About Me

Name: thekeenobserver
Email: reallykeenobserver@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

The time bomb of 'global warming' is a scientific dud-- but a burning political hot potato, indeed!

 

Attention to all ye faithful environmentalists and global warming proponents...it's time for your science quiz:

Question #1:How is it possible that the ice-cap is melting at an accelerated rate at the North Pole, (implying global warming within the Arctic Circle); yet the United States-- whose latitude is located not that many degrees further south in the Temperate Zone--has experienced its coldest Oct-Nov-Dec since 1976? So does this imply that we are now in firm acknowledgment of regional global warming?

Question number 2: If it's a fact that violent storms destroyed billions of dollars of property this year, and even more powerful storms will also destroy billions of dollars of property in future years, how was it that there were no major hurricanes in the western hemisphere in 2007? Does this imply global warming is only in effect some years? So which is duh answer?


Question #3: Why have the proponents of global warming changed their tune, and now denote the "problem" as 'climate change'. This is profoundly confusing to people who are science-based in their outlook towards weather. So which is it?


Yes boys and girls; Santa may not be coming this year for the Global-Warmers .Many regions of America are seeing pre-Christmas temperatures that haven't been witnessed in 25 years, when on December 24, 1983, nighttime lows of -23 were recorded in many midwestern cities. So is this deja' vu' all over again?

And a Sacramento California TV station has reported that Siberia had a recent -82 below zero, one the coldest tempatures ever since the region began keeping records. The northernmost regions of Russia are experiencing dangerously cold temperatures, which have caused many weather casualties; and authorities are warning Siberian factories about power cuts, as the 50-year record-low temperatures are expected to continue.

The world has never seen such freezing heat! A rare 50-year Arctic blast has hit the west coast hard, including southern California. Colorado is having one of the snowiest Decembers on record.

Both hemispheres of the world are reporting unusual cold and snow. Recent news headlines were all about the sudden drops in the temperatures: "California seawater readings unusually cold"..."Highways closed, motorists stranded as snow buries China"... "Bitter taste of Siberian air, heavy snow, hit parts of Canada"..."Heavy snow forecast for Cascade mountains".

 

And despite all this, the global warmers refuse to be confused by the facts (as usual). But as with any disinformation campaign, our wonderful media is determined to do their part to make the case. Currently, all of broadcast television is being deluged by public service ads about coal plants causing desertification, and that CO2 is somehow akin to being a poison gas. Oh if only we could bring back the good old TV era, where litter and drugs were societies' scourge, and, "a mind was a terrible thing to waste".

These unusually cold, hard weather events could be the beginning of the end of the politics behind the warming sham, because the facts do not at all support the premise that the ENTIRE earth is warming. We humans have a negligible effect on the climate...zero, zilcho, and nein! The climate is controlled by forces greater than anything we could ever produce. You could place a million earths inside our gigantic sun, whose radiant heat controls our earthly temperatures.

The scientific basis for global warming is easily refuted. And scietifically, it's not CO2 that drives the climate, but the multitude of natural variables that are constantly changing, such as ocean currents and sunspots.

 

For starters, the physical laws of the universe (i.e. Newton's Laws) make it impossible to have regional global warming. All weather experienced is a product of the pattern in place. There are no big mysteries. Just like any extremes, climate changes are all perfectly natural and have been ongoing for billions of years. Just remember the dinosaurs, our poor friends who became extinct when the earth suddenly began cooling 65 million years ago.

 

Currently, proof of global warming parallels the existence of Bigfoot; both remain mythological until proven.  The media rant of global warming is perhaps one of the greatest frauds in human and galactic history, as well as all this "going green" propaganda that came out a few years ago, and is being taught religiously in our schools.

 

EXAMPLE: must we really find a way to remove CO2? That would imply that all living, breathing animals and humans (that inspire oxygen and expire carbon dioxide), must all stop breathing.


Does anyone recall the Flat Earth Society; or more recently, the Y2k scare in 1999? In fact, all the warnings about global warming are basically political (not scientific) in nature. And the biggest danger global warming poses is that anyone who dares disagree, is at once labeled as a "right-wing-nut job", so powerful is the wave of political correctness that supports and promulgates it.

 

But politically, 75% Americans "want something done." But what? Maybe some ancient, all wise Indian medicine man might know; but until he's located, we'll all have to try and live through the forked-tongued myths about broiling to death “before it's too late”.

 
Lets address two basic fallacies. First: does burning fossil fuel in an internal combustion engine actually warm the earth? If this actually were the case, then Los Angeles, with more gasoline vehicles per capita than anywhere, would be an inferno, and the hottest city on earth!

Second: does burning 'dirty" coal cause global warming?  But what about the 170 volcanoes that erupt periodically around the globe? In May of 1980, the Mt. St. Helens eruption tossed unknown trillions of cubic meters of sulfuric clouds (containing heavy pollutants) that were blown eastward over North America; but the summers of '80 and '81 on the continent were normal. But historically, sun-blocking volcano eruptions are linked to periods of global COOLING.

Thus, if cloud-sized, sulfur-laden volcanic emissions cause cooling, compare it to a Midwestern power plant burning high-sulfur coal. A volcano is nature's herculean-sized smokestack venting earth's core. Coal plants are blamed for warming, but basically belch a similar volcanic by-product from their stacks, illustrating doubts that coal plants can actually warm the climate.

The one basic fact about the THEORY of global warming, is that those who support it the most, understand the least about science and physics, which are based in facts. Indeed, the facts against global warming are irrefutable; but yet there is the constant political drumbeat of, "we must deal with climate change before it's too LATE". But too late for what?

Well, it's probably too late to change the minds of the current generation of the young, who have been nothing less than brainwashed by our nation's educational system about the grave 'danger'. But this generation of greenies does pose a grave political danger to the nation in the form of a hugely misguided voting bloc, that's easily led by any candidate who's policies are also green.

 

And what of America's  economic future once this green generation takes their place in society's power structure? This ominously portends that the politics of global warming won't be going away anytime soon, and the arguments between the believers vs. the non-believers will continue to heat up for years to come.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hello America... Are you still there?


Question: What's the best job in government, where by following the rules, you are virtually guaranteed a lifetime of service, and then retire on a permanent pension with cost-of-living adjustments, and no co-pay health care to boot!

Answer: It's the con job, stupid!  Just be a con-man,  and be rewarded for life.

Nowadays, voters are in a better position than ever to make informed political decisions. They can access the internet, the blogs, and the portals to get election information. Plus there are now many more cable and national news networks like CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, FOX, Bloomberg, etc. all of which carry political programming. And we haven’t even mentioned the traditional news sources, such as the three major TV networks, or the great newspapers like the New York times, Washington Post, and the Chicago Tribune.
 
Yes, nowadays voters have access to more information than at any previous time, to make informed choices before they enter the voting booth-- yet they keep getting fooled over & over again. But why?

Today, Americans are not only more ignorant about their government than ever before, THEY DO NOT CARE! Ask the average American a simple question like, "what are the 3 branches of the federal government?" And 60% cannot answer correctly! And that's just for starters. Over 25% of Americans foolishly believe that the UN, along with the president, determines our foreign policy! This is beyond stupid...it is downright idiopathic, which is stupidity to the point where it becomes dangerous.
 
How dangerous is it to be stupid when it comes to one's knowledge of their government? Duh... just look at the way the average American votes nowadays. But first, a little historical perspective on voting stupidly.
 
In the election of 1976, it was Jimmie Carter, a dangerously inexperienced, peanut-farming, 1-term Georgia governor, who was running against Gerald Ford, who'd served well as an interim president after Nixon resigned. Ford was a long time Michigan congressman, and was an all-American football player at his Michigan University alma mater. But during the campaign, Ford was depicted as a clumsy, bumbling, oafish Republican, while Carter was portrayed as a sincere and confidant liberal reformer, who championed human rights and "would always tell the truth".
 
Of course Carter won because he was the adopted candidate of the liberal media. But in the final long term analysis, what was the REAL reason Carter defeated Ford? Was it because of Ford's blunder in the 2nd presidential debate, as history would tell us? Or was it because the country was ready for a president who would be the antithesis of the lying Richard Nixon, and would always be straight forward with the American people? NOPE! The real reason Carter won was because he had better hair than the shiny-pated Gerald Ford.
 
The one MAIN credential nowadays in major elections is: you cannot be bald. When's the last time America voted in a presidential candidate who was bald? DUH... give up? It was Dwight Eisenhower, who won less because of his popularity, and more because of Truman's unpopularity and rating of 35%. And despite the disastrous 1-term presidency of Jimmie Carter, would Ronald Reagan have succeeded him if he'd been bald? And to further the point, Reagan (fortunately) for his age had the thick hair of a 30 yr old.
 
Today, American political hairmania is pervasive in almost any electoral contest. Thinking about running for governor? Well friend, if you ain't got good hair, then try the school board.  How about senator? i.e. Look at the average serving senator's age, and then look at all the "older" men who serve there with great hair! Are either of the senators from your home state bald? Probably not. Or they had real good hair back when they were elected.
 
It's probably incalculable all the damage these great-haired conmen of our government have done to this country, in lieu of the competent bald men who might have served instead, would it not be the fact that they were scalp-challenged with little or no hair. Americans detest a bald political pate; and comb-overs are verboten in national politics. Maybe we should resurrect the Whig party, and highly-qualified honest candidates who lack hair, could now get elected wearing some well-fashioned toupe'.

Even the Founding Fathers had it figured out back then; they all wore powdered wigs, and all the best men were able to serve. And fortunately, they showed what honest, well-intentioned people of government can actually accomplish when they are free of artificial restrictions such as hair, or how they look on television.
 
Yup-- that's the bottom line and basic reason for America's obsession with voting stupidly-- it's how you look on television. In the recent election, what might have been the outcome if John McCain had been a member of the 'wig' party? Interesting question indeed. And to play devil's advocate here, could Obama have won his 'mandate' if he had hair like Micheal Jordan (shiny bald), or had gap-teeth like Micheal Strahan? If you don’t have great hair, or are 'challenged' facially, you cannot be serious about running for president. Just ask Rudy Julianni, Fred Thompson, or geeky Dennis Kucinich.
 
Would (could) homely Abe Lincoln have defeated Obama if he had been born 130 years later and was alive today? NO WAY! Lincoln wouldn't have been even able to make it into congress. Honesty and politics are like oil and water together.

Example: in the warped politics of today, a gaffe is when a candidate unintentionally "lets down his guard" and reveals his (her) true position. Yes, it's a fact...besides one's physical appearance, a political candidate cannot reveal the truth, lest it may damage their chances to win.
 
How did America get to this point? It's the con job stupid, and the 'rewards' of being dishonest. Today Americans are so lacking in ethics in their daily lives, that they seem to be "more connected to" the candidate who can promise them..."I'll create thousands of new jobs....I'll fight for working families everywhere"...etc.
 
Yes; they'll fight for working families everywhere. But the laws the con men sponsor are those of the special interests, who transform working families everywhere into unemployed families everyplace. And these con-men congress-people collect a HUGE payoff in the form of campaign contributions, so they'll have a "warchest" for their re-election, so they can perpetuate their misery.
 
It's a fine way to elect a government isn't it? And the con-men usually serve for life using this "fail safe" formula: Promise everything ...deliver nothing...and blame the failed policies of your political opponent as the cause. (quote) "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it...the truth is the greatest enemy of the State"... Joseph Goebbels (Hitler's propaganda minister).  “A lie told often enough becomes truth”...Vladimir Lenin. Who he? He founded the communist party during the Russian Revolution in 1917.
 
Can anyone deny that this is exactly the current state of politics in America today? You must be a con man or you cannot win. If you make too many gaffes, and let the truth 'slip out', then that's the kiss of death. During the presidential debates, people look for gaffes, rather than the candidate's true position. Policy matters not. The drama of the "gotcha moment" is what the public lives for in a campaign. And the candidate who provides enough "gotchas" is the inevitable victor; as the media will relive the gotcha moments over and over, and the gotcha candidate's ratings soar higher and higher in the polls.

And where does this all lead to? Well, it's become an American tradition: voting like an idiopathic moron; voting against your own best economic and social interests. Keep perpetuating the misery! Keep returning the conmen back to office! Never mind seeking the truth, it matters little. What's important is going with whatever candidate the media selects, that's how you're virtually guaranteed to elect the least worthy, and most specious person to office.

And what's even more idiopathic is to vote the choice of the comedians. Of course! let the comedy channel choose the "best " candidate. Take the advice of Stephen Colbert, and John Stewart Liebowitz, because they're the ones who're looking out for you. Do your part to make our democracy a joke. Let clowns like Bill Maher, and Lettermen and the the other clowns of comedy to make sure we keep re-electing congressional clowns like Barney Frank, and honest Chris Dodd, the odious Chuck Schumer, and the con man of ways and means, Charlie Rangel, because they always get the last laugh on you once they're done taking away what's left of our fast-disappearing, constitutionally guaranteed right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

And take special note of how our Founding Fathers used the word "pursuit" in the Preamble. Why? The longer we continue to re-elect these malevolent, fat-cat incumbents, we'll never catch up to being happy or feeling free from the ever-encroaching tentacles of our rapidly-expanding federal government; and the onerous regulations that destroy the freedom we have left in our lives to keep our money for ourselves, and to speak and act without the fear of political incorrectness, which will soon become another way for these liberals to control our lives, thus making us more miserable than ever.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »