Full disclosure: I am not, nor even been, a lawyer; nor do I play one (on TV or anywhere else).

The other day, Bob Owens put up a post about a bunch of Mississippi landowners who filed a nuisance lawsuit against some energy companies because those companies’ activities fueled the man-made (anthropogenic) global warming (AGW) that caused Hurricane Katrina, which heavily damaged their properties. First, let me dispense with one part of this: the lawsuit was actually filed in 2006; it was initially dismissed in the District Court in 2007, then in October, 2009 a panel of the 5th Circuit reversed the decision and ordered the District Court to rehear the case. Now, the foreign press has been very good about reporting on the recent AGW errors and scandals while the U.S. press has been deliberately negligent on the subject. But the AFP piece that Owens relies upon, which does mention the various decisions that have come down, makes it appear the lawsuit was just filed, which obviously isn’t the case.

Second, and this is the crux of my post, things may not be what they appear to be.

Read More →

…that environmentalism became about solving environmental problems to mutual and sensible long term benefits.

…that “global warming” and “climate change” were recognized as blatant tools to a globalization political agenda.

…that biodiversity, pollution, protecting parkland and wild habitats, and enforcing fishing and hunting regulations, were end goals in and of themselves, and not a vehicle for leftist politics.

…that environmentalism was based on science and community involvement, and not tax schemes or the regression of industrialized society.

…that protecting the wonders of life on earth, studying them for appreciation and utility, and ensuring that we take or destroy as little as possible, leaving as much as possible for our children and children’s children, is a worthy goal; and that these aims are not transformed or hijacked by political agendas.

…that biological and other scientific education is taught as fact; whereas lifestyle choices are governed by families, communities, and religion; that moderation and temperance are personal lifestyle choices taught by families and faith, not coercive public policy.

…that the seriousness of endangered species, depleted fishing stocks, careless pollution, and land use planning are addressed with plans that utilize science, public and private participation, and little or no cost to taxpayers.

…that it is recognized that many environmental problems, including protecting wildlife habitats and natural resources, are best solved by cooperation, volunteerism, and factual education.

…that we continue to evolve public policy such as the Migrating Birds Treaties, the Clean Water and Air Acts, and the Endangered Species Act, to minimize conflicts between economic progress and the real and wanted aims of maximizing a healthy ecology that affects both wildlife and humans.

I am deeply passionate about protecting and restoring endangered species and endangered spaces, and as a conservative often find it difficult to find environmental advocates who separate politics from the basic aims of environmentalism: to promote the health of ecosystems, scientific study, and education.

Some of us may find conflicts when it comes to land use planning, conservation easements, overuse of pesticides, overfishing, poaching, and trade in endangered species, but I honestly believe that the majority of these problems can be solved with practical solutions that minimally and beneficially affect local economies and stakeholders…

Cross-posted at councilnpb.blogspot.com

Promoted from diaries.  Also: Arrrr.  - Moe Lane

Even the Somali pirates have communications folks now.

NOTE TO EDITORS: We just wanted to pass along this important development in verifiably authentic fake news. Related facts also are available at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/137798.pdf

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                CONTACT: Admiral Mohamed
March 3, 2010                           1-800-WEREINTHESAMEBOATNOW

Read More →

Cross-posted at: TobyToons.com

Promoted from the diaries by Caleb. I noticed that “attacks” line right away too.

You know, I hate it, absolutely hate it, when leftists hijack quotes from the truly great people from history. They’ve lifted sayings from Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and others in order to make it appear our Founding Fathers would be very much against the way the U.S. has fought the war against the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America. Of course, most Americans have seen these attempts as nothing more than spin by the leftists; because, in reality, that is all the left has, spin.

Today’s New York Times will contain a long and rambling missive from the Goreacle, who has hijacked this quote from the great Winston Churchill: “Sometimes doing your best is not good enough. Sometimes, you must do what is required.” First, this is the quote: “It’s not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what’s required.” (You figure the guy who invented the Internet could have found the right quote on Google; but I digress.) Second, Gore attempts to spin the quote to justify the economic destruction of the United States in order to stop the completely unproven theory of man-made global warming. To steal the words of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), I would say to Gore “You lie!!!”

Worse yet, Gore’s tirade reads like a homily given by a preacher to his congregation.

Read More →

When I was 13 years old, science scared me. Not science itself, mind you, but the terrors of the future it foretold. News of the coming dark ages were delivered to our young ears through that most trusted of conduits, a high school science teacher. We’re killing the planet? I was shocked. What a bunch of jerks we all are! I remember so very clearly coming home from school, brow furrowed, and earnestly rebuking my parents for contributing to the destruction of the earth. RECYCLE! LIKE RIGHT NOW!! OR WE’RE ALL GONNA DIIIIEEEE!!!!!

My father, a professor himself, looked up calmly and said “why?” Well I didn’t really know why. Something about landfills and styrofoam and earth day. Newspapers were killing dolphins. Six packs of soda were strangling penguins. The hole in the ozone layer was letting all our air out into space. Or something. Whatever it was, it was URGENT that we recycle to fix it!!! FIX IT FIX IT FIX IT!!!

Still, though. Why?

So now I’m thirty-five years old, and although I eventually broke free, environmental hysteria has surrounded me ever since that day. And there is no hysteria more rabid than that over man-made global warming (anthropogenic global warming, properly, or AGW). Assuming you haven’t been in an alternate dimension for the last decade or so, you know exactly what I’m talking about. The world is going to be destroyed, Al Gore tells us with the earnestness and oratorical flourish of any panicked 13-year old, if we don’t do something RIGHT NOW!! To which the “global community” replied with a resounding FIX IT FIX IT FIX IT!!!!!!

I won’t go over my journey from terrified teen to skeptical adult, but suffice it to say a shift in politics (from conservative, toward liberal, back to conservative) over my twenties (hereafter referred to as the lost decade) was part of the process. Indeed, in the United States, political persuasion is a trusted diagnostic tool for determining one’s level of acceptance of the theory of man-made global warming. The more to the right you are, the less likely you believe. The more to the left … FIX IT FIX IT FIX IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

That should be a warning sign to anyone of a skeptical mind. What better indicator an issue has been politicized than that it breaks down almost perfectly along political dividing lines? Of course, on the right, we’ll claim it is because the left politicized the science. On the left, they’ll claim it’s because conservatives hate knowledge and also Rush Limbaugh is a doody-head. Nevertheless, the political point is important. Because, regardless of fault, there is now a definitive fault line. And that line is causing the most embarrassing breakdown in journalistic integrity in our lifetime.

But let’s get to that in a moment. Back to the story.

Read More →

“I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that … this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow.” - Barack Obama, June 3, 2008.

… or stopped even. The prophecy of the One has been fulfilled!!!!

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

Yet another card removed from the geodesic dome of cards that is AGW hysteria. The green scare is falling apart faster than furniture made from recycled materials, but you’ve got to listen to Britain if you want to read about it. The domestic, domesticated press haven’t the stomach for it.

The Drudge Report linked to this article about U.N. Climate Chief Yvo de Boer’s resignation, CNN has this article, CBSnews has this article,  MSNBC has the AP article linked to on Drudge, ABC news has this article, NBC has nothing, and even FOX has nothing but this AP article .  Nowhere in any of these articles was Climategate mentioned.  There is no mention of the leaked emails.  There is no mention that the prediction of Himalayan glaciers melting was baseless.  There is no mention of Phil Jones admission that the globe has not warmed in the last 15 years.  There is no mention of the fact that the globe was warmer during the Middle Ages.  There was no speculation that he might be resigning because the basis for action to curb man made greenhouse gas emissions has been proven to be false!!!!  This is an AP story.  Why are they ignoring the revelations of the last several months?  In what alternative universe do they live?  Once again, the MSM are way behind the curve in covering REAL news.  Now, I’m wondering if Congress will cut all government funding for ‘Global Warming’ research before the MSM will actually report it.  If it can happen with ACORN it could possibly happen with Global Warming, right?  Am I the only one just crazy enough to think it is possible?

Let me start by saying I hold no particular malice for Mel Martin of TUAW for his review of Skeptical Science, an iPhone application written with the goal of countering the arguments of global warming skeptics. He at least shows enough awareness to note that his side of the argument, supposedly the one based on science and reason, has a highly unfortunate tendency to devolve into emotional arguments when confronted.

I guess what I am trying to say that when the time comes to hand out amnesty as Rush outlined today, I would be happy to give Mr. Martin as much of a free pass as he could bring himself to accept.

No, my goal here is to take on the implicit challenge the app itself poses. Can I, as one of those AGW skeptics for which Mr. Martin disavows sympathy, rise to the challenge and face up to the rebuttals? Can I counter the counterarguments? If I can, then I know I can feel safe in my position. If not, then there may yet be things for me to learn.

As of this writing I have not yet downloaded the app, but if the screen shot is any indication I can already see deficiencies in it. Specifically, while the selection of “most used” arguments does not appear to be, on its face, a poor list, it does include some major omissions, most notably the Climategate email leaks and what they have revealed about the “science” behind AGW advocacy.

But by way of possible mitigation of that, events have been happening so quickly in this area that any static source of information has a very short shelf life. It’s possible that the top ten list featured in the screenshot may have been reflective of the AGW skeptic arguments even as recently as less than a year ago. Indeed, I suspect Mr. Martin may be feeling ever so slightly sheepish today that argument #7, “It hasn’t gotten warmer since 1998″ was actually revealed to be an understatement of the truth.

So at any rate, this is my plan for my next several diary entries, to download the app, give it a good once-over, then, hopefully, dismantle the counterarguments that lie within the ironically-named Skeptical Science app.

We’ll see how it goes.