do so. AGW skeptics are not satisfied that climatologists have done this quantification properly and thoroughly, and therein lies much of the controversy.”
Thank you for a very nice summary of the skeptics view point.

Vergano says ‘what if …scientists are misreading thse poll results and conflating them with news coverage of the recent publid-relations black-eyes from e-mails and the glacier mistake?” BLACK-EYES? MISTAKE?
How can a radical environmentalst’s baloney be included in a “sacred” IPCC document and be called a “MISTAKE”? How many other “MISTAKES” were included to mislead the non-scientist non-comprehending public? Are they trying to bamboozle Joe Sixpack and are afraid he is going to rebel?

old construction worker (14:15:49) :
“R. Gates (09:48:59) :
‘Response to Gail Combs (06:30:01) :
Your rather long post seems to indicate you believe that some group of very powerful rich people want to force us into some kind of economic slavery by controlling the AGW issue. To this I say, why would they need the climate issue to do so? In the U.S., our government is already well controlled by large corporate interests, and the recent Supreme Court case allowing even a great pipeline of money to flow between the corporations and those who supposedly represent “we the people” only reinforces this issue.’
You left out the influence peddling of NGOs. Groups like the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Tides Foundation.”
The NGOs were one of the more brilliant moves of Maurice Strong. It is thought that he got the idea from his early work with YMCA international. Strong worked for Rockefeller in Saudi Arabia in the fifties and is a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.
“Your rather long post seems to indicate you believe that some group of very powerful rich people want to force us into some kind of economic slavery by controlling the AGW issue.”
The long and the short of it is Corporations and bankers want to eliminate competition from the aggressive startup companies and they want to eliminate the pesky national borders and differing national regs that get in the way of doing business worldwide.
Rockefeller make it very clear that there is indeed a conspiracy. “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world … If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
However AGW is only one issue. Kissinger was also very blunt in his statement in the mid 1970’s “Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.”
If you control CO2 you control the use of energy, so CAGW takes care of part one – control of oil or more percisely energy. So what about food?
That is covered too. Actually the food issue, Animal ID to be specific, is where I started unraveling this mess. Animal ID lead back to NIAA or National Institute for Animal Agriculture, that lead back to the World Trade Organization that lead back to IPC, a group created in 1987 explicitly to drive home the GATT agriculture rules of WTO at the Uruguay talks. International corporations find national borders and national food safety regs to be a royal pain in the rump and WTO ag rules are designed to eliminate those borders and safety regs. The WTO also has teeth in the form of trade sanctions to force nations to comply with WTO rules thereby trumping national food safety regs. WTO and NAFTA were also instrumental in eliminating many of the small farmers allowing consolidation of a world wide food monopoly. Ten corporations now control most of the world food supply.
The same media manipulation and slanted science seen in AGW is duplicated in the food safety scares used to persuade the masses that farming regs are necessary. Again the ultimate goal is international regs favoring large corporations and eliminating the small guy.
I do not have to be a conspiracy nut to realize the USA has been driven to the edge of bankruptcy by the financial policies of the Federal Reserve and the US Congress. All I have to do is read what has been in the recent news: I am amazed that the US government, in the midst of the worst financial crises ever, is content for short-selling to drive down the asset prices that the government is trying to support….The bald fact is that the combination of ignorance, negligence, and ideology that permitted the crisis to happen still prevails and is blocking any remedy. Either the people in power in Washington and the financial community are total dimwits or they are manipulating an opportunity to redistribute wealth from taxpayers, equity owners and pension funds to the financial sector.” Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts250209.htm
“Stewart Dougherty, a specialist in inferential analysis, agrees. It is now “statistically impossible for the United States to pay its obligations”. http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/08.09/metastasis.html
Food References:
http://www.publiceyeonscience.ch/images/the_wto_and_the_politics_of_gmo.doc
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2009/12/the-festering-fraud-behind-food-safety-reform/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/History-HACCP-and-the-Foo-by-Nicole-Johnson-090906-229.html
An example of what is happening to the food security of other countries:
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/publication/rg/RGRich.shtml
http://www.countercurrents.org/mohanty230608.htm
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/savePolishCountryside.php

Mike D. (10:38:54) said:
“What’s the Latin name of THIS logical fallacy: argumentum ad sacrificium?
I busted my tail, deprived my family, traveled to the ends of the earth — therefore everything I say is factual.”
Mike, the point here isn’t about what the data do or do not say, the point is the integrity of the men and women who are out, diligently, honestly, looking and researching the data. The vast majority of these climate scientists honestly gather and report exactly what they find, and dedicated and interested in only one thing…finding the truth. When I hear talk of conspiracies, and the whole “trilateral, Federal Reserve, UN, etc etc.” I just have to laugh at the ignorance.
But I can say this about the AGW skeptics…either they will go down in history as the biggest heros to ever challenge the supposed dark cabal of the AGW “conspiracy”, or they will be known someday as a group of 21st century flat-earthers, who caused a great deal of confusion on the most important issue of our time.

Gail Combs:
That was a great article by Paul Craig Roberts. As usual, Roberts was incisive and he usually has a great handle on the US economy. And it is a very disturbing picture, indeed. I have feared for a long time that we were on the brink of something really bad, economically speaking. My fears may be coming to fruition.

Larry (01:01:44) :
“That was a great article by Paul Craig Roberts. As usual, Roberts was incisive and he usually has a great handle on the US economy. And it is a very disturbing picture, indeed. I have feared for a long time that we were on the brink of something really bad, economically speaking. My fears may be coming to fruition.”
Thank you.
I really hope R. Gates is correct “….When I hear talk of conspiracies, and the whole “trilateral, Federal Reserve, UN, etc etc.” I just have to laugh at the ignorance….”
However the direction the USA has been going in the last century leaves doubts. When I read articles like that by Paul Craig Roberts
OR reports such as”
“In a sweeping move that has garnered surprisingly little attention this week the United States and the European Union have signed up to a new transatlantic economic partnership that will see regulatory standards “harmonized” and will lay the basis for a merging of the US and EU into one single market, a huge step on the path to a new globalized world order.” The BBC reported (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6607757.stm) from the Summit in Washington on Monday: http://stopspp.com/stopspp/?p=122
When the FDA here in the USA bluntly states:
“The harmonization of laws, regulations and standards between and among trading partners requires intense, complex, time-consuming negotiations by CFSAN officials. Harmonization must simultaneously facilitate international trade and promote mutual understanding, while protecting national interests and establish a basis to resolve food issues on sound scientific evidence in an objective atmosphere. Failure to reach a consistent, harmonized set of laws, regulations and standards within the freetrade agreements and the World Trade Organization Agreements can result in considerable economic repercussions.”http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~comm/int-laws.html
Yet during the debate on approving the WTO Agreement, Congress was justifiably worried that the multinational pact was in conflict with U.S. Sovereignty. Arguments for ratification were vehemently endorsed by Clinton Administration officials who were eager to get the agreement passed Congress. Congressional fears were lulled by pointing out Congress is ultimately responsible for changing the laws of the United States; and second, the U.S. is entitled to withdraw from the WTO. Also a feature of the Uruguay Round agreements are described as follows:
“United States Law to Prevail in Conflict The URAA puts U.S. sovereignty and U.S. law under perfect protection. According to the Act, if there is a conflict between U.S. and any of the Uruguay Round agreements, U.S. law will take precedence regardless when U.S. law is enacted. § 3512 (a) states: “No provision of any of the Uruguay Round Agreements, nor the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, that is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect.” Specifically, implementing the WTO agreements shall not be construed to “amend or modify any law of the United States, including any law relating to (i) the protection of human, animal, or plant life or health, (ii) the protection of the environment, or (iii) worker safety”, or to “limit any authority conferred under any law of the United States, including section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.” http://www.eastlaw.net/research/wto/wto2b.htmd
OR when I see that as soon as the democrats were back in control of Congress in 2009, Rosa Delauro, wife of globalist Stan Greenberg, rolled out HR 875, placing our ability to grow our own food in jeopardy I see evidence supporting D Rockefellers statement.HR 875 places the growing of food under regulations similar to the manufacture of drugs, an industry I worked in as a Quality Engineer/lab Manager so I know the regs when I see them. The crucial phase was this:
“in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”
This means the fact you are growing veggies for you and friends does not exclude you from the regulation.
The Commerce Clause: A farmer was growing wheat for his own use “The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce” The Supreme court found against the farmer!!!
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp
“Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat — some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay.
Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce.
The Court’s opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
After Wickard , everything is mere detail. The entire edifice of civil rights legislation stands on the commerce power. Under this maximum commerce power, the government has been free to regulate nearly everything, including a restaurant owner’s bigotry. The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.”
As I said I really really hope I am seeing “conspiracy theories” under the bushes, but the recent actions of the FDA, USDA and people in Congress make me doubt it. The more I dig the more I find the USA is no longer a sovereign nation. The fact we have a chief scientist advising the president who co-authored a book earlier in his career that discussed the merits of adding a sterilant to public drinking water supplies to reduce population growth. A book that goes on to note that “compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution.”
And couple that with the USDA funding Epicyte, who in 2001 announced the development of genetically engineered corn which contained a spermicide which made the semen of men who ate it sterile. http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_85536/Covert_Sterilization.html
Or a USDA who was also part of the development of Terminator gene, now held by Monsanto – W.Koelz, of the USDA who collected the wheat samples with the Terminator gene is specifically named in the Biopiracy lawsuits in front of both in the Indian Supreme Court and in the European Patent Office http://www.countercurrents.org/en-shiva270404.htm