I discovered a long time ago as did Gary that scientists will completely make up science if they have to in order to receive government grants which can be several millions of dollars. The archeological digs that find skulls such as the famous Lucy have been highly ridiculed for this type of made up science. In fact the Lucy skull although recognized to this day as legitimate evidence of evolution has been proven to be a hodgepodge of different animal bones. As a matter of fact, Random House has a another book called “Lucy’s Legacy” which seems to be another science book pandering to more government grants related to made up science.

The skull “Lucy Australopithecus Afarensis” skeletal remains are all considered authenticated but none of the 8 different displays used over the years are exactly the same. There have been over 8 displays of Lucy and each display has bones added and removed from previous displays. What happened to these missing bones? What was wrong with them that they are mysteriousy gone now? The answer: Because Lucy is a “Jackalopian composit, a farbication of dis-articulated and geographically seperated bones of more than 30 individual skeletons, most of which may not be hominids at all they had to make it up as they went.

Back in 1974 the National Science Board told the world that “over the last 20 to 30 years world temperatures had fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade. Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end…leading into the next ice age.”

These scientists are only human and so many of them will gladly use a lot of creative license to make their findings follow along with national politics. For the scientists slight skewing of numbers and the scientific theory they receive millions of dollars to their university, science department and own pet project. Without a good politically flattering scientific find the university scientist will not receive federal grants and funding. This all boils down to business and scientists are not immune to this type of thing.
Gary Sutton said in his Forbes article, “In 2002 I stood in a room of the Smithsonian. One entire wall charted the cooling of our globe over the last 60 million years. This was no straight line. The curve had two steep dips followed by leveling. There were no significant warming periods. Smithsonian scientists inscribed it across some 20 feet of plaster, with timelines.”

Gary apoligized for noticing the Smithsonian change, tongue in cheek of course. He finalized his point by explaining that politicians whip up panic, get the votes they need from the scared public, rinse and repeat.

Ian Plimer is an australian geologist and professor of mining geology at Adelaide University in Australia. Highly qualified scientists are constantly talking about how global warming is a scam but many people seem to be hush hush as the cool urban hippy people might frown in their direction. People really don’t want to feel un cool or like they are red neck hillbillys in Texas believing what their momma told them. People generally want to be perceived as educated and right now to not agree with global warming is seen as un cool and  not smart. So a lot of people out there that probably don’t believe in global warming are just remaining silent about the issue.

There are athiests out there that are quite logical about things to a degree that no amount of persecution will allow them to choose anything other than the facts. Ian Plimer is one of these people and has even gotten himself in trouble when disrupting creationists get togethers. This guy is the real deal when it comes to standing up for scientific facts. He doesn’t seem to be peer pressured into the trending fad of global warming.

Ian  just published the latest of his six books and 60 academic papers on the subject of global warming. This book, Heaven and Earth — Global Warming: The Missing Science, draws together much of his previous work. It springs especially from A Short History of Plant Earth, which was based on a decade of radio broadcasts in Australia.

That book, published in 2001, was a best-seller and won several prizes. But Plimer found it hard to find anyone willing to publish this latest book, so intimidating has the environmental lobby become. source:

There is no problem with global warming, Plimer says repeatedly. He points out that for humans periods of global warming have been times of abundance when civilization made leaps forward. Ice ages, in contrast, have been times when human development slowed or even declined.

So global warming, says Plimer, is something humans should welcome and embrace as a harbinger of good times to come. source: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Global+warming+religion+First+World+urban+elites/1835847/story.html

The solar craze is touted by these college freshman and their daddy professors but go check out their house and see if they have one of these contraptions. You will notice that none of them own solar panels except maybe to power their ipod touch or other fashionable techno gadget. But they say the government has a plan to pay for everyone to have solar and wind power. OK, so if it costs 40 years to recover the initial investment and the government is going to pay for every family to have one of these solar systems than wouldn’t that money have to come from the tax payers? Yeah well the government will get that money from the greedy rich people. OK, well didn’t they try that in Maryland and those millionaires left that state in droves over to their second homes in Texas and Florida. Maryland ended up losing an additional 100 million dollars in tax revenue bringing them further in debt.

People you don’t penalize the rich for the next fad idea that makes no economical sense. You don’t fall for propaganda speech that sounds good but really has the alterior motive of bringing us that much closer to a socialistic government. The government isn’t going to buy solar for every household. They will use the tax increases to create more power at the top for themselves and to have more control over the people. If you haven’t seen it yet the government is making a power grab just like they did in Maryland. It won’t work, people in America like their liberty and will protect themselves from this power grab by whatever lawful means neccessary.

Green douche bags everywhere we call you to unite and jump into the ocean to reduce Americas carbon footprint. This is the answer and we ask that you donate your solar charger you use for your ipod touch to be placed on the tops of all walmarts to create the biggest united solar renewable energy power plant in history. We also ask that you send us your Danny Gokey glasses so that we may concentrate the beam of sunlight onto these solar panels in order to make efficient use of the solar panels and walmart’s roof.

The new show is going to be called “The Goode Family” and will be making fun of things like, “carbon footprints”, poop rags, and just the general snobish and elitist attitudes of the green environmentalists who enjoy the popularity that having a relationship with a tree and chia pet can bring. You get invited to the coolest parties, drinking a martini is no longer considered gay, and you can feel comfortable with people like Naked E who roams around the streets of San Francisco naked to display his brand of eco oneness with nature.

The creator of this show also created hit animation series like Beavis and Butt Head. He is going out on his own financing on this one which is great and means he will have free creative license to do as he pleases. I think this show is going to be hysterical and can’t wait until it comes out. Cartoon shows are no easy task as each episode costs around 2 million dollars to create and takes about 1 year to complete. I can imagine they must hire a lot of staff to push out one episode every week.

Get ready for some laughs with this one. I imagine it will be one of my favorite shows I will be sure to record on my DVR.

Reducing oil dependence. Strengthening energy security. Creating jobs. Tackling global warming. Addressing air pollution. Improving our health. The United States has many reasons to make the transition to a clean energy economy. What we need is a comprehensive set of smart policies to jump-start this transition without delay and maximize the benefits to our environment and economy. Climate 2030: A National Blueprint for a Clean Energy Economy (“the Blueprint”)
answers that need.

To help avoid the most dangerous consequences of climate change, ranging from extreme heat, droughts, and storms to acidifying oceans and rising sea levels, the United States must play a lead role and begin to cut its heat-trapping emissions today—and aim for at least an 80 percent drop from 2005 levels by 2050. Blueprint policies lower U.S. heat-trapping emissions to meet a cap set at 26 percent below 2005 levels in 2020, and 56 percent below 2005 levels in 2030.

The nation achieves these deep cuts in carbon emissions while saving consumers and businesses $465 billion annually by 2030. The Blueprint also builds $1.7 trillion in net cumulative savings between 2010 and 2030. Blueprint policies stimulate significant consumer, business, and government investment in new technologies and measures by 2030. The resulting savings on energy bills from reductions in electricity and fuel use more than offset the costs of these additional investments. The result is net annual savings for households, vehicle owners, businesses, and industries of $255 billion by 2030.

Under the Blueprint, every region of the country stands to save billions. Households and businesses—even in coal-dependent regions—will share in these savings.

US Energy Savings Plan Map

I question these savings numbers, “The nation achieves these deep cuts in carbon emissions while saving consumers and businesses $465 billion annually by 2030. The Blueprint also builds $1.7 trillion in net cumulative savings between 2010 and 2030.”

How come these savings numbers are not being brought in political speeches when attempting to convince people to go along with this? Where in this is the cost for these things? I see that we will save money but when you add the cost to these savings do we end up with a negative or positive number? My tax dollars for the rest of my life will be paying for these things so I would like to know if this is really going to be worth it. Where is the accounting spreadsheet that gives the final tally and how did they come up with these numbers?

With the help of the government and don’t forget the rich white man tax payer we will be able to buy a green car at an affordable price. Al Gore made the unique statement that we can’t “bailout” the environment. My home town movie theatre is offering a “movie stimulus plan” on Tuesday where a bag of popcorn and a drink only costs a $1 and I enjoyed a “staycation” with my “bailout savings coupon” at Andy’s custard. There seems to be no end to the amount of things you can create a bailout related marketing campaign around. I would like to provide an injection of economic stimulated free news worthy information to the blogosphere through my nifty blog I am sure readers will enjoy without ever having to waste a tree by reading your trusty news paper.

So 5 years from now will I be driving a green car? I assume I probably will because the government seems to have gripped their fist around this issue and they are not going to let go. Now is this really being done because these politicians want to save the environment or are they appealing to the mother earth pagan culture that has poliferated in England and is now quite large in the United States as well. These elitist liberal people feel like they are seeing the bigger picture by investing in the environment with this very minor part of a much worse liberal agenda. All the liberal politicians had to do is back a couple of noble ideals of the elitist left and they would follow right along.

Keep recycling your trash and teach your kids about compost piles and energy conservation but don’t get hooked into this liberal trap. What’s so wrong with the principles the founding fathers setup to make this country great? You can still be green while supporting common sense. Who is with me?