News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Ex-Penn State Pres. Spanier who cleared child rapist and ClimateGate figure wrote PhD dissertation on 'mate-swapping'

"The difference between the Mann investigation and the Sandusky investigation is that one covered up a sex offender and the other covered up a fraud."...

7/31/12, "The Climategate and Jerry Sandusky Scandals: A Common Thread," American Thinker, T.S. Weidler

"America, it's time to meet your newest top-secret government employee: a professional cover-up artist with a radical agenda. Graham Spanier is the former Penn State University president who was fired during the Jerry Sandusky investigation for failing to properly investigate Sandusky when the pedophilia allegations first surfaced.

Spanier's "investigation" of Jerry Sandusky was so thoroughly inept that it got him fired. When it was completed, Spanier stated that he had "complete confidence in how they have handled the allegations against Sandusky," and he was fired very shortly thereafter. The recent Freeh report indicates that the investigation was conducted for the purpose of finding nothing. In other words, it was a cover-up.

It wasn't the only time Spanier rigged an inept investigation for the purpose of finding nothing. In 2010, his investigators found that Penn State climatologist Michael Mann had done nothing wrong when he invented his "hockey stick trick," to "hide the decline" and lend false credibility to climate change theory. The difference between the Mann investigation and the Sandusky investigation is that one covered up a sex offender and the other covered up a fraud.

The Climategate "Investigation"

The methodology, however, was equally bad. The "Climategate" investigation was conducted by five Penn State employees. It is available here. The five internal investigators were given a list of four specific allegations of academic fraud, and they proceeded to dismiss the three most significant allegations outright, without investigating them at all. The next step was to read 376 e-mails written by Mann and dismiss 329 of them. After this, they conducted a two-hour interview with Michael Mann, in which he (shocker!) denied doing anything wrong.

The next step was to interview two outside climatologists, noted within the report itself for their personal support of Mann himself and his science, named Dr. Gerald North from Texas A&M and Dr. Donald Kennedy from Stanford University. Naturally, these two friends supported Mann. Next, they interviewed Dr. Richard Lindzen at MIT, who accused them of ignoring the most important allegations. They ignored him and moved on. The report actually states this. "We did not respond to him."

After this, the investigators deemed that Michael Mann hadn't done anything wrong. They did not investigate three quarters of the allegations against him, and they did not interview anyone with an opposing viewpoint. President Spanier then stated, "I know they have taken the time and spent hundreds of hours studying documents and interviewing people and looking at issues from all sides." This statement is blatantly untrue, as the report itself indicates. It also sounds disturbingly similar to Spanier's statement about the Sandusky cover-up -- "I have complete confidence in how they handled the
allegations against Sandusky" -- which got him fired.

When Graham Spanier organizies an internal investigation of his own celebrity employees, he finds what he wants to find, and he doesn't seem to care a lick whether it is true. An internal investigation overseen by Spanier is about as credible as a child rape investigation by the U.N.

This brings us back to Jerry Sandusky, the child rapist. There are two reasons Graham Spanier helped cover for Sandusky. First is Spanier's well-known instinct to protect his friends. Second is that Spanier himself has a radical sexual agenda.

The Child Rape cover-ups

His (Spanier's) career started in the early '70s, when he became one of the world's leading academic voices for "swinging," or mate-swapping. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on the subject, and he frequently published additional essays throughout the 1970s. His conclusion was that mate-swapping is good for marriages as long as it is not done in secret. In an article on mate-swapping that he co-wrote with Charles L. Cole from 1975, we find this gem: "We choose to view deviant behavior simply as behavior that some value and others consider wrong. An individual's behavior becomes deviant only when others define it as deviant."

With this attitude toward sexual morality, does it surprise you that Spanier himself personally refused to investigate a completely different sex scandal just a few days before the allegations against Sandusky were first brought to his attention?...

If you are counting at home, that is two charges of child rape in one week that Graham Spanier personally refused to investigate. The reason the Neisworth abuse case isn't more famous is because it didn't involve a celebrity football coach.

We know that the charges were true on both counts. Sandusky is in jail, and in 2005, Neisworth was charged with additional cases of child sexual abuse. In 2006 he agreed to an out-of-court six-figure payment to McLaughlin....

Penn State knew what agenda they were getting. When they hired him in 1995, the student body president at the University of Nebraska (which Spanier had headed) warned Penn State, saying, "Watch out for his social agenda and make sure he doesn't make it a priority over academics." The warning was prescient....

The Big Promotion

America, meet your newest secret consultant. Graham Spanier, the professional cover-up artist with a history of promoting and covering evil deeds, has now been hired by your federal government for a top-secret consulting job that is so secret that we aren't even allowed to know what it is. Sounds like a good fit. This man's primary skill is covering up dark things that make people look bad.

They need him for something. They hired him as soon as he was available.

Don't believe another word they tell you."


Monday, July 30, 2012

Obama, "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." speech to AIPAC, 6/4/2008

6/4/2008, "Transcript: Obama's Speech at AIPAC," NPR

"Illinois Sen. Barack Obama delivered a speech on Wednesday, June 4, before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.... In these prepared remarks provided by his campaign, Obama tries to allay doubts that some Jewish voters have expressed about his candidacy. He talks about his great-uncle's service in World War II, as a member of the infantry division that first liberated a Nazi concentration camp. He also calls Israel's security non-negotiable and compares his policies toward Israel with those of Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain."

parags. 22-27: "
Let me be clear. Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper — but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.

I have no illusions that this will be easy. It will require difficult decisions on both sides. But Israel is strong enough to achieve peace, if it has partners who are committed to the goal. Most Israelis and Palestinians want peace, and we must strengthen their hand. The United States must be a strong and consistent partner in this process — not to force concessions, but to help committed partners avoid stalemate and the kind of vacuums that are filled by violence. That's what I commit to do as president of the United States.

The threats to Israel start close to home, but they don't end there. Syria continues its support for terror and meddling in Lebanon. And Syria has taken dangerous steps in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, which is why Israeli action was justified to end that threat.

I also believe that the United States has a responsibility to support Israel's efforts to renew peace talks with the Syrians. We must never force Israel to the negotiating table, but neither should we ever block negotiations when Israel's leaders decide that they may serve Israeli interests. As president, I will do whatever I can to help Israel succeed in these negotiations. And success will require the full enforcement of Security Council Resolution 1701 in Lebanon, and a stop to Syria's support for terror. It is time for this reckless behavior to come to an end.

There is no greater threat to Israel — or to the peace and stability of the region — than Iran. Now this audience is made up of both Republicans and Democrats, and the enemies of Israel should have no doubt that, regardless of party, Americans stand shoulder to shoulder in our commitment to Israel's security. So while I don't want to strike too partisan a note here today, I do want to address some willful mischaracterizations of my positions.

The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat."...via Free Republic commenter


Thursday, July 26, 2012

Penn State climate panel silent on big news of US CO2 drop but says PSU is more powerful than state gov. & its global warming view can change society

A Penn State 5-member climate disaster panel (names listed below including Michael Mann) in April 2012 apparently is unaware of the good news that US CO2 has dropped and is heading lower 22 years after global warming 'action' was mandated by the US government. Penn State should get up to date with science, accept that US democracy isn't threatened by CO2, and use their "power" to solve other problems. Tom Nelson reports:

7/25/12, "April 2012: Remarkable statement by Penn State's Peter Buckland on the alleged political power of academic (global) warmists: "[Penn State is] arguably the most powerful institution in the state of Pennsylvania, maybe more powerful than the state government, because it can just tell the state government to go away all the time..."," Tom Nelson

"Changing the Moral Climate on Climate Change - YouTube
A free presentation given on April 30, 2012 at 101 Thomas Bldg. on Penn State's University Park Campus to a live audience.
At the 1:57 mark, "PSU expert" Peter Buckland says "[Penn State is] arguably the most powerful institution in the state of Pennsylvania, maybe more powerful than the state government, because it can just tell the state government to go away all the time. When you have a university that powerful, the statement that you know like ...climate change is real, we have people that tell us that it is real, and we have to take meaningful action,
  • that pushes other institutions to do things.
If you have coalitions of every major research university in the country, saying that and broadcasting it very clearly and then embedding it in everything they do,
  • it will change the civil-,
  • it will change the society."
Confronting The Climate Change Denial Machine - Mike Mann & 4 other PSU experts discuss AGW Politics

Peter Buckland, A.B.D
in Educational Theory and Policy [and co-host of "Sustainability Now Radio"]"

From You Tube post on the above Penn State event:


"There's a difference between skepticism and deception.

We take on climate change, justice, psychology, and the need for PSU [Penn State University] to take on climate change and combat climate change denial to defend democracy....


Dr. (Juris) Donald Brown
Peter Buckland
Dr. Janet Swim
Dr. Rick Schuhman
Dr. Michael Mann
Audience Q & A


Science, Technology and Society Program, Center for Sustainability, Campus Sustainability Office, Rock Ethics Institute, Natural Resources and Environment Program, Sustainable Agriculture Club, Sustainability Now Radio


Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, Sierra Club Moshannon, Sierra Club Pennsylvania, Sierra Club Moshannon, National Wildlife Federation, Voices of Central PA, PennEnvironment, PennFUTURE, Juniata Valley Audubon Society, Centre County Democrats, Interfaith Coalition on the Environment, Pennsylvania Interfaith Power & Light, Pennsylvanians for Clean Air and Water, Elk County C.A.R.E.S., and the Pennsylvania Environmental Resource Consortium (PERC)."


Ed. note: Even the NY Times has observed that US CO2 emissions have dropped steadily since at least 2006 and are going lower. Conversely, other countries' CO2 hasn't dropped,
This isn't to say US federal and state governments haven't become partners with the 'climate' industry. Trillions have been taken from US taxpayers for climate expenses via agency budget allocations, tax subsidies, diversion of US military to climate and green projects, countless federal regulations, vast sums shipped out in foreign aid for 'climate' endeavors, etc. Devoting 13 federal agencies to 'climate' matters is hardly a lack of action! In fact, Global Warming 'action' was institutionalized in US government in 1990 by George Bush the 1st. So, 22 years after that...congratulations, a big win! Penn State panelists among others wanted the US to knock down CO2 production and it did. The US even exports fuel now!


7/15/12, "Recession Special: Cleaner Air," NY Times, Matthew Wald

"What the government has not mandated, the economy is doing on its own: emissions of global warming gases in the United States are down.

According to the Energy Department, carbon dioxide emissions peaked in this country in 2005 and will not reach that level again until the early 2020s."...


US CO2 has dropped steeply and is going lower:

6/26/12, "The Incredible Shrinking Carbon Pollution Forecast - Part 2,", Dan Lashof


6/29/12, "US Carbon Output Forecasts Shrink Again," American Interest, Walter Russell Mead


6/4/12, "
Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006," Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage


6/22/12, "U.S. cuts greenhouse gases despite do-nothing Congress," CNN, Steve Hargreaves

"Even factoring in a stronger economy, forecasters see greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall."...


4/21/12, "Why [CO2] Emissions Are Declining in the U.S. But Not in Europe," by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus,

"As we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are expected to decline further over the next decade."


11/23/11, "Europe's $287 billion carbon 'waste': UBS report," The Australian, by Sid Maher

"SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union's emissions trading scheme has cost the continent's consumers $287 billion for "almost zero impact" on cutting carbon emissions."...EU CO2 trading provided "windfall profits" to participants paid for by "electricity customers.""


4/23/12, "'I made a mistake': Gaia theory scientist James Lovelock admits he was 'alarmist' about the impact of climate change," UK Daily Mail, L. Warren


7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe


10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro


5/6/12, "US Leads EU in CO2 Reductions," Walter Russell Mead, American Interest


A 2011 report noted EIA results through 2009, US CO2 emissions dropped steadily since 1999. If, hypothetically, US temperatures have been on the increase, they couldn't possibly be related to US carbon dioxide emissions:

4/14/11, "Biggest Drop in U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions," World Climate Report

"In 2009, greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. experienced their biggest drop since the U.S. Energy Information Administration began tracking them during the 1990-2009 timeframe."


1/25/2009, "Global warming industry becomes too big to fail," Timothy Carney, Washington Examiner


8/23/11, "The Alarming Cost Of Climate Change Hysteria," Forbes, Larry Bell

"The Small Business Administration estimates that compliance with such regulations costs the U.S. economy more than $1.75 trillion per year — about 12%-14% of GDP, and half of the $3.456 trillion Washington is currently spending. The Competitive Enterprise Institute believes the annual cost is closer to $1.8 trillion when an estimated $55.4 billion regulatory administration and policing budget is included."...


8/10/11, "U.S. Army Creates Renewables Office: Billions to Be Spent,"


11/21/11, "Analysis: U.S. government a tenuous beachhead for biofuel firms," Reuters

"The U.S. military has emerged as a key ally for fledgling producers of non-food-based biofuels."...


A few examples of climate cash sought in 2011:

1/11/11, "Big Money in Climate Change: Who Gives, Who Gets," Al Fin


CRS says congress may want to consider that global warming isn't happening anyway.

3/26/12, "Obama Requests $770 Million to Fight Global Warming Overseas," CNS News, Matt Cover

"The Obama administration has requested $770 million in federal funds to combat the effects of global warming in developing countries, a new congressional report details, continuing its policy of using foreign aid to combat the effects of global warming in the developing world.

The figure, from a recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), shows that despite another year of $1 trillion deficits, the Obama administration continues to pursue its policy of using foreign aid funds for anti-global warming measures – known as the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI).

According to CRS, the government has spent a total of $2.5 billion on GCCI since 2010 on overseas anti-global warming efforts in Latin America, Asia, and Africa."...


And, "Only 12% (of net US petroleum imports) came from Saudi Arabia last year, down from nearly 19% in 1993."...

12/16/11, "Oil boomlet sweeps U.S. as exports and production rise," USA Today, Wendy Koch

"The U.S. exported more oil-based fuels than it imported in the first nine months of this year, making it likely that 2011 will be the first time since 1949 that the nation is a net exporter of such goods, primarily diesel....

"It's dramatic. It's transformative," Edward Morse, a former senior U.S. energy official who now directs global commodities research at Citigroup, says of the historic shifts. He says the U.S. is importing a smaller share — 49% in 2010, down from 60% in 2005 — of the oil it uses, adding: "We're moving toward energy independence.""...


11/30/11, "U.S. Nears Milestone: Net Fuel Exporter," Wall St. Journal, by L. Pleven, R. Gold

A combination of booming demand from emerging markets and faltering domestic activity means the U.S. is exporting more fuel than it imports,

  • upending the historical norm.

According to data released by the U.S. Energy Information Administration on Tuesday, the U.S. sent abroad 753.4 million barrels of everything from gasoline to jet fuel in the first nine months of this year, while it imported 689.4 million barrels."...


7/28/10, "The secrets 10 states and Wall Street don't want you to know," by Mark Lagerkvist, NJ Watchdog

""Secrecy and greed are polluting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the nation’s first
  • mandatory cap-and-trade system.
Under the RGGI scheme, the smell of profiteering is powerful. New Jersey and nine other Northeast states have sold
The bidders at RGGI auctions include Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, JPMorgan Chase and other Wall Street heavyweights."...


7/02/09, "The Great American Bubble Machine: How Goldman Sachs has Engineered Every Major Market Manipulation Since the Great Depression," Rolling Stone, by Matt Taibbi

"A groundbreaking new commodities bubble,

  • called cap-and-trade.
The new carbon-credit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that's been kind to Goldman,

If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices

  • will be government-mandated.
  • Goldman won't even have to rig the game.
It will be rigged in advance."...


Ed. note: The topic of 'US-caused catastrophic climate change' alleged by Penn State is as relevant today as steel mills in the rust belt. Penn State will find new ways to corral US taxpayer millions.


Wednesday, July 25, 2012

NJ Gov. Christie rescues overbuilt solar and 'solar renewable' credits, forces utilities to buy more solar 'credits'

Which is nice but since man-caused global warming or climate change is officially no longer an issue in the US (though unofficially it never was to begin with) next time the subsidies would be better invested elsewhere.

7/23/12, "Gov. Christie signs into law a rescue for New Jersey's solar subsidy market," NJ Star-Ledger, E. Caroom

"Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill into law today to stabilize prices in the state's solar subsidy market.

In the last few years New Jersey built more solar projects than any state except California, which produced a glut of solar subsidy credits, called SRECs, driving down prices.

The bill signed into law today will dramatically increase the number of solar credits that New Jersey's electric utilities must buy, which legislators hope will increase prices for the credits to keep the industry healthy.

"It appears as though we’re so overbuilt that if nothing was done legislatively, you would not have to do any solar development in the next three to four years," said Jamie Hahn, co-founder of Solis Partners, which develops, designs, and constructs large solar power systems. "If you have a market that goes dormant for three to four years, you’re also going to have significant job loss as well."

Prices on spot markets plummeted from around $600 in the past several years to the mid-$100 range this year.

Solar industry leaders are mixed on whether the law is a permanent fix:

"We greatly appreciate that the Governor and the legislature worked very hard to provide a rescue for the solar industry," said Lyle Rawlings, head of the Mid-Atlantic Solar Energy Industries Association, which represents about 125 companies in New Jersey. "They have done so for the time being, but we were hoping for a more permanent solution."

One thing he and Hahn had sought was a mechanism for the Board of Public Utilities to control the market if projects again overtake demand and cause a price crash.

"That's the concern that a lot of industry experts have," Hahn said. "The most important thing is without some form of a throttle mechanism, we could potentially be in an overbuild scenario within the next two years."" via Save Jersey blog, "Green Energy is a Partisan Issue When I’m Forced to Subsidize It!"


4/4/12, "Arctic Shatters More Records," Real Science, Steve Goddard

"Arctic ice extent is the highest in nearly a decade, and has again set the record for both the latest peak and the longest winter. Normally it has been melting for almost a month already." (NORSEX, SSM/1)


As of Feb. 2012, no Antarctic ice lost in past 30 years per AGU, American Geophysical Union


6/26/12, "The Incredible Shrinking Carbon Pollution Forecast - Part 2,", Dan Lashof


6/29/12, "US Carbon Output Forecasts Shrink Again," American Interest, Walter Russell Mead


6/4/12, "
Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006," Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage


6/22/12, "U.S. cuts greenhouse gases despite do-nothing Congress," CNN, Steve Hargreaves

"Even factoring in a stronger economy, forecasters see greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall."...


4/21/12, "Why [CO2] Emissions Are Declining in the U.S. But Not in Europe," by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus,

"As we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are expected to decline further over the next decade."


5/2/12, "Permit glut sparks talk of ‘carbon central bank’," Euractiv


4/23/12, "'I made a mistake': Gaia theory scientist James Lovelock admits he was 'alarmist' about the impact of climate change," UK Daily Mail, L. Warren


No Greenland melt, just media hype and contradictions

7/25/12, "Unprecedented’ Greenland Surface Melt – Every 150 Years?," Dot Earth

7/25/12, "
News Report “NASA: Sudden Massive Melt in Greenland” – My Comments On This Media Hype,", Roger Pielke Sr.

There has been widespread media reporting of this melting (e.g. Fox News, MSNBC), but the real news story is the overstatement of this weather event by the media (and some scientists at NASA). The headline is the biased part of the article, which Seth may not have much control on, but, regardless, this biased misleading headline needs to be identified."


"Scientists said they believed that much of Greenland's ice was already freezing again."

Greenland summit webcam

7/25/12, "Satellites reveal sudden Greenland ice melt," BBC

"The surface of Greenland's massive ice sheet has melted this month over an unusually large area, Nasa has said....

According to ice core records, such pronounced melting at Summit station and across the ice sheet has not occurred since 1889.

"Ice cores from Summit show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time," said Lora Koenig, a glaciologist from Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland and a member of the research team analysing the satellite data....

Scientists said they believed that much of Greenland's ice was already freezing again." via Steven Goddard


Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Seth Borenstein, AP, LA Times, Reuters range from misleading to false in the sea level racket with billions of US taxpayer dollars on the line

""The United Nations' forecast of how quickly global sea levels will rise this century is vital in determining how much money might be needed to combat the phenomenon....It is a number which will ultimately establish how billions in taxpayer money will be spent."...(7/15/11, Der Spiegel)

7/24/12, "Refuting Global Warming," American Thinker, Dustin Siggins

"In the last few months, two large studies have been published that warn about the dangers of global warming related to coastal flooding in the United States. Unfortunately, the media outreach by one study's authors and the national media's reports on the stories are extremely misleading.

Just Facts President Jim Agresti dissected the reports earlier this week. According to Agresti, "[m]ajor media outlets -- and in some ways the studies themselves -- have painted a distorted picture of past, current, and future sea levels. In fact, the studies actually conflict with each other, a crucial fact that has gone unreported in news reports that have mentioned both of the studies."

What kinds of distortions are present? Agresti writes:

"The AP's claim about "scientists and computer models" predicting global sea-level rises by 2100 of "as much as 3.3 feet" could just as well have been worded "as little as 7 inches."

This 3.3 feet figure is not from the study that is the subject of the AP article[.] ...

The reality, however, is that a 2011 paper in the Journal of Coastal Research explains that such projections run as low as 7 inches. An honest way to report this would have been to provide a range of estimates[.] ...

The Los Angeles Times headline -- "California sea levels to rise 5-plus feet this century" -- is even more misleading...the study predicts a sea-level rise of 16.5 to 66 inches over this period. [T]he LA Times reporter walks back the headline and applies the qualifier "as much as" to the 5-plus-feet figure, but he fails to provide even a hint that this is the upper bound of a prediction that extends to as low as one fourth of this.

Reuters [claimed] that the East Coast study shows "sea levels from Cape Hatteras to Cape Cod are rising at a faster pace than anywhere on Earth."

This assertion appears to be completely fabricated.

The study compares global average sea-level accelerations to those on the coastlines of the continental U.S. and southernmost portion of Canada.

It says nothing about any other specific locations, and an email to one of the study's authors confirms that

  • the study "does not make comparisons 'to anywhere on earth'."

Agresti also notes that both studies' own press releases -- at least one of which was funded by the federal government -- are misleading. To wit:

"The official press release for the East Coast study states that "rates of sea level rise are increasing three-to-four times faster along portions of the U.S. Atlantic Coast than globally." This language is easily misconstrued, and this is exactly what has occurred in many news reports. In the context of this study,

  • the word "faster" refers to sea-level acceleration, not to sea-level rise. ...

The press release for the East Coast study ... includes an unsupported assertion that isn't even from the study ... [and] adds another easily misconstrued statement [italics in original]:

During the 21st century, the increases in sea level rise rate that have already occurred in the hotspot will yield increases in sea level of 8 to 11.4 inches by 2100. This regional sea level increase would be in addition to components of global sea level rise.

Based upon these claims, one might conclude that the study predicts a sea-level rise in the Northeast of two-to-three feet plus 8 to 11 inches, which amounts to 32-46 inches. This is not the case, but one would never know it unless he or she took the time to scrutinize the study and a 25-page file of supplementary information...

The press release could have cited another projection from the study that is very easily understood, which is that the total projected sea-level rise for New York City during the 21st century is 15 to 18 inches. This is less than half of what could be construed from the press release. However, one can't find this projection even by reading the entire study because it was relegated to the very last page of the supplementary information.

Along the same lines, the West Coast study's press release states that "San Francisco International Airport could flood with as little as 40 [16 inches] centimeters of sea-level rise, a value that could be reached in several decades." What the press release fails to mention is that sea levels in San Francisco

  • actually declined by 6 inches between 1992 and 2010."

In reading Agresti's analysis, I was struck by how these and other studies I've read about in the past really aren't as conclusive as the layperson (including myself) thinks."...


7/18/12, "Will global warming flood the coasts of the United States?", James D. Agresti


6/25/12, "Sea rise faster on East Coast than rest of globe," AP, by Seth Borenstein


7/15/2011, "UN Climate Body Struggling to Pinpoint Rising Sea Levels," Der Spiegel, Axel Bojanowski

Ed. note: Billions of US taxpayer dollars have already been "transferred" to various climate industry entities. Certain people expect alleged 'sea level' statistics will mean even more US taxpayer dollars will be removed. Sane people of course do not think this. Three top UN climate officials (listed below) freely admit the 'climate' issue is actually a wonderful redistribution of wealth. Sorry, but most people in the US aren't inclined to sign their lives over to
in the 'climate' or any other field. Unlike Europeans, Americans decided long ago not to live in a monarchy or anywhere near an 'EU.' This fact isn't often reported in the media.

As stated by at least 3 UN officials, the 'climate change' issue isn't about climate but 'transfer of wealth:'

1. UN IPCC Nobel winner, Pachauri: ""I am not going to rest easy until I have articulated in every possible forum the need to bring about major structural changes in economic growth and development. That’s the real issue. Climate change is just a part of it."" UN climate chief Pachauri, 2007

2. 11/14/10, Edenhofer, UN IPCC official, "But one must say clearly that we distribute to the climate policy de facto, the world's wealth."...(parag. 5).
And if this happens,
"Basically it is a big mistake, climate policy is separated from the major themes of globalization discussed. The climate summit in Cancun is not the...climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War." (parag. 4). Original German.

3. 10/9/10, Christiana "Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)" said, "This is the greatest societal and economic transformation that the world has ever seen."
Edenhofer, Pachauri and Figueres as UN figures can say and do whatever they want with US taxpayer money transferred to the UN. They're immune from criminal and civil prosecution (parag. 4). They can spend our money fixing up their summer home and we'll likely never know it and can do nothing about it anyway (4th parag. fr. end) ).

We made it clear in 1776 we want no part of you or anyone like you. Nothing personal.


Ed. note: Please excuse bright white background behind last part of this post. It was put there by hackers.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Global warming on back burner for Maldives profiteers as they expand airport and build big new terminal for more CO2 belching than ever

7/1/12, "Modernisation plan of Male airport in eye of political storm," Press Trust of India

"The expansion and modernisation of the Male airport is in the eye of a political storm with some parties in Maldives seeking its nationalisation, even as its top officer said the construction of a new terminal by the GMR-led international consortium is "right on track".

The consortium won the concession to manage, operate and develop Male's Ibrahim Nasir International Airport for 25 years in 2010 to modernise and expand the capacity of the existing terminal and construct a brand new one.

The new terminal, scheduled to open in summer 2014, is "right on track and will be ready for operation on time", airport CEO Andrew Harrison told PTI on phone from Male.

The political storm erupted after some parties demanded that the airport be nationalised once again. The Maldives government has, however, assured that Indian investments will be protected.

The matter also came up during President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik's recent visit to India when he assured Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that Maldives would adhere to all agreements between Indian and its businesses. He had then expressed the desire for more Indian investments in Maldives.

GMR, which holds a 77 per cent stake in the consortium with the rest being held by its partner Malaysian airports, would provide facilities like aerobridges, fuel hydrant system, a parallel taxiway, besides

  • a terminal approximately three times the size of the existing one.

"On opening day, the terminal will have the capacity to meet demand up to the year 2025 with minor expansion which is a requirement under the concession agreement," he said.

The committed value of the project is USD 511 million which "represents the largest
  • single investment in the history of the Maldives", Harrison said." via Steven Goddard


11/26/11, "What's there to discuss about flogging? There is nothing to debate about in a matter clearly stated in the religion of Islam. No one can argue with God," he (Maldives Minister Naseem) said."...(Maldives speaks of "shaming" money out of the US at the Durban 'climate' conference).

Above, Maldives protest UN Human Rights Commissioner suggesting they should not flog women, 11/25/11, Haveeru

Above Maldives protest UN Human Rights Commissioner Pillay suggesting they should not flog women, one sign says, "Flog Pillay", 11/25/11, Haveeru


Wind turbines violate noise ordinance in NJ says county health dept., now must be shut off from 10p-7a

"Last weekend, about 30 signs, critical of the borough’s wind turbines began appearing on the front lawns of borough residences."...

7/12/12, "Noisy wind turbines cause resident complaints," Asbury Park Press, Ocean Gate, New Jersey

"Several noise violations from the borough’s two power-generating wind turbines has led the Borough Council to shut the systems down between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. during the week.

The first turbine was put up in 2009 on West Arvene Avenue near Ocean Gate Avenue. The second was placed on East Arvene Avenue one block east in March.

Borough officials received correspondence dated March 30 from the Ocean County Health Department indicating that a noise recording demonstrated violations of the state administrative code, according to a news release issued Wednesday by Mayor Paul J. Kennedy.

OCHD spokeswoman Leslie D. Terjesen said “We began receiving resident complaints in February 2010 and have received new complaints as recently as late as last month,” said Leslie D. Terjesen, an OCHD spokeswoman.

She said the borough was sent a letter by the health department April 1 “with a summary of our findings.”

Onsite inspections of the two wind turbines were taken on March 27, April 8 and April 16. There were several readings above the maximum permissible decibel levels on each inspection,” Terjesen said.

Borough Attorney James J. Gluck contacted the county Board of Health Counsel on Monday and a written response from the OCHD is expected this week, according to Kennedy. Usually when such violations occur, “the responsible party is notified on the violation and given a grace period to abate this issue,” Terjesen said.

Kennedy said borough officials continue to evaluate and study the wind turbine in order to make improvements.

Last weekend, about 30 signs, critical of the borough’s wind turbines began appearing on the front lawns of borough residences.

Kate Ranuro, who lives a few blocks away from the turbines, said: “It sounds more like a factory outside there when they are operating.”

Rosemarie Kindon of West Point Pleasant Avenue said when the two turbines operate it impacts “people’s quality of life. There is the noise and the reflective flicker which is when the blades of the turbine hit the sun and reflects. It looks like a disco ball."" via Steve Maley at RedState


Russian officials arrested for not alerting residents to oncoming flood weather which prevented people from evacuating to safe terrain-BBC

7/22/12, "Officials in southern Russia held over floods," BBC

"Russian police have arrested three officials in the southern Krymsk region accused of failing to warn residents of disastrous flooding earlier this month.

The former head of Krymsk district, who had already been fired for his handling of the floods, and the mayor of Krymsk town are among those held.

The floods claimed the lives of 171 people, mostly in the town of Krymsk.

The floods hit the region overnight, catching many residents unawares, and were blamed on torrential rain.

The town of Krymsk was devastated as thousands of houses were almost completely submerged by rising water.

Many residents were forced to take refuge in trees or on rooftops.

"Essentially ignoring the weather service forecasts, the suspects did not inform the population about the looming danger and did not take steps to evacuate people," spokesman for the Investigative Committee said to Russian TV, according to the AFP news agency.

The floods were the first major disaster of President Vladimir Putin's third term in office, and federal authorities have been eager to show they are heeding criticism of the official response, which has been voiced even in normally pro-government media outlets.

Russian federal authorities launched an investigation shortly after the floods into possible negligence.

Mr Putin flew to the region himself in the immediate aftermath of the floods.

Local officials had said flood warnings were given using sirens, SMS messages and loudspeakers. But many people were asleep when the floods hit and did not hear them."


7/22/12, "Russia arrests officials after deadly floods,"


2010 Pakistan floods were forecast at least 10 days before they happened but the information was withheld by a London company and by Pakistan itself, which resulted in deaths. Profiteers used photos of the flood in an attempt to blame global warming rather than focusing on actual crimes that led to deaths.

, "Pakistan flood warning 'not passed on'," BBC

"A study has suggested that the effects of last year's floods in Pakistan could have been less catastrophic if European weather forecasts had been shared with Pakistan.

The American Geophysical Union said the forecasts could have given up to 10 days' advance warning of the floods.

The study said this could have allowed the authorities in northern Pakistan to take preventative measures.

  • The monsoon floods affected 20 million people and one fifth of the country.

At least 1,500 people died in the deluge.

The American Geophysical Union said the information

did not reach Pakistan because of a "lack of cooperation between the forecasting centre and Pakistan".

Pakistan's own weather agency also did not forecast the floods, the organisation added.

"This disaster could have been minimised and even the flooding could have been minimised," said Peter Webster, a professor of earth and atmospheric science at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta and lead writer of the study.

"If we were working with Pakistan, they would have known eight to 10 days in advance that the floods were coming."

The study, which used data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF), found that the floods could have been predicted if the data had "been processed and fed into a hydrological model,
  • which takes terrain into account".

The London-based ECMWF, however, said it did not

  • "give out weather forecasts and weather warnings to the general public
  • or media".

ECMWF scientist Anna Ghelli was quoted as saying that the organising provided forecasts to its members and co-operating states and

  • "they are responsible to prepare forecasts for the public and advise the authorities in their own countries"."


8/18/10, "Illegal logging by Pakistan's timber mafia increased flooding devastation,", Matthew McDermott


Ed. note: So it wasn't America's fault.



Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.