Archive for September, 2008

Sep 28 2008

Global Warming is Causing the Rise in CO2, Not Man

By:  Greg Henss

Yet another liberal claim is being blown up as propaganda. Man is not responsible for Global Warming after all. As it turns out, the natural rise in earth temperature is what is causing the rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere. It is not the other way around the way the doom and gloom liberal alarmists would have you believe.

If you were to watch the Al Gore farce of a movie “An Inconvenient Truth” you might walk away with the idea that we as humans on earth, living in the glow of the great technological luxuries that the creativity of man has provided, are causing Global Warming as a whole. Scientists are now looking at the information becoming available, that carbon dioxide, which it has been claimed is the big culprit, is indeed increasing. But the data is showing … read more …>

4 responses so far

Sep 23 2008

Another Unintended Consequence of Going Green

By: Greg Henss

The Ski Area at Snowmass, Colorado, has decided that it wants to do its part and try to go “Green”, and reduce Global Warming by installing wind turbines on top of the mountain to generate electricity for the Ski area operations. But as it turns out, it may have an ‘unintended consequence’ as they may be a hazard for bats.

Wind generator turbines are required to have identifying lights on them for aircraft to see at night, when the turbines get up above a certain height. Being that the turbines will be on top of the mountain, and are 200 feet tall, these qualify for navigation lighting. That now makes it a problem for the bats in the area since the lights will likely attract insects which will in turn attract bats. With a concentration of insects, there is likely to be a concentration of bats which could then be ‘batted’ out of the sky by the spinning blades of the turbine.

The Aspen Skiing Company and the Forest Service are considering placing three tall wind turbines atop the ski mountain in a effort to generate electricity and reduce the “carbon footprint” of the ski area operation. Aspen Skiing Company figures that by placing three turbines into their system they can reduce their electrical draw by two-thirds. But in so doing, the blades of the three turbines may become deadly for the bats if navigation lights are required on the turbines.

The Forest Service first became aware of the potential problem during a preliminary study of the potential environmental and visual effects that the towers may create. Such impacts will need to be more fully investigated and studied before the project can move forward. Results of the environmental impact reports will also need to be reviewed by the federal government.

Another hurdle that must be overcome is wind speeds will need to be studied to determine the viability of using wind turbines. In an effort to conduct that study, the Forest Service and Ski Company have decided to place a temporary wind turbine tower to test the wind speed, since a temporary tower does not need approvals and studies because of its ‘temporary’ nature. However, during their effort to hoist the tower into place, the tower fell to the ground as it was being winched up, damaging the tower. They hope to have the tower in place in the next week or so.

Officials are also concerned about possible opposition from people who object to the visual impact of the 200 foot tall towers atop their mountain. But the same officials discounted the potential for opposition stating that, “I think that five years ago you wouldn’t have been able to suggest this project. But I think today people understand the scale of climate change”, according to Jim Stark, winter recreation supervisor for the White River National Forest.

This is one of the consequences that I predicted when I warned how liberals will continue to promote propaganda and false science to further their agenda. The more people hear the flawed arguments, the more they begin to accept them, and allow costly attempts at mitigation of the purported problem. It is a slippery slope we are on as liberals begin to get their agendas accepted with incremental advances. It doesn’t matter how outlandish the claim, if they repeat it enough times, they begin to garner favor.

Don’t get me wrong. I am in favor of doing what we can do that is within reason to limit our use of fossil fuels and reduce our impact on the earth. But each and every attempt at that mitigation comes with a cost. In this case, we may have to loose a few hundred bats and we’ll have to put up with the visual of the towers on top of a picturesque mountain in Colorado. Environmentalists used to complain about electrical transmission towers, poles and lines calling them visual polution. How is a spinning wind turbine not visual pollution?

What is more, if three turbines will eliminate two-thirds of their electrical energy use, why stop there? Why not put in five, or ten towers? Once you have a few unsightly towers up there, people will get used to them and won’t mind a bunch more. I mean you should see our desert around the Palm Springs area in Southern California. There are so many wind mills that you can hardly see the desert any more. It’s just incredible.

Get more information on Global Warming at GlobalWarmingFactFinder.com

One response so far

Sep 22 2008

Al Gore is An ASS

I can’t believe we let Al Gore lecture us on science. I mean after all, what is Al Gore? He’s a Politician, not a scientist. Moreover, he’s is not just a politician, he is a liberal politician - a very liberal politician.

What are liberal politicians interested in? Liberal politicians are only interested in power and taxation. They crave power more than anything. Once in power they attempt to enhance their power by legislating taxes and laws that further restrict your freedoms, tell you how to run your life, and try to totally control your life through government. The more they control your life through government and taxation, the more power they derive in the process.

I remember years ago, after reading a book that I fell for hook line and sinker, talking to an elder, wiser friend of mine who asked me a question that made me think. He asked, “If you were writing a book that you want to seem believable, wouldn’t you put forth the most compelling arguments you could find to get the largest number of people to buy the book?” He further went on to say that, “Even if your claims may seem outlandish, sometimes the more outlandish they are, the more compelling they are, the more people will buy the book, the more money you will make”.

This follows another axiom I have come to embrace and that is that when you want to find the underlying motivation for anything, ‘Follow The Money’. In other words, who stands to make money from this and How?

Which brings us back to Al Bore and his Inconvenient Farce? To begin with how did he get the researchers and scientists to corroborate his claims? They received money for their time. Further, if their claims become more popular to the point that legislation is created to research the claims, they stand to get more money in the form of grants and research money. Millions of dollars are being doled out from the government coffers to research this whole issue of supposed anthropogenic climate change. And if you are a scientist or researcher on the other side of the of the issue and in disagreement with the idea that man is the evil cause of rising temperatures, how much of that money do you think you will get?

So it pays to be on the right side (or in this case “left side”) of the global warming issue. The more you claim you have evidence proves man made climate change, the more money you stand to get from the government to do further research and propagate your ideas.

About the only facts that were even close to the truth in Al Gore propaganda movie were that we have experienced a slight upturn in global temperature since the 1970’s. Prior to that, temperatures had been going down for 30 years. We have only recently gotten back to the temperatures of the 1940’s. See Whatever Happened to Global Cooling of the 70s.  Also, polar ice caps and glacial ice do seem to be retreating. But this is something that has been going on for years before man could have an influence. In fact when you look at a graph of earth temperatures from the 1800’s and compare it to a graph from more modern times, they look nearly identical. This has happened before. See Climate Skeptic.com.

Evidence that was and is readily available, but ignored by the science authorities presented in Al Gore’s movie shows that carbon dioxide is a result of temperature rise that occurs naturally, it is not the cause. It is the rise in temperature that causes the earth to create more carbon dioxide on its own. And as far as man’s contribution to the carbon dioxide goes, it represents less than 1% of the carbon dioxide created each year by earth processes. Carbon Dioxide is actually a good thing. It is a requirement for life to exist on earth. It promotes plant growth, helps farmers realize greater yields in their crops and causes forests to grow faster.

Further, the more recent evidence and research is indicating that Global Warming is currently reversing. Scientists are now saying that they are expecting a period of global cooling. In fact, we have be experiencing cooler temperature on earth since 2002. You can read more on this in our article Is Global Warming Over?

Perhaps what is most important here is that one needs to be very careful before blindly adopting a popular point of view on a concept that is not proven, just because a semi popular politician has a movie that captured a wide audience. Also keep in mind that Al Gore has made millions of dollars from his movie and subsequent Nobel Prize.

This is a man who is one the worst offenders to whole living “Green” concept. His personal electricity usage is one of the highest in his state for a residential property. His home uses more electricity that about 25 normal residences. Further, when he travels, he does so on a Private Jet. Just one trip on this jet that took him across country, spewed as much carbon dioxide (the element now being claimed to be the worst “greenhouse gas”) and ozone pollutants, as average automobile does in one year.

This is a man who in no way practices what he preaches. He spews the talk, but certainly does not ‘walk the walk’. It’s too inconvenient for him so he leaves that for the ‘commons’ like you and me.

If you want to believe that we can reduce the effect of Global Warming by driving smaller cars, driving less, living in a smaller home, using less toilet paper, using no toilet paper, and buying local foods, then by all means, you should do it. I, in many ways, try to do my part by recycling, reusing as much as I can and trying to reduce my electricity use in logical ways. But I refuse to spend more money to do it. Why should I listen to the “Hollywood Elite” (of which Al Gore is now a card carrying member”) who travel the world in limousines and private jets, producing more greenhouse gases then I ever will, who are preaching the evils of living a modern, technologically enhanced life? Why should I listen to politicians who live in huge, energy inefficient homes, fly in private jets, drive in motorcades and in general produce a “carbon footprint” 1000 times larger than mine ever will be? I mean, compare a motorcade to your normal commute to work.

In the immortal words of “The Outlaw Josie Wales”, “Don’t piss down my neck and tell me it’s raining”. Global Warming is a natural earth cycle that will continue long after we are gone. It is ultimately up to us to “Adapt Or Die”. What have they called that in the past? Oh yeah - “Evolution”.

2 responses so far

Sep 15 2008

Is Global Warming Over

Scientists are now saying that Global Warming is going to stop in the near future if not already. What’s more, these seem to be the same scientists that have predicting the doom gloom forecast of melting ice caps and lowland flooding. You know the same ones that Al Gore was citing in his dire forecast of the future.

Studies of long term changes in sea temperatures are indicating that … read more

No responses yet

Sep 05 2008

32,000 Scientists Reject Global Warming

On May 19, 2008, the National Press Club in Washington released a petition signed by nearly 32,000 noted American scientists who reject the premise that Global Warming and Climate Change are a man made phenomenon. In addition to rejecting the idea that the global increase in temperature is the fault of mankind; they reject the entire Kyoto accord to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

A letter by Frederick Seitz, Past President, National Academy of Sciences states, “Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that … read more

No responses yet