Sunday, December 27, 2009

Interpol becomes America's secret police

On December 23 Pres. Obama amended executive order 12425 granting Interpol this immunity:
Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable.

There are employees of the Department of Justice tasked to Interpol. This means that domestic law enforcement officials can gather information on Americans, and that information cannot be accessed through disclosure rules or through Freedom of Information requests. This is truly Kafkaesque.

For a more detailed and complete explanation read

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Climategate revisited

According to the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis:

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

Again, this is not science. If you only select data that supports your hypothesis you are not testing. This is data that is heavily relied upon by the U.N. IPCC to report the threat of a warming climate. The evidence becomes less and less convincing every day.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

On the precipice

"From the discussions we had, it's clear we are on the precipice of achievement that's eluded Congresses, presidents for generations -- an achievement that will touch the lives of nearly every American," Obama said.

According to Merriam-Webster online:

1 : a very steep or overhanging place
2 : a hazardous situation; broadly : brink

It seems that if the President viewed reform in a positive light he would have used a more positive term, like verge. Precipice to me certainly carries a connotation of peril.

Sunday, December 13, 2009


For those keeping political score, Democrats were almost twice as likely to believe in ghosts and to consult fortune-tellers than were Republicans, and the Democrats were 71 percent more likely to believe that they were in touch with the dead.
according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

This explains a lot.

Friday, December 4, 2009


It's no secret that I am, what is derisively termed, a skeptic on the global warming issue. The dump of a large volume of hacked emails from East Anglia's Climate Research Unit(CRU), which it seems is ground zero for global warming enthusiasts, has raised many questions.

To me the biggest take from all of this is that the CRU scientist have admitted they destroyed the data from which they built their climate models. There is no science if the data cannot be reviewed and verified. What this means is that whether the CRU scientists are right are wrong, their findings are totally worthless. If they cannot be independently verified by other scientists the process of verification is finished. Since most if not all of global warming science seems to exist in a small closed circle of researchers we can no longer accept that their is any scientific proof of global warming.

This does not mean that we are not experiencing a warming climate. It just means that we have no scientific evidence to support the theory that the Earth is warming and that man is responsible.